The Drone Doctrine

American contributions towards the growth and development of international law and jurisprudence have been great. The founding fathers of America were genius – George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison – who introduced the modern concepts of democracy, liberty and fundamental right. They were the flag-bearers of human rights and fundamental freedom. Likewise, the “Monroe Doctrine” propounded by the president James Monroe in 1823 reflecting the US foreign policy of the time was based on the principle of non-intervention that helped promoting self-respect among the member of international community.
This process still continues, however, in the negative direction. The so-called “Bush Doctrine” by the George W Bush is essentially based on the concept of Unilateralism in the international intercourses. The principle of “No-Fence-Sitting” based on his proclamation that “you are either with us, or with terrorists” has called for the unqualified and unquestioned support by the international community for the War on Terror. Now, the drone attacks conducted by Uncle Sam worldwide, and mainly in Pakistan, is an important development and contribution in this regard.
Here are the important points of its newly introduced and recently evolved “Drone Doctrine.” Firstly, a single incident like 9/11 can give a nation a sort of “license to kill” and impose upon another nation a “liability to be killed.” Under this license, one can attack any country and dismantle any regime all over the world. Secondly, in the name of some “higher cause” e.g., War on Terror, now one state can violate the national sovereignty of other state and may totally reject the protest or objection by the other state upon this. Thirdly, no formal authorisation from the UN Security Council is required for an international intervention in violation of the International Law and UN charter including Article 2(4), refraining to the member state from the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of other states. Fourthly, a civil and non-military agency of a state, like CIA, can directly and openly involved in the acts of hostility against an alien state. Lastly and most importantly, one can act as prosecutor, adjudicator and executor simultaneously and arbitrarily by relying on the new fundamental principle of “guilty until proven dead.”
MOHSIN RAZA MALIK
Lahore