1.005
Bearbeitungen
Killer-Drohne: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
→Rechtfertigung
Woozle (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Woozle (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 16: | Zeile 16: | ||
"President George W. Bush signed a secret 'Memorandum of Notification" giving the CIA carte blanche to hunt down and kill high-value Targets in the al-Qaeda leadership. Bush also approved a list of about twi dozen people whom the CIA was authorized to kill or capture without further presidential Review and allowed the Addition of names to that list with no permission necessary. On the day he signed the document, Bush spoke with Reporters at the Pentaton saying: 'I want justice, and there's an old poster out West, as I recall, saying WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE'. Reporting on the presidential 'kill list', the New York Times noted: ' Despite the authority given to the agancy, Mr. Bush has not waived the executive order banning assassinations, officials said. The presidential authority to kill terrorists defines operatives of Al Qaeda as enemy combatants and thus legitimate targets for lethal force" (115) | "President George W. Bush signed a secret 'Memorandum of Notification" giving the CIA carte blanche to hunt down and kill high-value Targets in the al-Qaeda leadership. Bush also approved a list of about twi dozen people whom the CIA was authorized to kill or capture without further presidential Review and allowed the Addition of names to that list with no permission necessary. On the day he signed the document, Bush spoke with Reporters at the Pentaton saying: 'I want justice, and there's an old poster out West, as I recall, saying WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE'. Reporting on the presidential 'kill list', the New York Times noted: ' Despite the authority given to the agancy, Mr. Bush has not waived the executive order banning assassinations, officials said. The presidential authority to kill terrorists defines operatives of Al Qaeda as enemy combatants and thus legitimate targets for lethal force" (115) | ||
=== Rechtfertigung === | === Rechtfertigung unter Obama === | ||
Unter der Präsidentschaft von Barack Obama ist die schon von Präsident George W. Bush insgeheim erteilte Erlaubnis zum Einsatz der Killer-Drohnen öffentlich gerechtfertigt worden. Dies geschah durch Harold Hongju Koh, Legal Adviser des State Department, in einem Vortrag vor der American Society of International Law. | Unter der Präsidentschaft von Barack Obama ist die schon von Präsident George W. Bush insgeheim erteilte Erlaubnis zum Einsatz der Killer-Drohnen öffentlich gerechtfertigt worden. Dies geschah durch Harold Hongju Koh, Legal Adviser des, von Hillary Clinton geleiteten, State Department, in einem Vortrag vor der American Society of International Law am 25.03.2010 [http://www.state.gov/s/l/releases/remarks/139119.htm]. Ausgangspunkt ist dabei, dass sich die USA weiterhin in einem "armed conflict with a--Qaeda, as well as the Taliban and associated Forces , in Response to the horrific 9/11 attacks" befinden und daher "consistent with ist inherent right to self-defense under international law" Gewalt anwenden dürfen. In der Folge setzt sich Koh mit vier juristischen Einwänden auseinander: | ||
"First, some have suggested that the very act of targeting a particular leader of an enemy force in an armed conflict must violate the laws of war. But individuals who are part of such an armed group are belligerents and, therefore, lawful targets under international law. During World War II, for example, American aviators tracked and shot down the airplane carrying the architect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, who was also the leader of enemy forces in the Battle of Midway. This was a lawful operation then, and would be if conducted today. Indeed, targeting particular individuals serves to narrow the focus when force is employed and to avoid broader harm to civilians and civilian objects. | |||
Second, some have challenged the very use of advanced weapons systems, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, for lethal operations. But the rules that govern targeting do not turn on the type of weapon system used, and there is no prohibition under the laws of war on the use of technologically advanced weapons systems in armed conflict-- such as pilotless aircraft or so-called smart bombs-- so long as they are employed in conformity with applicable laws of war. Indeed, using such advanced technologies can ensure both that the best intelligence is available for planning operations, and that civilian casualties are minimized in carrying out such operations. | |||
Third, some have argued that the use of lethal force against specific individuals fails to provide adequate process and thus constitutes unlawful extrajudicial killing. But a state that is engaged in an armed conflict or in legitimate self-defense is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force. Our procedures and practices for identifying lawful targets are extremely robust, and advanced technologies have helped to make our targeting even more precise. In my experience, the principles of distinction and proportionality that the United States applies are not just recited at meetings. They are implemented rigorously throughout the planning and execution of lethal operations to ensure that such operations are conducted in accordance with all applicable law. | |||
Fourth and finally, some have argued that our targeting practices violate domestic law, in particular, the long-standing domestic ban on assassinations. But under domestic law, the use of lawful weapons systems—consistent with the applicable laws of war—for precision targeting of specific high-level belligerent leaders when acting in self-defense or during an armed conflict is not unlawful, and hence does not constitute “assassination.” | |||
=== Bilanz des Einsatzes von Killer Drohnen ( diverse Quellen)=== | === Bilanz des Einsatzes von Killer Drohnen ( diverse Quellen)=== | ||