Search results
Jul 20, 2018 · The US government’s broad interpretation of policy and law related to where and when it can use lethal force has fueled two important debates. The first centers on whether US policy allowing for the use of lethal force outside of recognized conflict areas has a legitimate basis in international law.
- What International Law Is Applicable to Targeted Killings?
- What Are The Laws of War on Targeted Killings?
- What Is The International Human Rights Law on Targeted Killings?
- How Many People Have Us Forces Killed in Targeted Killings in Recent years?
- Does Using Aerial Drones in Targeted Killings Affect The Legal Regime Involved?
- How Has The Us Carried Out Targeted Killings in Pakistan?
- How Has The Us Carried Out Targeted Killings in Yemen?
- How Has The Us Carried Out Targeted Killings in Somalia?
- What Has Been The Us Rationale For Targeted Killings?
- Was The Targeted Killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki in Yemen Lawful?
The lawfulness of a targeted killing hinges in part on the applicable law, which is determined by the context in which it takes place. International humanitarian law (also known as the laws of war) is applicable during armed conflicts, whether between states or between a state and non-state armed groups. Hostilities between a state and an armed gro...
The laws of war permit attacks only against military objectives, such as enemy fighters or weapons and ammunition. Civilians are immune from attack, except those individuals “directly participating in the hostilities.” While the phrase “directly participating in hostilities” has various interpretations, it is generally accepted to include not only ...
International human rights law permits the use of lethal force outside of armed conflict situations if it is strictly and directly necessary to save human life. In particular, the use of lethal force is lawful if the targeted individual presents an imminent threat to life and less extreme means, such as capture or non-lethal incapacitation, are ins...
There is no concrete, verifiable number of deaths from US targeted killings. The New America Foundation, which bases its figures on local and international media accounts, conducted a studyof reported US drone strikes in northern Pakistan from 2004 to 2011, and concluded that the attacks killed between 1,680 and 2,634 alleged militants and civilian...
The use of unmanned aircraft or drones for targeted killings does not directly affect the legal analysis of a particular attack. Drones themselves and their weaponry of missiles and laser-guided bombs are not illegal weapons under the laws of war – they can be used lawfully or unlawfully depending on the circumstances. When used appropriately, dron...
Aerial drone strikes by the US on suspected members of al Qaeda and the Taliban in northern Pakistan have been conducted at least since 2004, although the US does not officially acknowledge them. They escalated in 2011, with some 60 strikes taking place through the end of September. These strikes were carried out primarily by the CIA. It is not kno...
The US reportedly has conducted at least 20 drone strikes and other aerial attacks against alleged al Qaeda militants and other Islamist forces in Yemen from 2002 through November 2011. In the first known strike, in November 2002, a CIA drone-launched missile killed Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi, a Yemeni suspected of masterminding the bombing of the...
The US government has conducted targeted airstrikes against alleged al Qaeda members in Somalia since 2006. At his confirmation hearing in June 2011, Vice Adm. William McRaven of the US Special Operations Command saidthat there was a need for greater use of drones in Somalia to enhance the chance of successful strikes. Beginning that month, the US ...
Through public statements by senior officials, the Obama administration has provided an outline of its legal authority for conducting targeted killings. The essence of its argument is that targeted killings of those associated with al Qaeda are lawful in general, because the US is justified in going to war in self-defense (an argument about the leg...
In September 2011, US drone-launched missiles killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen of Yemeni descent, and three other alleged al Qaeda members who were traveling by car in northern Yemen's al Jawf province. Awlaki had been sought by Yemeni authorities since November 2010 for plotting to kill foreigners and being a member of al Qaeda. Also killed in...
Dec 5, 2016 · Part I-B-1 of the Report offers a useful summary of the additional legal constraints that apply in the rare cases in which the government decides whether to use lethal force against a U.S. citizen who has joined enemy forces and planned attacks against the United States from abroad.
Dec 17, 2020 · This white paper sets forth a legal framework for considering the circumstances in which the U.S. government could use lethal force in a foreign country outside the area of active hostilities against a U.S. citizen who is a senior operational leader of al-Qa’ida or an associated force of al-Qa’ida—that is, an al-Qa’ida leader actively ...
In a recent post, Bobby raised the question of what impact, if any, Bin Laden’s death would have on the legal effect of the Authorization for Use of Military Force, or “AUMF.”.
Apr 10, 2015 · As many of you know, it was only days after the 9/11 attacks that Congress passed, and the President signed, an authorization for the use of military force, or AUMF, authorizing the President...
People also ask
Does a new AUMF authorize military operations against ISIL?
Why did the AUMF authorize the use of force in Syria?
Can lethal force be used outside armed conflict situations?
Who is considered a 'associated force' under the AUMF?
According to the U.S., under which circumstances could the government use lethal force, in a foreign country outside the area of active hostilities, against a U.S. citizen who is a senior operational leader of Al-Qa’ida or an associated force?
