Advertisement

International Politics

, Volume 55, Issue 5, pp 712–726 | Cite as

International society’s challenge of targeted killing by drones

  • Jodok Troy
Original Article

Abstract

Targeted killing by drones is a systemic driven instrumental practice that overrides societal non-instrumental practices that are essential for international society. Doing so, targeted killing by drones is not simply another form of inflicting violence by technical means to political opponents. It also inflicts the agents applying this practice, tempting them to frame it as a permissible measure to preserve international society. The reliance on drones for targeted killing is a pursuit of non-societal practices that seek individual and retributive justice and anticipatory and preventive self-defence by means of force relying on technological advantage. Eventually, this practice permits military tactics to steer political strategy, mitigating standards and practices agreed on in international society’s norms, rules of conduct, and institutions.

Keywords

Drones English school International society Realism Targeted killing 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research for this article was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project P25198-G16. Earlier versions of this paper have been presented at the Millennium Journal Annual Conference 2013 in London and at the International Studies Association Global South Caucus Conference 2015 in Singapore. I would like to thank the journal's editor, Martin Senn, and the anonymous referees of the journal for their useful comments on earlier versions of the article.

References

  1. Ainley, K. 2011. Excesses of responsibility. The limits of law and the possibilities of politics. Ethics and International Affairs 25(04): 407–431.Google Scholar
  2. Aloyo, E. 2013. Just assassinations. International Theory 5(03): 347–381.Google Scholar
  3. Alston, P. 2010 Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. Addendum: Study on targeted killings. http://goo.gl/NHOA13.
  4. Alston, P. 2011. The CIA and targeted killings beyond borders. Harvard National Security Journal 2: 283–446.Google Scholar
  5. Arato, A. 2002. The bush tribunals and the specter of dictatorship. Constellations 9(4): 457–476.Google Scholar
  6. Arendt, H. 1969. On violence. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
  7. Aristotle, T.A., and T.J. Saunders. 2005. The politics. Princeton: Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic.Google Scholar
  8. Aslam, W. 2013. The United States and great power responsibility in international society. drones, rendition and invasion. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Bain, W. 2007. One order, two laws. recovering the ‘normative’ in english school theory. Review of International Studies 33(4): 557–575.Google Scholar
  10. Banjo, S. 2015. What you don’t know can’t hurt you. Seal team 6 are now invisible warriors in a global manhunt machine. The New York Times, 6.Google Scholar
  11. Barela, S.J. (ed.). 2015. Legitimacy and drones. Investigating the legality, morality and efficacy of UCAVs. Farnham, Surrey, England, Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  12. Bell, B. 1972. Assassination in international politics. International Studies Quarterly 16(1): 59–82.Google Scholar
  13. Bowden, M. 2013. The killing machines. The Atlantic 14.Google Scholar
  14. Boyle, M.J. 2013. The costs and consequences of drone warfare. International Affairs 89(1): 1–29.Google Scholar
  15. Boyle, M.J. 2015. The Race for Drones. http://www.fpri.org/articles/2015/01/race-drones-0.
  16. Brunstetter, D., and M. Braun. 2011. The implications of drones on the just war tradition. Ethics & International Affairs 25(3): 337–358.Google Scholar
  17. Brunstetter, D.R., and A. Jimenez-Bacardi. 2015. Clashing over drones. The legal and normative gap between the United States and the human rights community. The International Journal of Human Rights 19(2): 176–198.Google Scholar
  18. Bull, H. 2002. The anarchical society. A study of order in world politics, 3rd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Bull, H. 2012. The anarchical society. A study of order in world politics, 4th ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Bull, H., and A. Watson. 1984. The expansion of international society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Buzan, B. 2004. Who may we bomb. In Worlds in collision. Terror and the future of global order, ed. K. Booth, and T. Dunne. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Byman, D.L. 2013. Why drones work. The case for Washington’s weapon of choice. Foreign Affairs 92: 32.Google Scholar
  23. Byman, D.L. 2016. Understanding the Islamic state. A review essay. International Security 40(4): 127–165.Google Scholar
  24. Carvin, S. 2012. The trouble with targeted killing. Security Studies 21(3): 529–555.Google Scholar
  25. Caygill, H. 2013. On resistance. A philosophy of defiance. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  26. Chamayou, G. 2012. Manhunts. A philosophical history. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Chamayou, G., and J. Lloyd. 2015. Drone theory. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  28. Cornin, A.K. 2013. Why drones fail. When tactics drive strategy. Foreign Affairs 92: 44.Google Scholar
  29. Coward, M. 2017. Against network thinking. A critique of pathological sovereignty‘. European Journal of International Relations 32: 5.Google Scholar
  30. Craig, M. 2012. Going medieval. Targeted Killing, Self-defense and the “Jus ad bellum” Regime. In Targeted killings. Law and morality in an asymmetrical world, ed. C.O. Finkelstein, J.D. Ohlin, and A. Altman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Cronin, A.K. 2002. Behind the curve. Globalization and international terrorism. International Security 27(3): 30–58.Google Scholar
  32. David, S.R. 2003. Israeli’s policy of targeted killing. Ethics & International Affairs 17(1): 111–126.Google Scholar
  33. de Nevers, R. 2007. Imposing international norms. Great powers and norm enforcement. International Studies Review 9: 53–80.Google Scholar
  34. de Wijze, S. 2009. Targeted killing. A ‘dirty hands’ analysis. Contemporary Politics 15(3): 305–320.Google Scholar
  35. Devlen, B., P. James, and Ö. Özdamar. 2005. The english school, international relations, and progress. International Studies Review 7: 171–197.Google Scholar
  36. Dill, J. 2015. The 21st-century belligerent’s trilemma. European Journal of International Law 26(1): 83–108.Google Scholar
  37. Elshtain, J.B. 2004. Just war against terror. The burden of American power in a violent world. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  38. Epp, R. 1998. The english school on the frontiers of international society. A hermeneutic recollection. Review of International Studies 24(5): 47–64.Google Scholar
  39. Farer, T., and F. Bernard. 2016. Killing by Drone. Towards uneasy reconciliation with the values of a liberal State. Human Rights Quarterly 38(1): 108–133.Google Scholar
  40. Finnemore, M., and K. Sikkink. 1998. International norms dynamics and political change. International Organization 52(4): 887–917.Google Scholar
  41. Fisher, J.W. 2006. Targeted killing, norms, and international law. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 45(3): 711–758.Google Scholar
  42. Fisk, K. and J. M. Ramos. 2013. Actions speak louder than Words. preventive self-defense as a cascading norm. International Studies Perspectives 15(2): 163–185.Google Scholar
  43. Flockhart, T. 2016. The coming multi-order world. Contemporary Security Policy 37(1): 3–30.Google Scholar
  44. Ford, F.L. 1985. Political murder. From tyrannicide to terrorism. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard U.P.Google Scholar
  45. Fuhrmann, M., and M.C. Horowitz. 2017. Droning on. Explaining the proliferation of unmanned aerial vehicles. International Organization 71(02): 397–418.Google Scholar
  46. Gilli, A., and M. Gilli. 2016. The diffusion of Drone warfare? Industrial, organizational and infrastructural constraints: Military innovations and the ecosystem challenge. Security Studies 25(1): 50–84.Google Scholar
  47. Goddard, S.E., and D.H. Nexon. 2016. The dynamics of global power politics. A framework for analysis. Journal of Global Security Studies 1: 1–15.Google Scholar
  48. Goldman, E.O. 2006. Cultural foundations of military diffusion. Review of International Studies 32(1): 69–91.Google Scholar
  49. Goldstein, J., and R.O. Keohane (eds.). 1993. Ideas and foreign policy. Beliefs, institutions, and political change. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Gray, C.S. 1993. Weapons don’t make war. Policy, strategy, and military technology. Lawrence, Kan: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  51. Gray, J. 1995. Enlightenment’s wake. Politics and culture at the close of the modern age. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Grayson, K. 2012a. Six theses on targeted killing. Politics 32(2): 120–128.Google Scholar
  53. Grayson, K. 2012b. The ambivalence of assassination. Biopolitics, culture and political violence. Security Dialogue 43(1): 25–41.Google Scholar
  54. Gregory, D. 2012. From a view to a kill. Drones and late modern war. Theory, Culture and Society 28(7–8): 188–215.Google Scholar
  55. Gregory, T. 2015. Drones, targeted killings, and the limitations of international law. International Political Sociology 9(3): 197–212.Google Scholar
  56. Gregory, T. 2017. Targeted killings. Drones, noncombatant immunity, and the politics of killing. Contemporary Security Policy 38(2): 212–236.Google Scholar
  57. Griffiths, M. 1992. Order and international society. The real realism? Review of International Studies 18(03): 217.Google Scholar
  58. Gross, M.L. 2006. Assassination and targeted killing. Law enforcement, execution or self-defence? Journal of Applied Philosophy 23(3): 323–335.Google Scholar
  59. Gunneflo, M. 2016. Targeted killing. A legal and political history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Hall, J.A. 1996. International orders. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  61. Hartz, L. 1955. The liberal tradition in America. New York: Harvest Books.Google Scholar
  62. Hayden, M.V. 2016. To keep America safe, embrace Drone warfare. The New York Times 19, 2.Google Scholar
  63. Heath-Kelly, C. 2013. Politics of violence. Militancy, international politics, killing in the name. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Holsti, K.J. 2004. Taming the sovereigns. Institutional change in international politics. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Horowitz, M. 2010. The diffusion of military power. Causes and consequences for international politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Horowitz, M.C., S.E. Kreps, and M. Fuhrmann. 2016. Separating fact from fiction in the debate over Drone proliferation. International Security 41(2): 7–42.Google Scholar
  67. Hurrell, A. 2007. On global order. Power, values and the constitution of international society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Jackson, R. 2000. The global covenant. Human conduct in a world of states. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Johnston, P.B., and A.K. Sarbahi. 2016. The impact of US drone strikes on terrorism in Pakistan. International Studies Quarterly 60(2): 203–219.Google Scholar
  70. Jordan, J. 2009. When heads roll. Assessing the effectiveness of leadership decapitation. Security Studies 18(4): 719–755.Google Scholar
  71. Jordan, J. 2014. Attacking the leader, missing the mark. International Security 38(4): 7–38.Google Scholar
  72. Jose, B. 2016. Bin Laden’s targeted killing and emerging norms. Critical Studies on Terrorism 10(1): 44–66.Google Scholar
  73. Kaplan, F. 2013. The world as free fire zone. How drones made it easy for Americans to kill a particular person anywhere on the planet‘, MIT Technology Review, 7.Google Scholar
  74. Kasher, A., and A. Yadlin. 2005. Military ethics of fighting terror. An israeli perspective. Journal of Military Ethics 4(1): 3–32.Google Scholar
  75. Kennedy, G. 2013. Drones. Legitimacy and Anti-Americanism. Parameters, 42/43, 4/1, 25–28.Google Scholar
  76. Keohane, R.O. 2002. The globalization of informal violence, theories of world politics, and the ‘Liberalism of Fear’. IO-Dialogue, 29–43. Spring.Google Scholar
  77. Knudsen, T.B. 2013. Master institutions of international society. Theorizing continuity and change. 8th Pan-European conference on international Relations.Google Scholar
  78. Kratochwil, F.V. 1978. International order and foreign policy. A theoretical sketch of post-war international politics. Boulder Colo: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  79. Kreps, S.E., and M. Zenko. 2014. The next Drone wars. Preparing for proliferation. Foreign Affairs 93: 68.Google Scholar
  80. Lehrke, J.P., and R. Schomaker. 2016. Kill, capture, or defend? The effectiveness of specific and general counterterrorism tactics against the global threats of the Post-9/11 Era. Security Studies 25(4): 729–762.Google Scholar
  81. Linklater, A. 2011. The problem of harm in world politics. Theoretical investigations. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Little, R. 2011. Britain’s response to the Spanish Civil War. Investigating the implications of foregrounding practice for English School thinking‘in E. Adler, V. Pouliot (eds.) International practices (Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  83. MacDonald, J. 2016. Ethics, law and justifying targeted killings. The Obama administration at war. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  84. MacIntyre, A. 1981. After virtue. A study in moral theory. Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  85. Mattern, J.B. 2005. Ordering international politics. Identity, crisis, and representational force. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  86. McMaster, HR. 2013. The pipe dream of easy war. The New York Times 20.Google Scholar
  87. Mendelsohn, B. 2005. Sovereignty under attack. The international society meets the Al Qaeda network. Review of International Studies 31: 01.Google Scholar
  88. Morgenthau, H.J. 1946. Scientific man Vs. power politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  89. Morgenthau, H.J. 1948. The twilight of international morality. Ehtics 58(2): 79–99.Google Scholar
  90. Morgenthau, H.J. 1956. Politics among Nations. The struggle for power and peace, 2nd ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  91. Morgenthau, H.J. 1962. Politics in the Twentieth Century. London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  92. Navari, C. 2011. ‘The concept of practice in the English School‘. European Journal of International Relations 17(4): 611–630.Google Scholar
  93. Norris, A. 2004. ‘Us’ and ‘Them’. The politics of American self-Assertion after 9/11. Metaphilosophy 35(3): 249–272.Google Scholar
  94. Oakeshott, M. 1975. On human conduct. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  95. Paul, T.V., and J.A. Hall. 1999. International order and the future of world politics. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  96. Phillips, A. 2011. War, religion and empire. The transformation of international orders. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Reinold, T. 2011. State Weakness, irregular warfare, and the right to self-defense post 9/11. The American Journal of International Law 105(2): 244–286.Google Scholar
  98. Reinold, T. 2014. Sovereignty and the responsibility to protect. The power of norms and the norms of the powerful. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  99. Rengger, N.J. 2000. International relations, political theory, and the problem of order. Beyond international relations theory?. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  100. Sandholtz, W. 2009. ‘Explaining International Norm Change‘in W. Sandholtz, K. W. Stiles (eds.) International norms and cycles of change (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  101. Sayler, K. 2015. A world of proliferated Drones: A technology primer. Washington D.C: Center for New American Security.Google Scholar
  102. Scheper-Hughes, N. and Bourgois, P.I. 2004. Introduction. Making sens of Violence. In Violence in war and peace (, ed. N. Scheper-Hughes and P. I. Bourgois. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.Google Scholar
  103. Scheuerman, W.E. 2009. Realism and the critique of technology. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 22(4): 563–584.Google Scholar
  104. Schmitt, C. 1988. Der Nomos der Erde im Völkerrecht des jus publicum Europaeum, 3rd ed. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  105. Schmitt, E. and Sanger DE. 2008. Pakistan shift could curtail Drone strikes. The New York Times 22.Google Scholar
  106. Senn, M., and J. Troy. 2017. The transformation of targeted killing and international order. Contemporary Security Policy 38(2): 175–211.Google Scholar
  107. Shaw, I.G.R. 2013. Predator Empire. The geopolitics of US Drone Warfare. Geopolitics 18(3): 536–559.Google Scholar
  108. Shklar, J.N. 1989. ‘The Liberalism of Fear‘in N. L. Rosenblum (ed.) Liberalism and the moral life (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  109. Sikkink, K. 2011. The justice cascade. How human rights prosecutions are changing world politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
  110. Simpson, G.J. 2004. Great powers and outlaw states. Unequal sovereigns in the international legal order. Cambridge, UK, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Singer, P.W. 2009. Wired for War. The robotics revolution and conflict in the Twenty-First Century. New York, NY: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  112. Slaughter, A.-M. 2003. Mercy Killings. The United Nations can and should target dictators directly, instead of their peoples. Foreign Policy, 1.Google Scholar
  113. Spandler, K. 2015. ‘The political international society. Change in primary and secondary institutions‘. Review of International Studies 41(03): 601–622.Google Scholar
  114. Strawser, B.J. 2010. Moral predators. The duty to employ uninhabited aerial vehicles. Journal of Military Ethics 9(4): 342–368.Google Scholar
  115. Terhalle, M. 2015. The transition of global order. Legitimacy and contestation. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  116. Thomas, W. 2000. Norms and Security. The Case of International Assassination. International Security 25(1): 105–133.Google Scholar
  117. Thomas, W. 2001. The ethics of destruction. Norms and force in international relations. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  118. Thomas, W. 2005. The new age of assassinations. SAIS Review 25(1): 27–39.Google Scholar
  119. Thomas, C. 2011. Why don’t we talk about ‘violence’ in International Relations? Review of International Studies 37(04): 1815–1836.Google Scholar
  120. Ticehurst, R. 1997. The Martens Clause and the laws of armed conflict. International Review of the Red Cross 37(317): 125–134.Google Scholar
  121. Waldron, J. 2016. Death squads and death lists. Targeted killing and the character of the state. Constellations 23(2): 292–307.Google Scholar
  122. Waltz, K.N. 1979. Theory of international politics. Reading: McGrwa-Hill.Google Scholar
  123. Watson, A. 1992. The evolution of international society. A comparative historical analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  124. Wight, M. 1966. Western Values in International Relations‘in H. Butterfield, M. Wight (eds.) Diplomatic Investigations. Essays in the Theory of International Politics (London: Allen & Unwin).Google Scholar
  125. Wight, M. 1979. Power Politics. London: Pelincan Books.Google Scholar
  126. Williams, J. 2015. Ethics, diversity, and world politics. Saving pluralism from itself?. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  127. Zenko, M. 2013. Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies. New York.Google Scholar
  128. Zenko, M. 2017. Trump Could Take Obama’s Drone War Further Into the Shadows. http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/02/the-buck-doesnt-stop-with-trump-on-counterterrorism/. Accessed 10 Feb 2017.

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations