And the Drones Start Patrolling Iraq, Again
Back when I went on a tear about how drones undermine nation-states (both ours and those countries we use them in) I predicted we’d be using drones in Iraq again.
Iraq: While plenty of America’s wars have been dubiously legitimate, Iraq certainly is at the top of that list. We trumped up a case against a sovereign nation-state (one with manufactured legitimacy internally, but no less than many of our allies in the region). In what may be the last traditional nation-state war we fight, we managed to (at least thus far and only barely) avoid breaking the country up into three or more parts and establish another leader with questionable legitimacy. In most of that, drones weren’t key. But I’m betting that they will be going forward as a threat to Nuri al-Maliki that if he doesn’t invite our troops to stay longer, we will feel free to use drones in his country. That’s just a guess, mind you, but the evolution of our drone power (and the influence Iran has in Iraq) surely has a bearing on whether and how Iraq fully reasserts is sovereignty by kicking our troops out.
Sure enough, it’s happening and Iraqis are worried about what it says about their sovereignty.
A month after the last American troops left Iraq, the State Department is operating a small fleet of surveillance droneshere to help protect the United States Embassy and consulates, as well as American personnel. Some senior Iraqi officials expressed outrage at the program, saying the unarmed aircraft are an affront to Iraqi sovereignty.
The program was described by the department’s diplomatic security branch in a little-noticed section of its most recent annual report and outlined in broad terms in a two-page online prospectus for companies that might bid on a contract to manage the program. It foreshadows a possible expansion of unmanned drone operations into the diplomatic arm of the American government; until now they have been mainly the province of the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency.
[snip]
A senior American official said that negotiations were under way to obtain authorization for the current drone operations, but Ali al-Mosawi, a top adviser to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki; Iraq’s national security adviser, Falih al-Fayadh; and the acting minister of interior, Adnan al-Asadi, all said in interviews that they had not been consulted by the Americans.
Mr. Asadi said that he opposed the drone program: “Our sky is our sky, not the U.S.A.’s sky.”
[snip]
The State Department confirmed the existence of the program, calling the devices unmanned aerial vehicles, but it declined to provide details. “The department does have a U.A.V. program,” it said in a statement without referring specifically to Iraq. “The U.A.V.’s being utilized by the State Department are not armed, nor are they capable of being armed.”
Though I gotta hand it to this drone-happy Administration. I didn’t predict they’d have the tone-deafness of running these drones through the Department of State.
It says “State” right there in the name. How can you pretend to be conducting diplomacy between states when you insist on having your own robot air force (albeit unarmed) flying over theirs?
Congratulations. You are seeing the face of 21st century warfare. Is a war not a war if you use drones?
Bob in AZ
Indeed! Where is the diplomacy?
Bob and I had a discussion on the previous thread in which he helped to inform us of all the State Department Military members in charge of things. While I do understand the need for some military expertise in the State Dept., the foreign policy seems to be skewed out of porportion with so many members from that background.
‘The program was described by the department’s diplomatic security branch in a little-noticed section of its most recent annual report and outlined in broad terms in a two-page online prospectus for companies that might bid on a contract to manage the program. It foreshadows a possible expansion of unmanned drone operations into the diplomatic arm of the American government; until now they have been mainly the province of the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency.’
Marcy,
This is another very important issue of contracting out stuff that should have oversight if it is being implimented on behalf of our government and the US as a whole. I absolutely do not see how this is advantageous to anyone. In fact, it appears that it would cost more and again have no oversight or liability.
We have very few assets left in America as it is. Everything has been privatized to the point of no return. What duties and infrastructure that hasn’t been privatized has been melded into military ops.
The message that was sent by trading the top officers of the CIA and Military was a loud one. Then when you see how not only has the CIA, FBI, NSA, and others have been militarized to the point of no distinction, you have to pause. Also, even the local police departments have been trained and geared up in military style. Those intelligence agencies that once did what they were commissioned to do appear to have become troops on the ground while the military has taken on another more powerful position in intelligence gathering. This makes the military drone program even more despicable.
Whew! I hope I got my thoughts clear in that little rant.
I wonder if State is testing these:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-auto-drone-20120126,0,740306.story
The article says they are currently unarmed…
What’s the deal with mission creep at State? All these “security” contractors in Baghdad, now with added drones, and then there’s environmental/trade responsibilities on the Keystone pipeline. Kinda like Hillary decided to try her hand at a bit of Presidenting by expanding the definition of diplomacy.
Do I understand this correctly?
“outlined in broad terms in a two-page online prospectus for companies that might bid on a contract to manage the program.”
Is the State Department putting out a Request for Proposals for private contractors to fly these drones? Will Blackwater (insert current name), being hired to run drones in Iraq? This would disturb me a whole lot more!
What is the upside of this? We just get to see things? Would that be enough for the State Department? When they see something they do not like, wouldn’t they want to do something about it? How hard would it be to arm a flying drone? Just attach something slightly more sophisticated than a Molotov cocktail and drop it onto a house?
Imagine Blackwater (sic), a for hire bunch of murdering mercenaries, running aerial surveillance in our name. Would they fly missions of their own once they have the contract? Can they demand protection money? Can they run rackets?
@bittersweet: This spring and summer you will need to watch out for these critters:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/30/us-army-hummingbird-a160-helicopter-drone_n_1176763.html
http://www.theplanetarypost.com/2011/06/war-evolves-with-drones-some-tiny-as.html
These birds and insects are dangerous!
From the NYT piece in the post above:
The ratio of 1 security contractor for every 2.2 staffers is rather stunning. But let’s think about that 16,000 figure a bit more . . .
The size of the entire federal (non-contract) workforce of the Department of Energy: 16,036. (pdf, page 10)
Dept of Labor: 16,000
EPA: 16,430
For that matter, the regular employee head count for the State Dept is 18,877. Obviously, this count does not include contract employees at embassies, which are included in the 11,000 number . . . but you get the idea.
Hey real diplomacy was done by USIA. Since it’s demise, we have experienced 9-11 and somehow drones say, “Diplomacy.”
Actually, State has never been quite pure when it come to military or intel ops, going all the way back to the State Department’s Office of Policy Coordination after WWII. OPC’s secret armies sent behind the Iron Curtain were one example, as was its later merger with the then-new CIA. Of course, State has long had its own Intelligence service, and they have a long not-too-well known history of covert activity.
Really, it’s quite rare that anything really new is happening here. What’s new is our own greater understanding.