Saturday, December 21, 2013

Yemen Deaths Test Claims of New Drone Policy December 20, 2013 Yemen Deaths Test Claims of New Drone Policy By MARK MAZZETTI and ROBERT F. WORTH WASHINGTON — In some respects, the drone strike in Yemen last week resembled so many others from recent years: A hail of missiles slammed into a convoy of trucks on a remote desert road, killing at least 12 people. But this time the trucks were part of a wedding procession, making the customary journey from the groom’s house to the house of the bride. The Dec. 12 strike by the Pentagon, launched from an American base in Djibouti, killed at least a half-dozen innocent people, according to a number of tribal leaders and witnesses, and provoked a storm of outrage in the country. It also illuminated the reality behind the talk surrounding the Obama administration’s new drone policy, which was announced with fanfare seven months ago. Although American officials say they are being more careful before launching drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere — and more transparent about the clandestine wars that President Obama has embraced — the strike last week offers a window on the intelligence breakdowns and continuing liability of a targeted killing program that remains almost entirely secret. Both the Pentagon and the C.I.A. continue to wage parallel drone wars in Yemen, but neither is discussed publicly. A Pentagon spokeswoman declined to comment about the Dec. 12 strike, referring a reporter to a vague news release issued last week by the government of Yemen, written in Arabic. It remains unclear whom the Americans were trying to kill in the strike, which was carried out in a desolate area southeast of Yemen’s capital, Sana. Witnesses to the strike’s aftermath said that one white pickup truck was destroyed and that two or three other vehicles were seriously damaged. The Associated Press reported Friday that the target of the strike was Shawqi Ali Ahmad al-Badani, a militant who is accused of planning a terrorist plot in August that led to the closing of more than a dozen United States Embassies. American officials declined to comment about that report. At first, the Yemeni government, a close partner with the Obama administration on counterterrorism matters, said that all the dead were militants. But Yemeni officials conceded soon afterward that some civilians had been killed, and they gave 101 Kalashnikov rifles and about 24 million Yemeni riyals (about $110,000) to relatives of the victims as part of a traditional compensation process, a local tribal leader said. Yemeni government officials and several local tribal leaders said that the dead included several militants with ties to Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, but no one has been able to identify them. Some witnesses who have interviewed victims’ families say they believe no militants were killed at all. The murky details surrounding the strike raise questions about how rigorously American officials are applying the standards for lethal strikes that Mr. Obama laid out in a speech on May 23 at the National Defense University — and whether such standards are even possible in such a remote and opaque environment. In the speech, the president said that targeted killing operations were carried out only against militants who posed a “continuing and imminent threat to the American people.” Over the past week, no government official has made a case in public that the people targeted in the strike posed a threat to Americans. Moreover, the president said in May, no strike can be authorized without “near certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured” — a bar he described as “the highest standard we can set.” At the time, administration officials said that authority over the bulk of drone strikes would gradually shift to the Pentagon from the C.I.A., a move officials said was intended partly to lift the shroud of secrecy from the targeted killing program. But nearly seven months later, the C.I.A. still carries out a majority of drone strikes in Yemen, with the remote-controlled aircraft taking off from a base in the southern desert of Saudi Arabia. The Pentagon strikes, usually launched from the Djibouti base, are cloaked in as much secrecy as those carried out by the C.I.A. “The contradictory reports about what happened on Dec. 12 underscore the critical need for more transparency from the Obama administration and Yemeni authorities about these strikes,” said Letta Tayler of Human Rights Watch, who has done extensive research in Yemen about the drone strikes. The very fact that the drone strike last week targeted an 11-vehicle convoy — a much larger group than Al Qaeda would typically use — suggests that the new American guidelines to rule out civilian casualties may not have been followed in this case. And the confusion over the victims’ identities raises questions about how the United States government gathers intelligence in such a contested region and with partners whose interests may differ sharply from those of the Obama administration. The area where the strike occurred, in the central province of Bayda, is almost completely beyond the control of the Yemeni government, and is populated by tribes whose recurring feuds can easily become tied up in the agendas of outsiders. Over the past two years, the Saudi government — which for decades has used cash to maintain a network of influence in Yemen — has increased its payments to tribal figures in Bayda to recruit informers and deter militants, according to several tribal leaders in the area. This shadowy system appears to contribute to the secretive process of information-gathering that determines targets for drone strikes, a process in which Saudi and Yemeni officials cooperate with Americans. But Saudi and American interests diverge in important ways in Yemen. Many of the militants there who fight in Al Qaeda’s name are expatriate Saudis whose sole goal is to bring down the Saudi government. Because of the program’s secrecy, it is impossible to know whether the American dependence on Saudi and Yemeni intelligence results in the killing of militants who pose a danger only to Arab countries. Some Yemeni officials have also hinted that the timing and target of the drone strike last week may have been influenced by a devastating attack two weeks ago on the Yemeni Defense Ministry in which 52 people were killed, including women, children and doctors at the ministry’s hospital. That attack ignited a desire for revenge in Yemen’s security establishment and also damaged Al Qaeda’s reputation in Yemen, leaving the group hungry for opportunities to change the subject. Both parties, in other words, may have had reasons to manipulate the facts, both before and after the drone strike. American officials will not say what they knew about the targets of the strike last week. But in the past, American officials have sometimes appeared to be misinformed about the accidental deaths of Yemeni civilians in drone strikes. In one example from Aug. 1, a drone strike killed a 28-year-old man who happened to hitch a ride with three men suspected to have been Qaeda members. According to a number of witnesses, relatives and local police officials, the man, Saleh Yaslim Saeed bin Ishaq, was waiting by a gas station late at night when the three men stopped in a Land Cruiser and agreed to give him a ride. Mr. Ishaq’s ID card and belongings were found in the burned wreckage of the vehicle, and the local police — who confirmed that the other three dead men were wanted militants — said he appeared to have been an innocent person whose presence in the car was accidental. When contacted about the strike, American officials said they were aware only of the three militants killed. Yet the details of Mr. Ishaq’s death, and an image of his ID card, were published at the time in newspapers and on websites in Yemen. Shuaib al-Mosawa contributed reporting from Sana, Yemen. DECEMBER 19, 2013, 4:25 PM The Aftermath of Drone Strikes on a Wedding Convoy in Yemen By CHRISTINE HAUSER An Al Jazeera report in Arabic this week on the drone attack on a wedding and the debate in Parliament. Images from local media surfaced last week on Facebook and in other social media showing what were described as the graphic consequences of a drone-fired missile strike on a convoy that was part of a wedding party in a remote area of Yemen. Since the Dec. 11 attack, criticism and debate online over the use of drones in Yemen has widened as the attack has been dissected. The Yemeni government provided compensation for the victims; Parliament this week approved a decree banning drones, while human rights groups and others criticized the United States for its drone policy and questioned its effectiveness in fighting terrorism. As my colleague Robert F. Worth reported last week, at least 11 people were killed when missiles fired by drones hit the convoy in Bayda Province. The previous week, a multistage assault on Yemen’s Defense Ministry left 52 people dead. Al Qaeda’s Yemen-based affiliate claimed responsibility. Most of the dead in the drone strike appeared to be people suspected of being militants linked to Al Qaeda, according to tribal leaders in the area, but there were also reports that several civilians had been killed, Mr. Worth reported. Although it did not mention a specific attack in Yemen, the United Nations approved late on Wednesday a draft resolution to ensure that the use of “remotely piloted aircraft” complies with a country’s obligations under international laws, including those that deal with distinguishing the targets. After the attack on the wedding convoy, Kenneth Roth, the executive director for Human Rights Watch, quoted previous remarks from the Obama administration about drone use and targeting. So much for Obama’s promise that drones wouldn’t be used unless there’s a “near certainty” of no civilian casualties — Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) 14 Dec 13 Human Rights Watch linked to a recent report that examined six targeted drone killings in Yemen before the one on Dec. 11. United States targeted airstrikes against alleged terrorists in Yemen have killed civilians in violation of international law. The strikes, often using armed drones, are creating a public backlash that undermines US efforts against Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Atiaf Alwazir, a researcher and blogger based in Sana’a who was a co-founder of a media advocacy group called SupportYemen, also highlighted a look at the background of the drone program in Yemen and the effect on civilians, which she referred to as the “invisible casualties.” A Yemeni-born blogger for Global Voices wrote that opposition to the drone strikes should not be confused with support for Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, using the group’s acronym AQAP. Opposing #drones i4 their illegal extrajudicial killing & inhumanity, doesn’t mean sympathizing with AQAP nor does it mean approving them. The State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf, answering a question about the Dec. 11 drone attack during a briefing on Dec. 13 in Washington, reiterated the administration’s position while making it clear she was speaking about the policy in general. “Obviously, broadly speaking, we take every effort to minimize civilian casualties in counterterrorism operations – broadly speaking, without speaking to this one specifically.” But the impact is in sharper focus on the ground. Iona Craig, a Times of London correspondent based in Yemen, visited the scene of the strike as well as the hospital facility and interviewed witnesses at both places, sharing at least one image of a child she was told had lost his father in the attack. Past 24hrs: Visited strike site & widows of civilian victims + saw aftermath of MoD hosipital attack & met survivors. Both #Yemen tragedies — Iona Craig أيونا (@ionacraig) 19 Dec 13 The Yemen Times reported this week that the Yemeni government had given guns and money to the families of the victims of the drone strike, in what was described as a “rare case of arbitration.” And Parliament voted for a ban against the use of drones in Yemen, as Nasser Arrabyee, a reporter for The New York Times, noted on Twitter. But it was not clear to what extent it would affect the flights, if at all. #Yemen parliament voted for a decree to ban US drones from striking and flying over Yemen. — Nasser Arrabyee (@narrabyee) 15 Dec 13 Adam Baron, a freelance journalist based in Yemen, also highlighted the outstanding questions. Told that there wasn’t a single MP who voted against today’s drone ban. Telling. #yemen — Adam Baron (@adammbaron) 15 Dec 13 At this point, there’s little indication that #yemen parliament’s drone ban is anything more than a symbolic gesture. — Adam Baron (@adammbaron) 15 Dec 13 • Copyright 2013 The New York Times Company Donations can be sent to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD 21218. Ph: 410-366-1637; Email: mobuszewski [at] Go to "The master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their lives." Eugene Victor Debs

No comments: