Later On

A blog written for those whose interests more or less match mine.

Using drones for good

with 2 comments

Very interesting op-ed in today’s NY Times by Andrew Sniderman and Mark Hanis:

DRONES are not just for firing missiles in Pakistan. In Iraq, the State Department is using them to watch for threats to Americans. It’s time we used the revolution in military affairs to serve human rights advocacy.

With drones, we could take clear pictures and videos of human rights abuses, and we could start with Syria.

The need there is even more urgent now, because the Arab League’s observers suspended operations last week.

They fled the very violence they were trying to monitor. Drones could replace them, and could even go to some places the observers, who were escorted and restricted by the government, could not see. This we know: the Syrian government isn’t just fighting rebels, as it claims; it is shooting unarmed protesters, and has been doing so for months. Despite a ban on news media, much of the violence is being caught on camera by ubiquitous cellphones. The footage is shaky and the images grainy, but still they make us YouTube witnesses.

Imagine if we could watch in high definition with a bird’s-eye view. A drone would let us count demonstrators, gun barrels and pools of blood. And the evidence could be broadcast for a global audience, including diplomats at the United Nations and prosecutors at the International Criminal Court.

Drones are increasingly small, affordable and available to nonmilitary buyers. For hundreds of thousands of dollars — no longer many millions — a surveillance drone could be flying over protests and clashes in Syria.

An environmental group, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, has reported that it is using drones to monitor illegal Japanese whaling in the waters of the Southern Hemisphere. In the past few years, human-rights groups and the actor and activist George Clooney, among others, have purchased satellite imagery of conflict zones. Drones can see even more clearly, and broadcast in real time.

We could record the repression in Syria with unprecedented precision and scope. The better the evidence, the clearer the crimes, the higher the likelihood that the world would become as outraged as it should be.

This sounds a lot like surveillance, and it would be. It would violate Syrian airspace, and perhaps a number of Syrian and international laws. It isn’t the kind of thing nongovernmental organizations usually do. But it is very different from what governments and armies do. Yes, we (like them) have an agenda, but ours is transparent: human rights. We have a duty, recognized internationally, to monitor governments that massacre their own people in large numbers. Human rights organizations have always done this. Why not get drones to assist the good work? . . .

Continue reading.

Written by LeisureGuy

31 January 2012 at 9:04 am

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The article admits that sending in surveillance drones would violate Syrian airspace and possibly international laws. It then goes on to claim this is very different from what governments and armies do. Actually, disregarding national sovereignty and flaunting international laws was precisely what landed us in so much trouble in Iraq. So was the ‘it is okay if it is for a cause I support’ line of thinking on the part of some senior US officials.

    The Unites States might well be better off minding its own business than meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. Unless attacked or to honor treaty obligations, do we really have any business straying beyond our own borders?


    31 January 2012 at 11:50 pm

  2. I agree, but it’s pretty clear that the US doesn’t recognize the sovereign rights of other nations unless it wants to—our war of aggression against Iraq and our use of drones over all sorts of nations (including firing missiles) is a sign. But my thought is that this may be a tool that enables the people of a country to monitor their own governments, given that governments are increasingly hostile toward those who challenge persons in power (cf. the jack-booted storm-trooper responses to the Occupy protesters: when people simply exercising their rights peaceably to assemble are attached with pepper spray and clubs, that indicates that things are getting ugly right here. Good real-time clear streaming-video documentation of what’s happening, particularly if directional mikes are possible, from helicopter drones hovering over the action might offer some protection to the people there and certainly more information than the government will allow—Wikileaks has shown again the tendency of governments toward secrecy, and that tendency is increasing.

    But as drones become cheaper and cheaper, progressive action groups can avail themselves of the technology—cf. the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (and in their case the actions are on the high seas, where national sovereignity does not apply).

    I’m sure that these things can be used badly for peaceful purposes, but also they can be used ingeniously. Think cellphone cameras. On stilts.


    1 February 2012 at 6:59 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s