![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/02\/xlarge.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
When a forum as hawkish at The Washington Post<\/em>‘s editorial page starts running pieces arguing the drone war is creating more enemies than it is eliminating, you know the dialogue is beginning to shift.<\/p>\n In an Op-Ed yesterday<\/a>, Danya Greenfield, “deputy director of the\u00a0Atlantic Council\u2019s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East<\/a>,” and\u00a0David J. Kramer, “president of\u00a0Freedom House<\/a>,” insisted the high numbers of civilian casualties in the Obama administration’s drone war in Yemen is having the unintended consequence of expanding the support base of extremist militants, while also criticizing “the lack of transparency and accountability behind the drone policy.”<\/p>\n They write: “Thirty-one foreign policy experts and former diplomats \u2014 including us \u2014 sent\u00a0a letter to President Obama<\/a>\u00a0last week that said the administration\u2019s expansive use of unmanned drones in Yemen is proving counterproductive to U.S. security objectives: As faulty intelligence leads to collateral damage, extremist groups ultimately win more support.”<\/p>\n Despite considerable U.S. humanitarian aid and development support to their government, most Yemenis associate U.S. engagement with the ongoing drone campaign to destroy al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and they see it as having little regard for its effect on civilians. A number of former U.S. military and intelligence officials argue that the drone program\u2019s costs might exceed its benefits. Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal has\u00a0articulated the hazards of overreliance on drones<\/a>, and Gen. James E. Cartwright, former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,\u00a0cautioned last month<\/a>\u00a0against unintended consequences, arguing that no matter how precise drone strikes may be, they breed animosity among targeted communities and threaten U.S. efforts to curb extremism.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Of course, the Op-Ed was not nearly strong enough. The still-expanding drone war in Yemen, which often kills civilians,\u00a0does in fact cause blowback<\/a>\u00a0and help al-Qaeda recruitment –\u00a0as attested to<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0numerous Yemen experts<\/a>,\u00a0investigative reporting<\/a>\u00a0on the ground,\u00a0polling<\/a>, testimony\u00a0from Yemen activists<\/a>, and the actual fact that recent bungled terrorist attacks aimed at the US have\u00a0cited such drone attacks as motivating factors<\/a>.<\/p>\n After a September drone strike that killed 13 civilians, a local Yemeni activist\u00a0told CNN<\/a>,\u00a0\u201cI would not be surprised if a hundred tribesmen joined the lines of al Qaeda as a result of the latest drone mistake. This part of Yemen takes revenge very seriously.\u201d<\/p>\n And of course there is more to the drone war outrage than the fact that it’s strategically counterproductive. Even if it killed less civilians and avoided considerable blowback, it would still be unacceptable for the President to draw up secret kill lists of mere suspects and conduct a secret, unaccountable war that dispenses with traditional legal boundaries of war and habeas corpus.<\/p>\n But the gradual push-back the Obama administration has been receiving from elite policy wonks (“foreign policy experts and former diplomats,” as well as a military general here and a CIA officer there) does represent a change from what the norm as has been for the entirety of Obama’s first term – namely, that almost exclusively alternative media and antiwar activists spoke out against the inhumane and counterproductive drone war.<\/p>\n This pressure hasn’t generated a change in policy yet: President Obama is still conducting the drone war at full speed and with all the ruthlessness and disregard of his first term. Last month, however, it was reported<\/a> that a decision has been made to shift responsibility for the drone war from the CIA to the Defense Department. What appreciable change this will bring is not yet known, although there is reason to expect none.<\/p>\n Still, there are other pressures mounting. A\u00a0federal appeals court ruled last month<\/a>\u00a0that the CIA cannot continue to \u201cneither confirm nor deny\u201d the existence of the drone war, in a court case prompted by a Freedom of Information Act request by the American Civil Liberties Union. For years, the modus operandi has been for the drone war to be the world\u2019s worst kept secret so Obama gets the credit for being \u201ctough on terror,\u201d while reserving the right to disregard probing questions or inquiries.<\/p>\n In addition, a high level United Nations investigator last month said the drone war in Pakistan\u00a0technically violates the law<\/a>\u00a0because it is conducted without the express consent of Islamabad, therefore a breach of Pakistani sovereignty. The UN envoy, Ben Emmerson, is leading an investigation into the drone war\u2019s compliance with international law and international human rights law.<\/p>\n