Inaugural Address
President Obama's inaugural
speech – in its lofty tone reminiscent of John F. Kennedy's 1960
inaugural address – has reminded us of why we liked him so much in
2008 and why we still have a soft spot in our hearts for him. He
musters enormous eloquence in defense of the best American
progressive tradition.
But his speech is marred by
serious omissions. There is no mention of the drone war or of any
covert assassination programs.
Now you might say, the man
can't talk about everything in 20 minutes. Give him a break.
The inaugural is beguiling
because it repeats Abraham Lincoln's formula of democracy as
government of, by and for the people and cites the opening lines of
the Declaration of Independence that all human beings have the
right to life, liberty, and happiness. In the US the right to life
means, at least, that you cannot be killed without a trial, without a
chance to defend yourself, to examine the evidence the government has
against you and to try to refute that evidence.
The drone war is so serious
because it has killed American citizens without benefit of trial or a
chance to defend themselves.
The list of people to be killed
by drones and their missiles is made up by some officials high in the
hierarchy in the White House, including President Obama. The list is
secret, the deliberations are secret, the criteria for getting on
that list are secret. The whole drone war is hidden away. Should
major policies be hidden in a democracy?
One American citizen victim to
the drones was a Muslim Iman Anwar Al-Awlaki. Another person killed by
drones was Al-Awlaki's 16-year-old son. Al-Awlaki was a bad actor but
he never got the trial he was entitled to as an American citizen.
Since the whole project is shrouded in secrecy we don't know what his
son had done to deserve being murdered at age 16.
This whole project of killing
people selected secretly by people we don't know who they are, of
depriving American citizens of their constitutional rights is not
consistent with President. Obama's praise and endorsement of American
democracy. The government that murders people from the air –
frequently innocent people – in Afghanistan, in Yemen, in Sudan and
we don't know where next, is contemptuous of democracy, and
contemptuous of the Constitution.
But terrorism is a serious
threat. 9/11 taught us that. So perhaps we should ignore the lofty
questions raised by the rhetoric of the Inaugural Address. Perhaps we
should not think about the right to life, or constitutional
protections. We should just be pragmatic and ask: is this really
making us safe?
Suppose you are a Taliban in
Afghanistan and you believe that it is okay for you to murder people
for the sake of your tribe and for the sake of Islam. And now the
Americans with their fabulous modern technology come and do the same
thing with airplanes flown by someone in Nebraska. Would you not
think that the Americans are doing just what you are doing? The
weapons used are different. Yours are guns; their's are drones with
missiles. But you are doing the same thing namely trying to undermine
the other by killing their leaders.
By using the drones, we are
telling the Taliban, we are telling al Quaida and connected groups:
"we're just like you – we're terrorists too."
That is not going to win the
hearts and minds of people in the Mideast, and now more and more in
Africa also. Instead, the drone war has made us more hated and has
recruited many new persons to the ranks of various groups the
government would describe as "terrorists."
Senior military leaders at home
have insisted for years that “we can't kill our way out of these
conflicts.” Negotiations are essential. But they become more
difficult and less likely with every new drone strike.
The drone war is
counterproductive. It gives the lie to all the high-minded rhetoric
we've heard in the inaugural address. It is profoundly immoral.
It should stop today.
No comments:
Post a Comment