Few new technologies are as closely identified with American counterterrorism, or have proven as controversial, as drones. These unmanned aerial vehicles are not necessarily military; increasingly, drones are used by civilian law enforcement, and may soon be used to provide wireless service in Africa or for instant deliveries across the United States. Even these civilian uses raise important privacy questions. But it is drones' emergence as a missile platform that has made them such a lightning rod for criticism and human rights anxiety. Increasingly, critics worry that the technology has lowered the costs of war and that their use carries deceptively heavy burdens for operators.
Latest in Drones
In a challenge to U.S. use of a military base in Germany to conduct drone strikes, a German court found the government responsible for ensuring that U.S. operations conducted from German territory comport with international law.
On Wednesday, President Trump issued an executive order revoking an Obama administration order that created reporting requirements for U.S. counterterrorism strikes. Read the full order below.
Executive Order on Revocation of Reporting Requirement
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
A preliminary analysis of the international legality of each party's actions.
More research and development resources should be dedicated to preparing for defense against the non-military uses of unmanned autonomous weapons.
The bold conversation the U.S. public and officials ought to have now has a different focus.
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling striking down the FAA’s regulation, though it failed to block an additional notice placing further restrictions on drone flights in the Washington, D.C. area.
Micro drones now demonstrate collective decision-making, adaptive formation flying, and self-healing. The future is now .....
Erik Lin-Greenberg argues that the recent agreement regulating U.S. drone exports will be ineffective at best and, at worst, potentially harmful for U.S. national security.
As commentators grapple with the political question of whether a reckless and irresponsible tone is disqualifying for high office, we might also ask whether a cerebral and serious tone compensates for policies that blur legal frameworks and masquerade novel theories as matters of routine interagency review.