Shorter Jeh Johnson: 16-Year Old Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki Legitimate Military Target

I’ll have more to say about this speech Jeh Johnson gave at Yale later. But for the moment I wanted to unpack the logic of his comments about targeted killing.

As part of his claim that drone strikes are just like past military killing, Johnson boasted of the precision of our current weapons.

I want to spend a moment on what some people refer to as “targeted killing.”  Here I will largely repeat Harold’s much-quoted address to the American Society of International Law in March 2010.  In an armed conflict, lethal force against known, individual members of the enemy is a long-standing and long-legal practice.  What is new is that, with advances in technology, we are able to target military objectives with much more precision, to the point where we can identify, target and strike a single military objective from great distances.

Should the legal assessment of targeting a single identifiable military objective be any different in 2012 than it was in 1943, when the U.S. Navy targeted and shot down over the Pacific the aircraft flying Admiral Yamamoto, the commander of the Japanese navy during World War Two, with the specific intent of killing him?  Should we take a dimmer view of the legality of lethal force directed against individual members of the enemy, because modern technology makes our weapons more precise?  As Harold stated two years ago, the rules that govern targeting do not turn on the type of weapon system used, and there is no prohibition under the law of war on the use of technologically advanced weapons systems in armed conflict, so long as they are employed in conformity with the law of war.  Advanced technology can ensure both that the best intelligence is available for planning operations, and that civilian casualties are minimized in carrying out such operations.

He then goes on to argue that our targeted killing is not assassination because the targets are all legitimate military targets.

On occasion, I read or hear a commentator loosely refer to lethal force against a valid military objective with the pejorative term “assassination.”  Like any American shaped by national events in 1963 and 1968, the term is to me one of the most repugnant in our vocabulary, and it should be rejected in this context.  Under well-settled legal principles, lethal force against a valid military objective, in an armed conflict, is consistent with the law of war and does not, by definition, constitute an “assassination.”

Well then. If our weapons have that much precision–if the intelligence that goes into such strikes is so good we can strike individuals with precision–and we only hit military targets, it must follow that we knew 16-year old American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki was present when we killed him with a drone strike. And we must have considered the teenager a legitimate military target.

Because of course the United States would never assassinate its teenagers, would it?

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

22 Responses to Shorter Jeh Johnson: 16-Year Old Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki Legitimate Military Target

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel Kind of surprising no one has asked Tammy Duckworth about McConnell (and Mark Kirk) playing chicken with phone dragnet.
20mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @DickCheneyFacts @JesselynRadack @JohnKiriakou Uh, you might talk to David Passaro about that statement.
49mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @deray: An NBA Player Is Missing the Playoffs Because the NYPD Broke His Leg—Why the Sports-Media Silence? http://t.co/gmjW0rwoKq
1hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @GatorZoneBB: Peter Alonso gives the #Gators a 2-0 lead in the 1st with a 2-out RBI single to bring home Buddy Reed
2hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @GatorZoneBB: Harrison Bader leads off with a home run - No. 13 for Bader - 1-0 #Gators
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @weems So I suspect one goal of this--in both USAF and Burr's bill--is to make it easier to get if/when it's in the cloud.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @weems One likely explanation for Comey's whining about encryption is that iMessage and FaceTime bypass any potential telecom collection.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @weems And because he wants to expand it, it would be integrated with PRISM production for those providers, probably.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @weems Nope. What he wants to do is expand the dragnet beyond what it was in Stellar Wind.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Juan Pablo!
4hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV Uh oh! Now Georgia goes to second base! #NoMoreTweetsInThisSeries http://t.co/Eb8lWBZ4lZ
4hreplyretweetfavorite
February 2012
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829