This weeks readings, specifically the articles and Singer's chapter 11 clearly illustrated some very interesting as well as related issues that unmanned vehicles are experiencing. I thought that after reading about the struggle to establish a "doctrine" all the issues became a clear result of that simple blunder. First and foremost I think many people, not without cause, oppose the use of drones due to their infliction of collateral damage and the effects on those who are not guilty. This in turn leads to an increase in both sympathy for terrorists among the locals as well as even a growing desire to oppose and/or hinder U.S. operations. It seems to me that this is a direct result of a lack of doctrine. Not only do we not have a set goal in mind when using drone technology but we also have not successfully converted existing doctrine to fit drones in. As it stands right now, drones are used primarily for extended reconnaissance and eventual neutralization. This is as we see has its perks but as well, as Singer points out, leaves us to wonder how much humans should be involved. The current doctrine doesn't utilize much human to human interaction and as many of Singer's "advanced" professionals pointed out, the war against terrorism must be a war for the hearts of those who could possible shelter and/or be sympathetic to insurgents.
In addition to the effects this lack of doctrine is having on the ground it also is reeking havoc on our reputation around the world. The lack of planning has made us look reckless as well as hypocritical when we detain and humiliate those who speak out against our policies. We come across as paranoid and adds to the idea that we are either doing something very wrong or we just don't know what we are doing.
Finally, the lack of doctrine stems from what I believe to be the biggest issue, an out of control military budget and therefore obsession with improvement and technological advancements. As was pointed out the only wars the U.S. has lost has been against unconventional enemies with inferior technology. This shows a basic lack of adaptability of the U.S. and as is seen in it's detainment of critics, presidential power in ordering drone strikes, and declining world opinion that the U.S. is just too set in its ways and will not be able to function in this new era of asymmetric warfare unless significant change is undertaken. Technology can lead to incredible advancements in every aspect of life but if without proper doctrine as well as knowledge you might as well be using an iPhone as a hammer.
In addition to the effects this lack of doctrine is having on the ground it also is reeking havoc on our reputation around the world. The lack of planning has made us look reckless as well as hypocritical when we detain and humiliate those who speak out against our policies. We come across as paranoid and adds to the idea that we are either doing something very wrong or we just don't know what we are doing.
Finally, the lack of doctrine stems from what I believe to be the biggest issue, an out of control military budget and therefore obsession with improvement and technological advancements. As was pointed out the only wars the U.S. has lost has been against unconventional enemies with inferior technology. This shows a basic lack of adaptability of the U.S. and as is seen in it's detainment of critics, presidential power in ordering drone strikes, and declining world opinion that the U.S. is just too set in its ways and will not be able to function in this new era of asymmetric warfare unless significant change is undertaken. Technology can lead to incredible advancements in every aspect of life but if without proper doctrine as well as knowledge you might as well be using an iPhone as a hammer.
Interesting point with the lack of doctrine contributing to the reckless use of drones. Do you think that it would be possible to have true oversight on drone usage with the CIA heading drone operations? If not, do you think it would be possible to conduct effective cross-border drone operations in Pakistan at all? I definitely agree that the shady use of drones can have an adverse effect on America's image, but it is hard to tell where the line between an aggressive use of force and a concern for face-saving procedures needs to be drawn.
ReplyDeleteI think that the CIA's involvement is certainly hindering the process due to their ability to operate without many questions being asked however I do believe that the CIA's goals are in line with our military's goals and there would not be that much difference in doctrine of implementation, simply more disclosure. On the quesiton of whether or not they could be effective in Pakistan, I think that they certainly could be. However the problem is we don't know what we want them to be effective at. As it stands, they are effective in identifying IEDs, eliminating militants, etc. but not so much at "winning the war"
DeleteI find the idea of creating a doctrine to regulate drone operations, but I believe the the process of creating a doctrine would be impossible. It seems impossible to think that congress would be able to work together with the CIA to know what needs to be included in this doctrine. Furthermore it seems that even discussing all that the CIA does with drones would put out national security and national image at risk. This does open the conversation as to if we should do what we do if it would not look favorable in an international light.
ReplyDeleteI certainly understand that revealing a gameplan publicly would be a threat to national security but given there is apparently no plan as it stands, or if there is it isn't effective, then perhaps they need to find a solution behind closed doors and implement it. I don't need to know the doctrine, just that it is effective.
DeleteI agree that it is possible that the US could decide to implement a drone policy that is secret but effective. However, I wonder how it would be possible to actually confirm whether such a doctrine is effective or not. Unfortunately, it seems that we would have to trust their word for it and they have been seen previously to have misled people in regards to statistics involving drone strikes.
Delete