3/20/13

The Moral Hazard of Drones - NYTimes.com

JULY22,2012,5:15PM

TheMoralHazardofDrones
ByJOHNKAAGandSARAHKREPS

AsthedebateonthemoralityoftheUnitedStatesuseofunmannedaerialvehicles (U.A.V.s,alsoknownasdrones)hasintensifiedinrecentweeks,severalnewsandopinion articleshaveappearedinthemedia.Two,inparticular,bothpublishedthismonth,reflect thecurrentethicaldivideontheissue.AfeaturearticleinEsquirebyTomJunodcensured theLethalPresidencyofBarackObamafortheadministrationspolicyoftargetedkillings ofsuspectedmilitantsanother,TheMoralCaseforDrones,anewsanalysisbyThe TimesScottShane,gatheredopinionsfromexpertsthatimplicitlycommendedthe administrationforreplacingDresdenstylestrategicbombingwithhighlypreciseattacks thatminimizecollateraldamage. Amidthisdiscussion,wesuggestthatanallegorymightbehelpfultoillustratesomeofthe manymoralperilsofdroneusethathavebeenoverlooked.Itshowsthatourattemptsto avoidobviousethicalpitfallsofactionslikefirebombingmayleaveusvulnerabletoother, moresubtle,moraldangers. Whiledroneshavebecometheweaponsofourage,themoraldilemmathatdronewarfare presentsisnotnew.Infact,itisvery,veryold: Onceuponatime,inaquietcorneroftheMiddleEast,therelivedashepherdnamed Gyges.DespitethehardshipsinhislifeGygeswasrelativelysatisfiedwithhismeager existence.Then,oneday,hefoundaringburiedinanearbycave. Thiswasnoordinaryringitrendereditswearerinvisible.Withthisnewpower,Gyges becameincreasinglydissatisfiedwithhissimplelife.Beforelong,heseducedthequeenof thelandandbegantoplottheoverthrowofherhusband.Oneevening,Gygesplacedthe ringonhisfinger,sneakedintotheroyalpalace,andmurderedtheking. InhisRepublic,Platorecountsthistale,butdoesnottellusthedetailsofthemurder. Still,wecanrestassuredthat,likeanyviolentdeath,itwasnotapleasantaffair.However, thestoryendswell,atleastforGyges.Hemarriesthequeenandassumesthepositionof king. Thisstory,whichisasoldasWesternethicsitself,ismeanttoelicitaparticularmoral responsefromus:disgust.SowhydowefindPlatosstorysoappalling? Maybeitsthewaythatthestoryreplacesmoraljustificationwithpracticalefficiency:
opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/the-moral-hazard-of-drones/?pagewanted=print 1/5

3/20/13

The Moral Hazard of Drones - NYTimes.com

Gygesbeingabletocommitmurderwithoutgettingcaught,withoutanyrealdifficulty, doesnotmeanheisjustifiedindoingso.(Expediencyisnotnecessarilyavirtue.) MaybeitsthewaythatGygesringobscureshismoralculpability:itsdifficulttoblamea personyoucantsee,andevenhardertobringthemtojustice. MaybeitsthatGygesissuccessfulinhisplot:awickedactnotonlygoesunpunished,butis rewarded. Maybeitsthenaggingsensethatanykingdombasedonsuchdeceptioncouldnotbeajust one:whatelsemighthappeninsuchakingdomunderthecoverofdarkness? OurdisgustwithGygescouldbetracedtoanyoneoftheseconcerns,ortoallofthem. OnemightarguethatthemythofGygesisasuitableallegorytodescribethecombatants whohaveattackedandkilledAmericanciviliansandtroopsinthelast10years.Ashepherd fromtheMiddleEastdiscoversthathehasthepowerofinvisibility,thepowertostrikea fatalblowagainstamorepowerfuladversary,thepowertodosowithoutgettingcaught, thepowertobenefitfromhisdeception.These,afterall,arethetacticsofterrorism. ButthemythofGygesisreallyastoryaboutmoderncounterterrorism,notterrorism. Webelieveastrongercomparisoncanbemadebetweenthemythandthemoraldangersof employingprecisionguidedmunitionsanddronetechnologiestotargetsuspected terrorists.WhatisdistinctiveaboutthetaleofGygesistheeasewithwhichhecancommit murderandgetawayscotfree.Thetechnologicaladvantageprovidedbytheringendsup servingasthejustificationofitsuse. Terrorists,whateverthemoralvalueoftheirdeeds,maybefoundandpunishedashumans theyaresubjecttoretribution,whetheritbecorporalorlegal.Theymayloseorsacrifice theirlives.Theymay,infact,bekilledinthemiddleofthenightbyadrone.Because remotecontrolledmachinescannotsuffertheseconsequences,andthehumanswhooperate themdosoatagreatdistance,themythofGygesismoreaparableofmodern counterterrorismthanitisaboutterrorism. Onlyrecentlyhastheuseofdronesbeguntotouchonquestionsofmorality.Perhapsits becausetheanswerstothesequestionsappearselfevident.Whatcouldbewrongwiththe useofunmannedaerialvehicles?Afterall,theylimitthecostofwar,intermsofboth bloodandtreasure.TheU.S.troopswhooperatethemcanmaintainsaferstandoff positionsinEasternEuropeorathome.Andarmedwithprecisionguidedmunitions,these dronesaresaidtolimitcollateraldamage.In2009,LeonPanetta,whowasthenthe directoroftheCentralIntelligenceAgency,said,U.A.V.sareverypreciseandverylimited intermsofcollateraldamagetheonlygameintownintermsofconfrontingortryingto disruptthealQaedaleadership.Whatcouldbewrongwithallthis? Quiteabit,itturnsout.
opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/the-moral-hazard-of-drones/?pagewanted=print 2/5

3/20/13

The Moral Hazard of Drones - NYTimes.com

Return,foraminute,tothemoraldisgustthatGygesevokesinus.Gygesalsoriskedvery littleinattackingtheking.Thesuccessofhismissionwasalmostassured,thankstothe technologicaladvantageofhisring.Gygescouldsneakpastthekingsguardsunscathed,so hedidnotneedtokillanyonehedidnotintendonkilling.Thesearethefactsofthematter. Whatwefindunsettlinghereistheideathatthesefactscouldbeconfusedformoral justification.Philosophersfindthisconfusionparticularlyabhorrentandguardagainstit withtheonlyweapontheyhave:adistinction.Thefactvaluedistinctionholdsthat statementsoffactshouldneverbeconfusedwithstatementsofvalue.Morestronglyput, thisdistinctionmeansthatstatementsoffactdonotevenimplystatementsofvalue.Can doesnotimplyought.Tosaythatwecantargetindividualswithoutincurringtroop casualtiesdoesnotimplythat,weoughtto. Thisseemssoobvious.But,asPeterW.SingernotedearlierthisyearinTheTimes,when theObamaadministrationwasaskedwhycontinuedU.S.militarystrikesintheMiddle Eastdidnotconstituteaviolationofthe1973WarPowersResolution,itrespondedthat suchactivitiesdidnotinvolvethepresenceofU.S.groundtroops,U.S.casualtiesora seriousthreatthereof.Thejustificationofthesestrikesrestedsolelyontheirease.The RingofGygeshasthepowertoobscuretheobvious. Thisissuehasallthehallmarksofwhateconomistsandphilosopherscallamoralhazard asituationinwhichgreaterrisksaretakenbyindividualswhoareabletoavoid shoulderingthecostassociatedwiththeserisks.Itthusseemswise,ifnotconvenient,to underscoreseveralethicalpointsifwearetoavoidourownGygesmoment. First,wemightrememberMarxscommentthatthewindmillgivesyouasocietywiththe feudallordthesteamenginegivesyouonewiththeindustrialcapitalist.Andprecision guidedmunitionsanddronesgiveyouasocietywithperpetualasymmetricwars. Thecreationoftechnologyisavalueladenenterprise.Itcreatesthematerialconditionsof cultureandsocietyandthereforeitscreationshouldberegardedasalwaysalreadymoral andpoliticalinnature.However,technologyitself(thephysicalstuffofroboticwarfare)is neithersmartnordumb,moralnorimmoral.Itcanbeusedmoreorlessprecisely,but precisionandefficiencyarenotinherentlymorallygood.Imagineaveryskilleddentist whopainlesslyremovesthewrongtooth.Imagineadroneequippedwithaprecision guidedmunitionthatkillsacompletelyinnocentperson,butsparesthepeoplewholivein hisorherneighborhood.Theuseofimpressivetechnologiesdoesnotgrantoneimpressive moralinsight.Indeed,asGygesdemonstrates,theoppositecanbethecase. Second,assassinationandtargetedkillingshavealwaysbeenintherepertoiresofmilitary planners,butneverinthehistoryofwarfarehavetheybeensocheapandeasy.The relativelylownumberoftroopcasualtiesforamilitarythathasturnedtodronesmeans thatthereisrelativelylittledomesticblowbackagainstthesewars.TheUnitedStatesand itsallieshavecreatedthematerialconditionswherebythesewarscancarryonindefinitely.
opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/the-moral-hazard-of-drones/?pagewanted=print 3/5

3/20/13

The Moral Hazard of Drones - NYTimes.com

Thenoncombatantcasualtyratesinpopulationsthatareattackedbydronesareslowand steady,buttheyaddup.Thatthecasualtyratesarerelativelylowbyhistoricalstandards thisisnoDresdenisundoubtedlyagoodthing,butitmayallowtheinternationalmedia tooverlookpeskylittlefactsliketheslowaccretionofforeigncasualties. Third,theimpressiveexpediencyandaccuracyindronetargetingmayalsoallow policymakersandstrategiststobecomelaxintheirmoraldecisionmakingaboutwho exactlyshouldbetargeted.Considerthestarkcontrastbetweentheambiguouslanguage usedtodefinelegitimatetargetsandthespecifictechnicalmeansamilitaryusesto neutralizethesetargets.Thetermsterrorist,enemycombatant,andcontingent threatareextremelyvagueanddoverylittletoarticulatethelegitimacyofmilitary targets.Incontrast,thetechnicalcapabilitiesofweaponsystemsdefineandpaintthese targetswithevergreaterdefinition.Asweaponrybecomesmoreprecise,thelanguageof warfarehasbecomemoreambiguous. Thisambiguityhas,forexample,alteredthediscoursesurroundingtheissueofcollateral damage.Therearetwoverydifferentdefinitionsofcollateraldamage,andthesedefinitions affectthetruthofthefollowingstatement:Dronewarfareandprecisionguidedmunitions limitcollateraldamage.Onedefinitionviewscollateraldamageastheinadvertent destructionofpropertyandpersonsinagivenattack.Inotherwords,collateraldamage referstostuffwedontmeantoblowup.Anotherdefinitioncharacterizescollateral damageasobjectsorindividualsthatwouldnotbelawfulmilitarytargetsinthe circumstancesrulingatthetime.Inotherwords,collateraldamagereferstothegood guys.Since1998,thisisthedefinitionthathasbeenused.Whatisthedifferencebetween thesedefinitions? Thefirstisadescriptionoftechnicalcapabilities(beingabletohitXwhilenothittingY) thesecondisanormativeandindeedlegaljudgmentaboutwhoisandisnotinnocent(and thereforewhoisalegitimatetargetandwhoisnot).Thefirstisamatteroffact,thesecond amatterofvalue.Thereisanimportantdifferencebetweenthesestatements,andthey shouldnotbeconfused. Fourth,questionsofcombatantstatusshouldbethesubjectofjudicialreviewandmoral scrutiny.Instead,ifthesequestionsareaskedatall,theyareansweredasiftheyweremere mattersoffact,unilaterally,behindcloseddoors,ratherthanthroughtransparentdue process.Thatmoralreasoninghasbecomeevenmoreslipperyoflate,astheAmerican governmenthasimpliedthatallmilitaryagedmalesinastrikeareaarelegitimatetargets: aguiltbyassociationdesignation. Finally,asthestrategicrepertoiresofmodernmilitariesexpandtoincludedronesand precisionguidedmunitions,itisnotatallclearthathavingmorechoicesleadsstrategists tomakebetterandmoreinformedones.Inasking,IsMoreChoiceBetterThanLess?the philosopherGeraldDworkinoncearguedthattheanswerisnotalways.Inthewordsof Kierkegaard:Inpossibilityeverythingispossible.Henceinpossibilityonecangoastray
opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/the-moral-hazard-of-drones/?pagewanted=print 4/5

3/20/13

The Moral Hazard of Drones - NYTimes.com

inallpossibleways. Somemightobjectthattheseguidelinessetunrealisticallyhighexpectationsonmilitary strategistsandpolicymakers.Theywouldprobablyberight.ButnooneexceptGyges saidthatbeingethicalwaseasy. NOTE ForabroadertreatmentofthisargumentseeJohnKaagandWhitleyKaufmansMilitary Frameworks:TechnologicalKnowHowandtheLegitimizationofWarfareinthe CambridgeReviewofInternationalAffairs(2009)alsoSarahKrepsandJohnKaagsThe UseofUnmannedAerialVehiclesinContemporaryConflict:ALegalandEthicalAnalysis inPolity(2012). JohnKaagisanassistantprofessorofphilosophyattheUniversityofMassachusetts, Lowell.SarahKrepsisanassistantprofessorofgovernmentatCornellUniversity.

Copyright2013TheNewYorkTimesCompany

PrivacyPolicy

NYTimes.com620EighthAvenueNewYork,NY10018

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/the-moral-hazard-of-drones/?pagewanted=print

5/5