Drone policy refers to the interventionist measures that are mostly used by US government to counter terrorism. The predator drones are used for surveillance in the military hot points, in the countries which pose a national threat through the creation of groups that disregard human rights throughout the world. For example, in 2000, an unarmed predator drone conducting surveillance observed a figure suspected to be Osama Bin Laden walking around a property. In at least five countries-Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq and Somalia, US drones patrol their skies and are occasionally used to launch lethal strikes to the suspected terrorists. The drones are used in the unique environments where drone preferences are above any other policies and tactics.
Reasons for the Policy
It is important for the drone policy to be implemented in order to curb the actions of terror throughout the world. While many organizations are taking into contextualizing the drones within the larger issue of spying, drone strikes are degrading the ability of the terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda to conduct training especially in the remote areas.
In countries such as Pakistan, these organizations are moving away from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) towards more urban environments while, in Yemen, there is increased mobile training.
Beneficiaries
The drone policy benefits not only the countries conducting such policies but also the countries in which policies are undertaken. Within the FATA, the US has had to contend with the specific groups. Such groups include the common enemy with Pakistan, enemies of the US who have relations with Pakistan and the enemies of Pakistan who are little interest to the US. Having such scenarios, the Pakistan government has had to work together with the US on some targets while undermining others.
This would be of potential benefit to the government because it is anti-terrorism policy which hinders achievement of government objectives. The government through the non-governmental organizations will also benefit as they strive towards a more democratic society. Drone policy plays a crucial role in enhancing government regulation strategies in a country.
Other people who might be the beneficiaries of the drone policies are those who will understand that the use of the drones calls for new methods to be used. If the drones are still used as a means of dealing with terrorists, it could be an effective measure to prevent terrorism and conflicts in the foreseeable future.
Implementers of Drone Policy
The drone policies are implemented by the national security and the federal aviation administration. The FAA, which controls the safe minimum operating altitudes for other aircrafts, does not currently regulate the drones. Defining navigable airspace for drone operation may be one way in which the FAA responds to congress’s instruction, in FMRA, to write rules integrating civil drones in the national airspace. Based on the size and the capabilities of the drones, the FAA can be able to categorize the drones in different classes. Larger drones that physically resemble fixed-wing aircraft, which are subject to similar safe minimum operating altitude requirements and smaller drones could be regulated similar to helicopters.
The policies are implemented by the federal government through the central intelligence agency (CIA). The CIA chief executive officer is also involved in the policy decisions on the drone as the CEO acts as the advisor to the president on matters of counterterrorism.
Sustainability of the Policy
The majority of people will question the sustainability of the drone policy. According to the white house spokesman John Carney, the policies are legal and constitutional. He argues those not only are they ethical but are also wise. In reality, the policies in which drones are allowed to operate in the countries which terrorism is widespread will look at the bigger picture in which the majority of the people will benefit. If terror is to be fought, new ways have to be devised in order to improve the accuracy of surveillance and the strikes otherwise the policies may prove futile if the communities living in terror areas are affected hence rendering the policy unsustainable.
References
Boyle, A. (2012, August 20). Event Review – U.S. Drones Policy: Strategic Frameworks and Measuring Effects. Retrieved April 26, 2013, from Flashpoint Blog: http://americansecurityproject.org/blog/2012/event-review-u-s-drones-policy-strategic-frameworks-and-measuring-effects/
Dolan, A. M., & Thompson II, R. M. (April 4, 2013). Integration of Drones into Domestic Airspace:. Congressional Research Service , 3-19.
Salutin, R. (2013, April 26). Foreign policy and the consequences of drone killings . Retrieved April 26, 2013, from rabble: http://rabble.ca
Siddiqui, S. (2013, April 24). Drone Hearing's Lack Of White House Official Ignites Testy Defense From Press Secretary. Retrieved April 26, 2013, from HuffPost: http://www.huffingtonpost.com
