[Mb-civic] Guess who's coming to dinner? - Amos N. Guiora and Martha MinowBoston Globe

[William Swiggard]

  Guess who's coming to dinner?

By Amos N. Guiora and Martha Minow  |  January 21, 2006  |  The Boston Globe

THE AIRSTRIKE in Damadola, Pakistan, on Jan. 13 is yet another example 
of how the Bush administration's policies are harming the interests of 
the United States. The short-term and long-term harm to the US military 
is clear. The seemingly botched job, with five children among those 
killed, increases the risk of revenge to US soldiers should they be 
captured. The credibility of the military is shaken because it seems 
that those planning the operation did not know who was coming to dinner.

By violating the sovereignty of an ally, we embarrassed a key US partner 
in the fight against terrorism and jeopardized General Pervez 
Musharraf's already tenuous hold on power as president of Pakistan. In 
the justified but failed attempt to eliminate Osama bin Laden's top 
deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, it may well turn out that the attack did take 
out important Al Qaeda operatives, but the apparent guessing game 
indicates accidentalism, itself a symptom of a deeper problem.

The apparent lack of sophistication in intelligence gathering, 
operational planning, and policy four years into the fight against 
terrorism reveals failure to establish a reliable and institutionalized 
process that serves America's interest at this crucial point in history. 
At least according to media reports, the administration did not have 
accurate information about who was going to attend the dinner targeted 
by the airstrike and still lacks full information about who was there 
and who was killed. The loss of innocent civilians may be an unavoidable 
consequence of targeted killing, even when justified, but the unanswered 
question here is whether sufficient efforts were undertaken to minimize 
such killings.

The violation of Pakistan's sovereignty in contravention of 
international law raises a red flag about what legal advice was rendered 
or followed prior to the attack. This event puts all of our allies, 
especially those in Arab and Muslim countries, in a difficult box. And 
we've created a public relations boon for bin Laden's supporters and a 
fiasco for ourselves.

A reliable and sophisticated process must include the following:

Comprehensive intelligence gathering based on open sources, human 
intelligence, and signal intelligence, with the expertise in language 
and culture necessary to understand and analyze what is seen and heard.

Sophisticated operational capability able to pinpoint a target while 
minimizing ''collateral damage" through the highest technical skill and 
real-time intelligence.

Rigorous and independent legal advice even in the face of pressures from 
military or political decision makers.

Realistic foreign policy analysis, especially attentive to the worlds of 
our allies and our enemies.

The capability to integrate these resources, act nimbly, and remain able 
to say no so as to best serve America's interests.

Counterterrorism is not a perfect science; military commanders must have 
the flexibility to act even without complete knowledge. Even the best 
planned operation may go awry and innocent lives may tragically be lost 
even in operations that are deemed a success. A sophisticated process 
must include a sober and informed assessment about the risks and 
benefits of any military operation. To proceed without the elements of a 
sophisticated process is reckless and potentially counterproductive.

Until there is active oversight from Congress and the courts, we should 
not be surprised that the administration and the military have not 
devised such a sophisticated process. Enormous sums are being spent 
daily in our name, but without sophisticated application, our safety 
will remain elusive.

Unlike Israel -- which has clearly approved targeted killings based on a 
sophisticated, integrative process of the sort described here -- America 
is still struggling with whether to approve this kind of strategy. 
Surely, it should never be approved without the integration, 
comprehensive intelligence capability, refined operational capacity, 
rigorous and independent legal advice, realistic foreign policy advice, 
and the judgment worthy of the confidence of the American people.

We need to know who is coming to dinner.

Amos N. Guiora is a professor of law and director of the Institute for 
Global Security Law and Policy at Case Western Reserve University School 
of Law. Martha Minow is a professor at Harvard Law School.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/01/21/guess_whos_coming_to_dinner/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060121/bf8c9dde/attachment.htm