Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 26, 2012
Signature Strikes In Yemen Will Increase The Problem – Is This Intended?

Building on an already desastrous foreign policy towards Yemen the Obama administration has decided to make things worse by allowing "signature drone strikes" in Yemen. Anyone in Yemen that shits like a terrorist, thereby showing the same "signature behavior", is now in danger of being killed by a U.S. drone:

The policy shift, as described by senior U.S. officials, includes targeting fighters whose names aren't known but who are deemed to be high-value terrorism targets or threats to the U.S.

There once was a time that the twin towers in New York were "deemed to be high-value terrorism targets". But now it is, as the WSJ seems to acknowledge with that phrase, the U.S. doing the terrorism and the targets are those shitting Yemeni. While not knowing the names of the people, knowing that their shit stinks, or is assumed to stink, will be enough to get them – plus the usual assortment of then "collateral damage" women and children – killed.

This policy is so idiotic that the administration has to resort to Orwellian logic:

Advocates of expanding the scope of U.S. drone strikes in Yemen say the latest U.S. intelligence shows that AQAP has grown stronger since one of its prominent leaders, American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed in a U.S. strike in September.

So when a drone strike was followed by an increase in the number of AQAP than more drone strikes will somehow solve the problem? How?

As regional expert have pointed out, every major increase in AQAP power followed after a U.S. cruise missile or drone strike in Yemen

I would argue that US missile strike are actually one of the major – not the only, but a major – factor in AQAP's growing strength.  Both Jeremy Scahill and Michelle Shephard have documented how US bombing mistakes in Yemen have played into AQAP's hands.

In parts of south Yemen AQAP is now the only group that provides services and government to the people. Taking that away, without any replacement in sight, will create more anarchy. If one thinks that Somali pirates are a problem, does one want the people in Abyan and Shabwa to also  take up that business line?

This policy of open murder by drone strikes of people who's "signature" way of life equals that of assumed terrorists is bound to have considerable negative effects.

As these blowbacks are easy to foresee the question is again if such U.S. foreign policy is made due to shear incompetence or if the foreseeable negative consequences are the real intent of such policies.

Comments

guess who the “neighbouring country” is:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2012/04/26/yemen_seeks_more_anti_terror_aid_but_limits_drones/
Yemen is next to “Saudi Arabia”? So turmoil in Yemen potentially threatens them?
I guess Obama likes drones because that way he can “project power” to his own electorate and to allies without having to commit the politically risky boots on the ground.
Of course it is going to backfire. It solves Obama’s political problems though.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2012 17:09 utc | 1

This is NOT incompetence b, just part of the same old policy. The US cares nothing about blow back, just about sending messages on the use of force.

Posted by: ben | Apr 26 2012 17:47 utc | 2

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/04/26/8553/
International Summit to Examine Issues Around US Government’s Use of Drones
Domestic drone issues, such as concerns about privacy and unwarranted surveillance of Americans, have been considered separately. Part of what will make the summit a success is how participants and speakers come to understand that all communities have to work together. All the issues are connected. As Benjamin explains, drone use by Homeland Security or Border Control in the United States and drones flying and killing people in countries overseas are both examples of the “undemocratic abuse” of this “technology for repressive purposes.” They are connected in that what is happening shows a clear “lack of respect for democratic values and privacy issues and international law.” In fact, she points out the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) does not just work on one aspect of drone use. They have lawyers that have a campaign on the killing of American citizens and also a campaign on law enforcement use of drones.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2012 17:55 utc | 3

Glenn Greenwald has been covering this madness:

The drone-happy President authorizes attacks on people in Yemen even when their names are not known
…So here’s yet another war that Obama is escalating, now ordering people’s death with greater degrees of recklessness, now without even bothering to know who is being targeted…it is crystal clear that, as usual, this aggression will only worsen the very problem it is ostensibly intended to solve…Then there’s the question of what legal authority exists for Obama to order the targeting of Yemenis who very well may have nothing to do even with the “Al Qaeda” group in Yemen: one which itself did not even exist as of the time the 2001 AUMF was enacted….

Posted by: Frank | Apr 26 2012 17:55 utc | 4

/Agree with Somebody
I won’t go into the ethics/morals of bombing villagers via drone, since everyone here probably knows it is immoral already, no point debating that fact. More interested in the “Why Yemen?” question. The reasons for going into Iraq were countless (largely untapped oil reserves, create a client state in the heart of the Middle East, encircle Iran, a dozen reasons), Afghanistan also had similar reasons given its closeness to China and Russia’s underbelly as well as Iran, not to mention the gas pipelines.
What strategic purpose is behind Yemen? It’s insignificant in geo-politics. No oil, no pipelines, not near US rivals. Not exactly anyones idea of a prized asset. It’s on the edge of the chessboard in every way. As Somebody said its only importance is that it is south of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi’s are terrified of AQAP gaining even more of a foothold in Yemen due to the Yemen uprising keeping the security forces busy.
Seems to me that the US is stepping in to bail out the Saudi’s by keeping AQAP at bay (of course it won’t work since the drones will turn the population even more Anti-American, but thats the plan). Also note that targetting people based on “signature behaviour” sounds like desperation to me, a reflection that they don’t have any useful intelligence so they are just going to randomly bomb and hope they get someone of important.

Posted by: Colm O’ Toole | Apr 26 2012 18:16 utc | 5

yeah, it is weakness and stupid policy – would you bet the future on monarchies?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/04/26/washington-bets-on-the-gulf-royals/
Such Nice People
Washington Bets on the Gulf Royals
by VIJAY PRASHAD

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2012 19:03 utc | 6

Far out. Surely this is a campaign to recruit new terrorists.

Posted by: Alexander | Apr 26 2012 19:08 utc | 7

Implicit of course, is terrorism is needed to legitimize the US counter-terror enforcement. The new precedence of targeted killings are very useful for any hegemony who want absolute power and control. Killing your political enemies with nobody protesting is an extreme power, and how the draconian nature of this practise isn’t obvious to everyone I can’t understand. In the EU lately, there has been no Al-Queda attacks, and most terrorism is motivated by right wing separatists.

Posted by: Alexander | Apr 26 2012 20:36 utc | 8

the announcement is (artfully) confusing
1) was it the WH or the Yemen government that put restrictions on drone strikes?
2) why are the CIA and the Pentagon maintainig TWO separate hit lists?
3) is the Yemeni government asking for more drone strikes or less?
anyways, my thoughts:
– the drone campaign rationale must be sought in inter-agency burocratic wrangling and ambitions, in creeping supreme power delirium and in lobbying interests;
– engaging in an endless war makes the identification of specific strategic goals increasingly irrelevant; war becomes an end in itself, constantly expanding its reach
– Us-Yemen relations will soon head south, like the Us-Pakistan did

Posted by: claudio | Apr 26 2012 22:55 utc | 9

First of all, signature strikes are an escalation of this war on people in Yemen. It also comes down to a decision to kill people based on less and less military intelligence information; and this means mechanical robotic killing based on some algorithm tied to patterns of movement. It’s really classically evil. And it takes away the need to answer questions the press might ask at the White House, that would require specifics regarding particular people who are targeted for killing, or any concrete relationship such people might have to AQAP, or to anything whatsoever.

Posted by: Copeland | Apr 26 2012 23:17 utc | 10

“Advocates of expanding the scope of U.S. drone strikes in Yemen say the latest U.S. intelligence shows that AQAP has grown stronger since one of its prominent leaders, American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed in a U.S. strike in September.”
It just staggers the mind, doesn’t it?
Q: Got a headache that won’t go away?
A: Whack yourself on the head with a plank of wood.
Q: The headache only gets worse?
A: Then keep whacking, only harder and faster.
I’d like to think that, one day, hopefully soon, some bloodsplattered American Senior Administration Official staggers to the microphone and shouts “Wy Are We Doing This??? This Is F**cking STUPID!!!!”
I’m not holding my breath about it, though……

Posted by: Johnboy | Apr 26 2012 23:30 utc | 11

from http://bigthink.com/ideas/signature-strikes-in-yemen?page=all cited by b:

The AQAP that exists today is not the one that existed in 2009 or 2010. The organization is now providing services and attempting to govern in parts of at least governorates.
No water, no electricity, no teachers for their children. AQAP is trying to provide these things for the first time

attempts at autonomy and self-government by Muslims have on the Us establishment the same effect waving red flag has on a bull – see also Somalia

Posted by: claudio | Apr 26 2012 23:38 utc | 12

@Colm, #5::
Two more possibilities:
1) Blackmailing the Saudis (possibly preemptive?)
2) Distraction from something

Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Apr 26 2012 23:49 utc | 13

Johnboy @ 11.
I like the plank of wood analogy. As for
This Is F**cking STUPID!!!!”
I prefer INSANE.
Insanity allows intelligent people, or more to the point, groups of like-minded intelligent people, to do F**cking STUPID things.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 27 2012 2:44 utc | 14

America’s 1% are a group of like-minded intelligent people and have bought and paid for the “right” to set US political and military policy at home and abroad.
Empathy and sympathy aren’t their strong suites.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 27 2012 2:54 utc | 15

It is actually inexplicable. There MUST be a reason that these fuckin’ maniacs in DC are working AGAINST our best interests.
Could it be that their agenda is not nationalist in nature, that, in fact, global pursuits of power have erased patriotism as the primary motivation for action and policy??? If so, then YOU, the American citizen, mean no more to them than a Afghani wedding party incinerated in a drone strike.
When we see such gross disrespect for international laws, individual nation’s sovereignity, human life, human rights, and the very essence of moral justice, it has to be a harbinger of domestic policy. And, truth to this prediction can be found throughout legislation enacted since 9/11. We ARE becoming a fascist police state, with a leadership that is very cavalier about holding themselves above the law. As our laws become more intrusive and fascist, directed towards the citizenry, our leadership’s disregard for the law becomes more blatant and egregious.
I doubt that insanity is driving foreign policy. It is too calculated, too richly fueled. More likely, it is driven by the cold and calculating quest for power that has plagued mankind throughout history. Power really does corrupt. And we ain’t seen nuthin’ yet. We tend to think of the Hitlers and the Idi Amins in our past as evil personified. Now, imagine them with nukes, drones, satellites and cruise missiles.

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Apr 27 2012 4:46 utc | 16

Really, when you get right down to it…
Terrorist attacks against American targets, here and abroad, actually greases the skids for what seems to be the “desired” direction our “leaders” are taking us. When considered in that context, our policy in Yemen isn’t insane at all.

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Apr 27 2012 5:10 utc | 17

In other words, these elitist pieces of SHIT in DC couldn’t care less if their policies breed hatred and terrorism. All the better for giving momentum to current policy, both in regard to domestic fascist legislations and policies, as well as expanding global military adventures.
They WANT an excuse. They WANT another trifecta.

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Apr 27 2012 5:17 utc | 18

somehow I find this here very convincing:
http://peakgeneration.blogspot.de/p/petrodollar-warfare.html
“It is a strategic power play of breathtaking consequence. Ultimately, the U.S. doesn’t have to “win” or even control territory; it simply has to deny control to others, introduce a permanent uncertainty and unease in their plans, and establish forward bases for power projection.”
above quote is from here
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogapr10/global-empire04-10.html

Posted by: somebody | Apr 27 2012 7:12 utc | 19

in the meantime China is doing this here:
“The Yanbu project is an $8.5 billion joint venture, which covers an area of about 5.2 million square meters. It is expected to process 400,000 barrels of heavy crude oil per day, according to Bloomberg. Aramco will hold a 62.5 percent stake in the plant while Sinopec will own the remaining 37.5 percent.
By all accounts China’s investment in oil infrastructure and refining capacity, at home and abroad, supports a long-term strategy of developing world-class refining facilities in partnership with OPEC suppliers. Such relationships mean economic leverage that could soon make China OPEC’s premiere purchaser and subordinate U.S. relations with the same countries.
Also underway is a joint project to build Egypt’s largest refinery ever. In its agreement with Nigeria, China is investing $23 billion to build three refineries (combined 750,000 barrels per day of refining capacity) and a fuel storage complex.”
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/on-energy/2012/04/18/china-makes-oil-refining-plans-for-the-futurewill-the-us

Posted by: somebody | Apr 27 2012 7:16 utc | 20

claudio @ 12: “attempts at autonomy and self-government by Muslims have on the Us establishment the same effect waving red flag has on a bull – see also Somalia.”
Yes, sure seems that way. And not just muslims, could be anywhere. If some government decides to use it’s national policies to help workers/masses enjoy a better lifestyle, well, we can’t let that go unchallenged. Might threaten the hegemony of certain malignant elites.

Posted by: ben | Apr 27 2012 13:45 utc | 21

USG is — at root, & always has been — an amoral killing machine. not many speedbumps along the way from exterminating native americans to depopulating centers of peripheral resistance (ideology/religion/nationalist/political/etc) to hegemonic designs & material interests. advancement of drones/drone policy & implementation is simply the latest fad/vehicle for delivery and apt illustration of the disregard for anything other than self-interests of an imperial juggernaut. underlying impetus for foreign policy has always been the expansion of & maintenance of control, including the elimination of rivals and/or opportunities for them. contingencies such as blowback — like its victims (e.g., bug testers in the case of drones & targeting software) — obviously are of little-to-no importance in the feedback systems that propel it forward.

Posted by: b real | Apr 27 2012 14:58 utc | 22

OT but:

…apologies & quick explanation to regular readers of this blog – am needing a temporary break…

has temporary turned into permanent b real? As if there wasn’t already enough international affairs to keep up on, but I miss your feedback from the “dark continent”. I finished “heart of darkness” and have to agree with some of your original assessment. But that’s for an open thread.
Regards.

Posted by: juannie | Apr 27 2012 15:11 utc | 23

Coming soon to a theatre near you: (drones, USA)
Wa Po 26.4
As targeted extra-judiciary assassination of US citizens is now permitted, why not by drones?
As Claudio @9 intimated, there is really no policy, only flimsy, trumped up, rationales for indiscriminate killing. (See also POA @16 who raises other questions.)
Driven by arms producers, certainly. But who else?
I would venture that power resting within a symbiosis of Gvmt.-Corporations, with Corporations being the more influential (often called ‘fascist’), power becomes splintered and scattered, and thus to maintain itself concentrates on means rather than ends, as examining the ends would create disarray.
However, as ends can’t be ignored entirely when communicating to ppl who have some common sense left, they are just made up, vague, and are wafted out from a position of authority, often accompanied by ‘secret’ considerations, etc. (“Terrorism”, etc.)
All these characteristics make them very difficult to contest, oppose.

Posted by: Noirette | Apr 27 2012 15:50 utc | 24

@Noirette

Driven by arms producers, certainly. But who else?

the Cia and the Pentagon themselves are extremely powerful lobbies; the Pentagon shoould be viewed as an assembly of powerful bureaucracies, for whom arm sales represent only one voice of the budget;
the sheer dimension of their budgets, aside of all dirty deals they can manage through their overseas bases and activities, and intelligence gathering, makes them probably the most influential lobbies in the Us
analogous considerations for NATO
in the Yemeni drone case, competition between Cia and the Pentagon seems evident

Posted by: claudio | Apr 27 2012 16:47 utc | 25

can somebody please kindly describe to “somebody” how to fucking create a proper hyperlink?
jesus. It’s not that difficult.

Posted by: slothrop | Apr 27 2012 23:44 utc | 26

@Noirette

power becomes splintered and scattered, and thus to maintain itself concentrates on means rather than ends, as examining the ends would create disarray

examining the ends wouldn’t create disarray; it would mean, simply, governing, that is: exercising the first and most banal political activity; it would mean limiting the scope of lobbies (ok, that would create disarray in their plans …); we live in a post-political society precisely because this kind of activity has been abandoned, for many reasons (that should be at the top of our attention)

ends […] are just made up, vague, and are wafted out from a position of authority, often accompanied by ‘secret’ considerations, etc. (“Terrorism”, etc.)

this is what I call the dominance of rhetoric in the current political discourse; they appear credible (or at least formally and apparently sensible) because build on specific ideologies and mythologies (the most important ones: “western civilization”, “capitalistic system”, “representative democracy”, “the Absolute Evil”, “totalitarianism”, “free markets”, etc)
ideologies, mythologies and rhetorics have spun the current Newspeak
the dominance of rhetoric is the other face of the current “government of, by and for the lobbies”
until we address ALL the ideologies and mythologies that enslave traditional political thought, we won’t be able to escape the bubble that imprisons us, and engage in a new, free political battle; being slave to even only ONE of them is enough to capture you by the ankle and drag you down again in the current ideological bubble

Posted by: claudio | Apr 28 2012 0:09 utc | 27

Tomgram: Mark Danner, The Age of Rhetoric
inspiring, and still relevant, although the rhetoric has changed from Bush to Obama

Posted by: claudio | Apr 28 2012 1:41 utc | 28

An Africa Oil Corp presentation PDF Hunting Elephants in East Africa’s Rift Basins January 2012 estimates a fair amount of oil in Somalia. Maps show oil fields in Yemen and northern Somalia that were formerly contiguous but split by the rift. The report maps fields in Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia and Somalia, and there are a number of nice maps in the report. The estimates for Somalia are for Puntland:
Nugaal MMBbl Gross best estimate 4,083 Net best estimate 1,225
Dharoor MMBbl Gross best estimate 1,210 Net best estimate 363
somebody @19, many thanks for the links. When I look at US behavior in Africa I am wondering more and more if permanent uncertainty is the intended outcome of US policy. It is glaringly apparent in Somalia, but I wonder about Nigeria, and a number of other places as well where it is still more covert.
And b, I’ve been meaning to add my thanks for all your work on this site. I learn a great deal from you and from many of the commenters here. I don’t comment much, but I’m a regular reader.

Posted by: xcroc | Apr 28 2012 1:56 utc | 29

Off topic…buuutttt……..
Interesting that Israeli military chief and ex-intel chief are slamming Netanyahu’s sabre rattling towards Iran at the same time Obama is allegedly considering allowing Iran a 5% enrichment protocol.
Some behind the scenes State Department diplomacy going on with some powerful Israelis, seeking to undermine Netanyuahu on Iran?

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Apr 28 2012 17:48 utc | 30

@ somebody | Apr 27, 2012 3:12:32 AM | 19
somehow I find this here very convincing:
Me too.
It makes a lot more sense than the lies and motherhood statements from the mouth-pieces of the wholly-owned subsidiary of the 1% (aka the Obama Administration).

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 29 2012 5:53 utc | 31

“And b, I’ve been meaning to add my thanks for all your work on this site. I learn a great deal from you and from many of the commenters here. I don’t comment much, but I’m a regular reader.”
ditto

Posted by: Hu Bris | Apr 29 2012 11:35 utc | 32

@juannie – i hear ya – no, not permanent – still working on a proper stance for juggling

Posted by: b real | Apr 29 2012 17:34 utc | 33

@33 b real – still waiting for your return and those fine grained insights … hope you get the proper stance but most of all be well.

Posted by: thirsty | Apr 29 2012 20:22 utc | 34

@ 29 xcroc — thanks for highlighting the resource figures.

Posted by: thirsty | Apr 29 2012 20:24 utc | 35