Medea Benjamin's Blog, page 13

Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control

(Dedicated to Medea Benjamin and CODEPINK)

 

The video warrior arrives in the early hours

Ready for a grueling day beside his computer towers

For he’s the pilot of a General Atomics Predator Drone

Ready to send a missile into someone’s home

 

Firmly planted behind the flat screen monitor

From a hidden bunker in Nevada he can scan

The ground for child, woman or man.

Then with a push of a button he can

Disintegrate his victim according to plan

By launching a rocket of immense power and lethality–

Never mind the flagrant lack of morality.

 

B52s in Viet Nam unleashed bombs from 36,000 feet.

But the kid in Nevada has got this beat

He kills his victims from the other side of the world.

And keeps safe the “heimat” with flag unfurled

 

And of course his high value targets are never in error

And he always delivers their deserved terror

But when the intelligence is wrong

He must be stoic and strong and play along

That there is no collateral damage

For denial is an emotional advantage

No his conscience is clear

Ah, but that is just the point –I fear

For conscience is what is lacking here

And this ghastly deed has the feel

Of an impersonal game; but with victims quite real.

 

So what does he say on arriving home to his wife?

That he had spent a day in continuous strife?

And what does he to his kids cheerfully say

When they ask “Daddy” what did you do today?

 

No one has to be conditioned to kill

And block out those emotions at will

And dissociate from the victims all sense of humanity

But isn’t this a form  of insanity.

 

For people the world over want –and I know I am not wrong

To live, to love and to watch their children grow strong

Which is why CodePink toils to end war

And rid the world of this terrible horror.

 

HP Charman MD

3-24-09 to 10-30-2013

Drone Victims Take on Washington DC

By Medea Benjamin

Faisal bin Ali Gaber is a soft-spoken engineer from Yemen. After he lost his cousin and brother-in-law in a drone strike in August 2012, he published an open letter to President Obama and Yemeni President Hadi. He said his brother-in-law was an imam who had strongly and publicly opposed al-Qaeda, and that his young cousin was a policeman. “Our town was no battlefield. We had no warning. Our local police were never asked to make any arrest,” he wrote to the presidents. “Your silence in the face of these injustices only makes matters worse. If the strike was a mistake, the family — like all wrongly bereaved families of this secret air war — deserve a formal apology.”

Now Faisal Gaber will get a chance to appeal directly to the American people. This weekend for the first time ever, a Yemeni delegation of drone strike victims’ family members, human rights experts and grassroots leaders will be visiting Washington as part of the Global Drone Summit–– You can watch the Summit live all weekend on the CODEPINK livestream channel.

While the CIA and US military have been using lethal drones for over a decade, this will be only the second time that drone victims have gotten visas to come to the United States to tell their stories. The first visit was just a few weeks ago when, on October 29, the Rehman family — a father with his two children — came all the way from the Pakistani tribal territory of North Waziristan to the US Capitol to tell the heart-wrenching story of the death of the children’s beloved 67-year-old grandmother. The hearing, convened by Congressman Alan Grayson, had the congressman, the translator and the public in tears. The Rehman family’s story is documented in the new film Unmanned: America’s Drone Wars by Robert Greenwald of Brave New Foundation, which was released at the time of their visit.

Just as the visit and the film have put real faces on drone victims, new reports by prestigious institutions have brought the covert drone wars out of the shadows. Amnesty International issued a report on drone strikes in Pakistan. Human Rights Watch issued a report on the civilian cost of US targeted killings in Yemen, the new focal point of the US drone wars. Also just released are two UN reports: one by Christof Heyns, the UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and the other is by Ben Emmerson, the special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism. Both question the US legal framework in light of international law and decry the lack of transparency and accountability. The UN reports engendered the first-ever UN discussion on remote-controlled killing at the General Assembly when, on October 26, representatives from a broad swath of nations took turns denouncing US drone policies.

The US government is feeling the pressure. It has taken steps to reduce civilian casualties and has reduced the actual number of strikes, but certainly not eliminated them. In fact, there was a drone strike in Somalia on October 28, one in Pakistan on October 31, and yet another one in Yemen on November 7.

While the reduction in the number of strikes is a partial victory, it cannot erase the hundreds of innocent lives lost over the years. Also, with the global proliferation of drones (thanks to the easing of restrictions on overseas sales and the introduction of domestic drones into US skies by September 2015), their usage will inevitably increase.

That’s why the Global Drone Summit on November 16-17 will bring together hundreds of people from across the US and around the world to discuss strategies to stop the proliferation of drones used for killing and spying. It is organized by the peace group CODEPINK, along with the Institute for Policy Studies, The Nation Magazine, Center for Constitutional Rights, and the National Lawyers Guild.

In addition to the Yemeni delegation, the Summit will include drone pilots, legal experts, human rights advocates, authors, technology experts, artists and grassroots activists. Their hope is to build a global movement to rein in the use of drones for the purposes of killing and spying. With the FAA mandated to open up US airspace to drones by 2015, and police departments around the country anxious to purchase drones with Homeland Security grants, the issue of drones for domestic surveillance is of grave concern to civil liberty and privacy activists.

It seems that the more Americans know about the effects of killer drones, the less likely they are to support them. Polls show a precipitous decline in support from 83 percent in 2012 to 61 percent one year later. Hearing directly from the victims will continue to erode the support.

As Predator drones are forced out into the light of day, the veneer about their pinpoint precision and effectiveness in fighting terrorism is being peeled away. What gets exposed is the innocent lives destroyed and the blowback that keeps us in a state of perpetual war.

Medea Benjamin is co-founder of the human rights organization Global Exchange and the peace group CODEPINK: Women for Peace. She is the author of Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control. Please tune into the Drone Summit livestream over the weekend!

Will Jeh Johnson make the homeland more secure?

Jeh Johnson, President Obama’s pick to replace outgoing Secretary Janet Napolitano as head of the Department of Homeland Security, will appear before the Senate Homeland Security Committee this week for his confirmation hearing. Johnson is an obscure figure to the general public, but his likely confirmation does not bode well for human rights, or your civil liberties. Johnson is civil and criminal trial lawyer who made millions defending corporations such as Citigroup and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco. His government positions included a stint as New York assistant US attorney and general counsel for the Pentagon from 2009 to 2012, during President Obama’s first term.

Johnson’s nomination came as a surprise even to the Washington beltway crowd. In a July National Journal poll asking more than 100 defense and foreign policy experts who should replace retiring Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, suggestions included retired Coast Guard admiral Thad Allen (he oversaw relief efforts for Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which is one of the department’s responsibilities), Homeland Security undersecretary Rand Beers, number two at department Jane Holl Lute, NYC police commissioner Ray Kelly, and former California Congresswoman Jane Harman. Not a single person cited Jeh Johnson.

Johnson’s nomination was also a surprise to the law enforcement groups that are supposed to be the agency’s key partners. “I couldn’t have picked him out of a lineup with the Marx Brothers,” James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, told an AP reporter.

One reason for Johnson’s unexpected nomination might well have to do with money. He was a heavy-weight fundraiser for Obama, raising more than $200,000 during Obama’s first campaign for office, according to USA Today reported in 2009. During the 2008 race, Obama’s campaign website listed Johnson as a member of his national finance committee. Federal records show that Johnson has personally contributed over $100,000 to Democratic groups and candidates, including influential senators such as Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and James Clyburn.

Republicans have voiced concerns over political cronyism, calling Johnson more a fundraiser than someone with the expertise needed to oversee the gargantuan 240,000-employee department that was cobbled together from 22 separate agencies in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Johnson has never managed a government agency, much less one that combines within its purview everything from terrorism to drugs, cyber attacks, natural disasters, immigration, protecting the president and securing air travel.

Johnson might also be receiving a kick upstairs for having been an unapologetic supporter and enabler of President Obama’s policy of drone warfare. His tenure at the Defense Department was marked by a dramatic increase in US drone strikes by both the military and the CIA. Johnson himself was personally responsible for providing the legal rationale for the military’s involvement in the drone program, and those legal memos remain hidden from the public and most of the Congress.

When some administration officials argued for more restrictions on drone strikes, particularly against lower-level militants, Johnson argued the more hawkish view. In Somalia, for example, the New York Times reported that Jeh Johnson was the voice saying that Al-Shabab was a full affiliate of al-Qaeda, and since we are at war with with Al Qaeda, it is fine to target even lower-level militants.

To the great dismay of civil rights advocates, Johnson also argued that U.S. citizens could be targeted in strikes. “Belligerents who also happen to be U.S. citizens do not enjoy immunity where noncitizen belligerents are valid military objectives,” he said in a speech at Yale Law School. Johnson put his legal rationale into practice by authorizing the execution of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen and Al-Qaeda supporter who was killed by a drone strike in Yemen in September 2011. Johnson’s support of drone warfare could bolster the Department of Homeland Security’s effort to beef up its fleet of domestic drones, including Predator drones, with “nonlethal weapons.”

From its inception following the 9/11 attack, the agency has encouraged the proliferation of a national security state: surveillance cameras, armed personnel carriers, spy drones. It has awarded some $35 billion in Homeland Security grants for police departments to arm themselves with paraphernalia usually reserved for war zones. (For example, thanks to DHS, Fargo, North Dakota, a city with fewer than two homicides a year, got a new $256,643 armored truck; Montgomery County in Texas purchased a new $300,000 Vanguard ShadowHawk drone.)

Despite the overwhelming outrage by the public, Johnson has defended the NSA’s massive spying on Americans, asserting that when you make a phone call, you have no legitimate expectation of privacy when it comes to the collection of metadata—phone numbers, duration of calls, even GPS location. Johnson said the NSA’s data collection was “probably the most regulated national security program we have.”

It should come as no surprise that Johnson is an outspoken advocate for the criminal prosecution of whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden. He served as general counsel during the height of the WikiLeaks scandal, calling Wikileaks disclosures “illegal and irresponsible actions,” and claiming that the leaking of classified materials aided America’s enemy.

At a 2011 Pentagon commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr., Johnson made the controversial statement that King would have supported the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “I believe that if Dr. King were alive today, he would recognize that our nation’s military should not and cannot lay down its arms and leave the American people vulnerable to terrorist attack,” he claimed. This is the same Dr. King who called the US was the greatest purveyor of violence in the world, the same Dr. King who said that a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.

While no one should attempt to speak for the great civil rights leader, I wonder what Dr. King would have thought about Jeh Johnson’s nomination and the enormous Department of Homeland Security, whose $50 billion price tag is robbing funds from programs of social uplift.

“Spiritual doom” comes to mind.

If you think Jeh Johnson’s confirmation will threaten our security more than it will secure it, send a message now to the Senators on the Committee on Homeland Security, and tell them to reject Johnson to head the DHS.

 

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK: Women for Peace. She is the author of Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control.

The US Should Stop Supporting Nuri Al-Maliki

The US Should Stop Supporting Nuri Al-Maliki

Eman Ahmed Khamas*

‘Maliki is a liar’, Iraqis have been chanting in their demos for years now, showing their displeasure with the Iraqi prime minister Nuri Al-Maliki. Now he has gone to the United States asking for weapons and intelligence support, insisting that outside terrorists are jeopardizing the peace, prosperity, and democracy of both Iraq and the United States. But it is Maliki’s own government that is the greatest threat.



Iraq under Maliki’s administration has become one of the most dangerous places on earth, especially for journalists anda professionals. Around 7,000 civilians have been killed in the first ten months of 2013; triple this number have been injured and maimed. Maliki claims that terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda are responsible for these massacres. While it is true that post-occupation Iraq has become a haven for different armed groups, pro-government sectarian militias are wreaking havoc against Iraqis in broad daylight.

Armed men with sectarian insignia patrol Iraqi streets. There are at least five armed militias working in collaboration with the Iraqi security forces, apart from the special units that are directly connected to the prime minister’s office. Even Maliki’s son, Ahmed, has his own armed men and conducts military operations, although he has no police or security portfolio.

According to Navi Pillay, the UN high Commissioner for Human Rights, there are massive human rights violations in Iraq. The Iraqi legal system under Maliki does not comply with the simplest global norms. From January-October 2013, 140 Iraqis have been executed by the Ministry of Justice, in defiance of the calls by many international human rights organizations for an immediate death penalty moratorium.

“The law has become a sword held to the necks of Iraqis,” said Osama Nujaifi, the Iraqi Speaker of the Parliament.

Iraqi government sources confirm that there are some 30,000 Iraqis in prison; 17,000 languish there without trial. Arbitrary arrests are common practice in Iraqi streets. Documented and filmed horror stories of torture and death in Iraqi prisons make the infamous Abu Graib abuses look like child’s play. Many of the detainees disappear, their families unable to ascertain if they are dead or alive.

Maliki claims that he leads a vibrant democracy, but he heads an authoritarian regime and monopolizes six high governmental posts: chief of staff, minister of defense, minister of interior, chief of intelligence, and head of national security. Even his partners in the Shiite alliance have been excluded, let alone his Sunni opponents. He is supported by the theocracts in Iran and he has supported the Syrian regime, one of the most notorious autocracies in the region. In a televised interview, Maliki threatened to liquidate those who demonstrate for justice and better services, and described them as a ‘stinking bubble’. Indeed, his SWAT forces used lethal weapons against peaceful protestors several times. In the town of Hawija, for example, at least 50 unarmed men were slaughtered last April. In other cities, such as Basra, Nassyria, Fallujah, and Mosul, protestors have been beaten, arrested and killed.

Iraq ranks at the bottom of the most corrupt countries in the world. Corruption has been institutionalized in all walks of life through nepotism, blackmail, bribes and kleptocracy, a term that has become recurrent in the Iraqi media. Scandalous stories of billions of dollars disappearing in a dizzying array of fake or fishy deals – from building schools to buying weapons – have also become commonplace. Even prisons have turned into a prolific business where security personnel blackmail inmates’ families for thousands of dollars.

In an open letter to the Prime Minister, the dean of the Faculty of Journalism in Baghdad University said that government positions are reserved for people who are related to sectarian parties and militias, like the reserved seats on airplanes. According to Transparency International, every week 800 million dollars are transferred outside the country. Most alarming is Maliki’s repeated acknowledgement that he knows all about these corrupt deals, and their relation to violence and terrorism, but he chooses to ignore them in order to maintain the political stability!

One of the Maliki’s biggest lies is that the economy is growing by almost 10 percent due to efforts to rebuild the infrastructure, education and health care systems. There is little data available to refute his claims, but the bleak reality of Iraq today tells a different story. Mothers sell their children for a pittance; prostitution, begging, and child labor flourish; unemployment is over 30%; illiteracy is higher than it has been in half a century; and the health and education systems are in shambles. Even Iraq’s social and cultural fabric has been shredded, as you can see from the ghetto walls that now divide Baghdad into different sectarian communities.

The simple fact is that Maliki’s sectarian regime is responsible for this free fall, and Maliki is now cynically using his failure as an excuse to ask for more US aid. Believing his lies and militarily supporting him would simply mean allowing these violations to continue. And for what? Hasn’t the US already done enough damage in Iraq?

Eman Ahmed Khamas is an Iraqi journalist. She was coordinator of Iraq Occupation Watch, a project of CODEPINK, from 2003-2007.

Whom Is Maliki Cheating!! #Iraq

Whom Is Maliki Cheating!!

Eman Ahmed Khamas*

‘Maliki is a liar’, Iraqis have been chanting in their demos for years now, against the Iraqi prime minister Nuri Al-Maliki. Believing him is complicity in his crimes against the Iraqi people. He has been to US asking for weapons and aid in intelligence, pretending that outside terrorists are jeopardizing Iraq’s -and the US- peace, prosperity, and democracy.

Iraq under Maliki’s administration has become the most dangerous place on earth to live in –especially for journalists and professionals- according to many international organizations, the UN for one. Around 7.000 civilians have been killed in the last ten months of 2013, triple this number injured, many maimed. Maliki claims that terrorists linked to Al-Qaeda are responsible for these massacres. While it is a fact that post-occupation Iraq has become a haven for different armed groups, but well known, self-acknowledged pro-government sectarian militias are raking havoc against Iraqis in day light.

Armed men in specific dresses, holding sectarian slogans patrolling Iraqi streets, have become a familiar daily view. There are at least five armed militias who are working in collaboration with the Iraqi security forces, apart from the special units that are connected to the prime minister’s office directly. Even Maliki’s son, Ahmed, has his own armed men and conducts military operations –according to the father himself- even though he has no police or security portfolio.

Until last October, 140 Iraqis have been executed in 2013 alone by the ministry of justice in defiance to many international human rights organizations’ calls for immediate death penalty moratorium, and condemnations of the Iraqi legal system as not complying with the simplest global norms. The law has become a sword held to the necks of Iraqis, Osama Nujaifi, the Iraqi Parliament Speaker, said. According to the UN high commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Navi Pillay, there aremassive human rights violations in Iraq.

Iraqi government sources confirm that there are 30.000 Iraqis in prison, 17,000 languish there without trial. Iraqis know that the real number is many doubles. Arbitrary arrests are common practices in Iraqi streets. Documented and filmed horrible stories of torture and death under it in Iraqi prisons make the infamous Abu Graib children stories. Many of the detainees disappear, no trace of them could be found, whether dead or alive.

Maliki claims that he leads a vibrant democracy, while he heads an authoritarian regime and monopolizes six high governmental posts as a chief of staff, minister of defense, of interior, as chief of intelligence, and of national security. He has excluded everybody else from power even his partners in the shiite alliance, let alone his enemies. He has supported – and is supported by- the Iranian and Syrian regimes, ones of the most notorious autocracies in the region. In a televised interview he threatened to liquidate those who demonstrate demanding justice and better services, and described them as a ‘stinking bubble’. Indeed, his SWAT forces used lethal weapons against peaceful protestors several times. In Hawija town, for example, at least 50 unarmed men were slaughtered last April. In other cities such as Basra, Nassyria, Fallujah, and Mosul among others, protestors have been beaten, arrested, and killed.

Iraq ranks at the bottom of the most corrupt countries in the world. Corruption has been institutionalized in all walks of life through nepotism, blackmail, bribes, and kleptocracy, a term that has become recurrent in the Iraqi media. Scandalous stories of billions of dollars disappearing in different kinds of fake or fishy deals – building schools for example, or buying weapons – have also become regular stories. Prisons have become a prolific business where security personnel blackmail inmates’ families for thousands of dollars. In an open letter to the prime minister, the dean of the Faculty of Journalism in Baghdad University says that posts are ‘booked’ for the people related to sectarian parties and militias, like the seats on airways. According to Transparency International, Every week 800 million dollars are transferred outside the country. Most alarming, though, is Maliki’s repeated acknowledgements that he knows about all those corrupt deals, and their relation to violence and terrorism, but he chooses to cover them in order to maintain the political process!!

Probably the biggest of Maliki’s lies is the economic expansion of almost 10 percent, investing in rebuilding infrastructure, education and health care systems. Typically, data is not available to refute his statement, but when mothers sell their children for nothing, when prostitution, begging, and child’s labor flourish, everyone knows that Iraq’s economy is in a shambles. Any picture of any Iraqi city or town would show their bleak reality. Unemployment is over 30%, illiteracy has risen above its rates in half a century, no development projects whatsoever exist, health and education systems are corrupted, girls are separated from boys at schools, and the social and cultural fabric have been dismantled, at least telling from the ghetto walls that cut Baghdad in several areas. The simple fact is that the Maliki sectarian regime is responsible for this vertical fall, and is cynically using his failure in maintaining security to justify other failures. Believing his lies and (militarily) supporting him would simply mean killing more Iraqis and violating all their rights, and for what?!

*Iraqi journalist.

 

 

Sources

http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/iraq

http://www.gicj.org/index.php

http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/answer/iraq_overview_of_corruption_and_anti_corruption

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/11/world/middleeast/iraq-42-prisoners-executed-this-week.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Drones have come out of the shadows

At each of the over 200 cities I’ve traveled to this past year with my book Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control, I ask the audience an easy question: Have they ever seen or heard from drone strike victims in the mainstream US press? Not one hand has ever gone up. This is an obvious indication that the media has failed to do its job of humanizing the civilian casualties that accompany President Obama’s deadly drone program.

This has started to change, with new films, reports and media coverage finally giving the American public a taste of the personal tragedies involved.

On October 29, the Rehman family—a father with his two children—came all the way from the Pakistani tribal territory of North Waziristan to the US Capitol to tell the heart-wrenching story of the death of the children’s beloved 67-year-old grandmother. And while the briefing, organized by Congressman Alan Grayson, was only attended by four other congresspeople, it was packed with media.

Watching the beautiful 9-year-old Nabila relate how her grandmother was blown to bits while outside picking okra softened the hearts of even the most hardened DC politicos. From the Congressmen to the translator to the media, tears flowed. Even the satirical journalist Dana Milbank, who normally pokes fun at everything and everyone in his Washington Post column, covered the family’s tragedy with genuine sympathy.

The visit by the Rehman family was timed for the release of the groundbreaking new documentary Unmanned: America’s Drone Wars by Robert Greenwald of Brave New Foundation. The emotion-packed film is filled with victims’ stories, including that of 16-year-old Tariq Aziz, a peace-loving, soccer-playing teenager obliterated three days after attending an anti-drone conference in Islamabad. Lawyers in the firm pose the critical question: If Tariq was a threat, why didn’t they capture him at the meeting and give him the right to a fair trial? Another just released documentary is Wounds of Waziristan, a well-crafted, 20-minute piece by Pakistani filmmaker Madiha Tahir that explains how drone attacks rip apart communities and terrorize entire populations.

Just as the visit and the films have put real faces on drone victims, a plethora of new reports by prestigious institutions—five in total—have exposed new dimensions of the drone wars.

On October 22, Human Rights Watch issued a report on drone strikes in Yemen and Amnesty International issued another on drone strikes in Pakistan. While not calling for an end to all drone strikes, the reports detail cases of civilian casualties and criticize the US government for considering itself above the rule of law and accountability. A third report, License to Kill, released by the Geneva-based group Al Karama, is much more damning of US policy. While Amnesty and Human Rights Watch say drones are lawful under certain circumstances and mainly push for transparency, Al Karama asserts that the US drone war is a clear violation of international law. It calls for an end to extrajudicial executions and targeted killings; complete reparations to victims; and a resolution by the UN Human Rights Council opposing the US practice of extrajudicial executions.

Adding to these well-researched reports by non-governmental organizations are two documents commissioned by the United Nations. One is by Christof Heyns, the UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. The other is by Ben Emmerson, the special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism.  Heyns warns that while drones may be more targeted than other weapons, they are easier to use and may “lower social barriers against the use of lethal force.” He said that a “drones only” approach risks ignoring peaceful approaches such as individual arrests and trial, negotiations and building alliances.

Emmerson said states have the obligation to capture terrorist suspects, when feasible, and should only use force as a last resort. He blasted the US lack of transparency, calling it the single greatest obstacle to an evaluation of the civilian impact of drone strikes. He said states must be transparent about the acquisition and use of drones, the legal basis and criteria for targeting, and their impact. “National security does not justify keeping secret the statistical and methodological data about the use of drones,” he claimed.

But perhaps more impactful than the UN reports themselves was the debate they engendered on the floor of the UN General Assembly. On October 26, for the first time ever, representatives from a broad swath of nations waited their turn to denounce the US drone policy. Venezuela called drones “flagrantly illegal” and said they were a form of “collective punishment.” Brazil pushed the UN rapporteurs to take an even stronger stand. China called drones a “blank space in international law” and insisted that nations “respect the principles of UN charters, the sovereignty of states and the legitimate rights of the citizens of all countries.”

The representative of Pakistan tried to put to rest press reports that the Pakistani government secretly approved of the strikes. He stated that drones put all Pakistanis at risk and radicalize more people, and called for “an immediate cessation of drone strikes within the territorial boundaries of Pakistan.” This was the same sentiment expressed by Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in his October 23 meeting with President Obama.

The US government is feeling the pressure. It has taken steps to reduce civilian casualties and has reduced the actual number of strikes, but certainly not eliminated them. In fact, there was a drone strike in Somalia on October 28 and another one in Pakistan on October 31 that killed Taliban leader Hakimullah Mahsoud, who was about to engage in peace talks with the Pakistan government.

While the reduction in the number of strikes is a partial victory, it cannot erase the hundreds of innocent lives lost over the years. Also, with the global proliferation of drones (thanks to the easing of restrictions on overseas sales and the introduction of domestic drones into US skies by September 2015), their usage will inevitably increase. A mobilized global community is the only force that can serve as a restraining factor.

It is also best way to honor the Rehman family and other victims. As 13-year-old Zubair Rehman testified, “I hope that by telling you about my village and death of my grandmother, I can convince you that drones are not the answer. I hope I can return home to tell my community that Americans listened and are trying to help us solve the many problems we face. And maybe, just maybe, America may soon stop the drones.”

Responding to this call is the Global Drone Summit November 16-17 in Washington DC, where hundreds of people from around the world will gather to strategize and to organize a global network. They will also announce campaigns to pressure the US government to release the legal memos justifying drone strikes, and create a compensation fund for civilian victims. Check here to register for the summit or watch the livestream.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK and the human rights organization Global Exchange. She is the author of Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control.

Once Upon A Time, I Was the Boss of Medea Benjamin

By Dana BalickiOctober 30, 2013
Original post can be found on DanaBalicki.com.

The other night I had the honor of introducing my dear friend and teacher, Medea Benjamin, to an audience of peacemakers at an award ceremony where she was being honored. Here’s what I actually said embellished a bit with what I would’ve said if I could’ve rambled on for longer.

Hi everyone, my name is Dana Balicki, I am activist, a certified life coach, a communications strategist and once upon a time I was the boss of Medea Benjamin. [crowd laughs, of course...]

Follow me back in time for a moment as I recall the first time I ever saw Medea. It was 2000, I was in college in northern California, and I’d spent the whole day volunteering at the Bioneers Conference in Marin. My job had been to help with stage managing and so the whole day I was backstage with the luminaries who were presenting their ideas/visions/innovations. At one point I was sitting between Alice Walker and Paula Gunn Allen going “oh hey, no big deal, just chatting with Alice and Paula…[OMGOMGOMG].” My heart would pulse and whir Vita-mix style in my chest. The spinning actually making heat.

I took that big burning heart to a Green Party Super Rally that evening. I was going to be able to vote in an election for the first time that year. My friends and I were way in the back…and I don’t remember Ralph Nader hardly at all. What I do remember (besides PattySmithHolyShit!) is a tiny woman taking the stage–who was she? I had to look at the program to figure it out. Medea Benjamin. Huh.

Could she even see over the podium? I wondered.

She could. And oh did she. She started her fiery oratory and that chest heat returned. We all felt it. I wanted to vote for her. Like right then. Cast my ballot. I forgive her now for her bad haircut. It was 2000.

Fast forward four years and I’m just out of college and being hired to work for CODEPINK. In those in-between years we had Bush, 9/11, the War on Terror, yellow cake, WMDs, lies. So many lies. So much fear-mongering. My job was to help them project manage the book that would be Stop the Next War Now: Effective Responses to Violence & Terrorism. My very first conversation with Medea was over the phone and she told me that she knew this was a big job, with a short window for execution and that I just needed to tell her what to do, I needed to BE THE BOSS OF HER.

I was terrified. And up for it. I didn’t want to do anything else with my life except end war, and these women seemed like they had something key figured out. I worked for CODEPINK for the next near seven years. The rest of my twenties.

There is so much that I learned from this time, these women, this history, the movement, the exhaustion, the passion…so much I could write a book, or at least an epic essay. Or maybe a series of short stories. Either way, here are FIVE lessons I hold dear.

1) The best time for a salsa dance party is at midnight and only after you’ve been leading a boisterous gaggle of CODEPINKers in an all day march through the streets of Washington, DC and regurgitated heartfelt talking points to dozens of reporters, made at least 3 banners, formatted the fliers and songsheets for the next day, sent out a national email alert (after several rounds of up-to-the-minute updates) and have ALL THE TIME AND ENERGY IN THE WORLD for a dance party. Why? Because Medea said so. And really, who can say no to Medea? And really, who should say no to dancing, ever?

2) If you can’t carry a tune, just mouth the words. Medea is an epic songstress, so there’s no half-stepping. This rule still counts if you are in jail with her, but depending on how long you’re held she might be lenient. Just don’t sing too loud.

3) Know your numbers and your facts. These are important, and yet they are never to replace emotion or the power of personal story. Deep human connection is in fact what we are playing for when we shifting war culture. Numbers and facts are tools. It’s the emotion, the connection to the other, the personal narrative that makes it mean something.

4) Never let go of your banner. Seriously, don’t. And if it gets wrestled out of your hands, make sure to have your message written on your shirt, and have a back up banner stuffed in your pants, and in the lining of your purse, and… Never underestimate the photo opp as you deliver your message.

Addendum 1 to this rule: Know where the photographers are or plant your own.
Addendum 2: If you’ve worn heels into an event it’s really always best to kick them off before getting up on the table or chair or stage to disrupt/place under citizen’s arrest a war-monger. Or this will happen to you (I almost had you Karl, I really did.)

5) This last one comes from the very beginning of my time with CODEPINK, when we were working on the book. It was our first big work session together—me, Jodie Evans (the other CP cofounder) and Medea. We circled up at the CP HQ office in Venice at Jodie’s kitchen table looking at all of moving pieces of the book, the contributors, the editors (paid and volunteer), and the deadlines. I was thrilled for the opportunity to all be in the same place—the four-page long to do list would get done, by gawd it would! And then as we settled in, we got an email from our friend, ally and intrepid journalist, Dahr Jamail. He was in Fallujah and the US siege was underway. He told us that no one was reporting how bad it was—the thousands fleeing with nothing into the desert as winter approached rapidly, the evidence of chemical weapons being used, the havoc and terror spread wide and deep across Fallujah and innocent Iraqis.

Medea and Jodie immediately jumped into action. One last, longing look at the deadlines and lists, and I quickly stacked our files in the corner of the table out of the way. We began to draft a national email alert, set up a donation page, connect with various doctors and friends in Iraq to set up a delivery of money, supplies and medicines. I remember digesting the worry that we wouldn’t make our book deadlines and I would fail at my job. And I remember letting it go. I was being shown true priorities.

Once you learn that lesson, you cannot unlearn it. For that, I am supremely grateful. Thank you Medea. Thank you crazy, amazing women (and men) in pink. My twenties were the least I could give for what I received in return.

 

Canada’s Justice Department Reviews Torture Opponents’ Request to Bar Dick Cheney or Prosecute Him

Canada’s Justice Department Reviews Torture Opponents’ Request to Bar Dick Cheney or Prosecute Him

Former U.S. Vice President Richard (Dick) Cheney is scheduled to speak at the Toronto Global Forum, October 31, 2013, at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. The event is hosted by the International Economic Forum of the Americas.

A letter was sent to Canada’s Prime Minister, Attorney General and Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Immigration urging them to either bar Dick Cheney from Canada as a person credibly accused of torture – or to arrest and prosecute him on arrival, as required by the Convention against Torture. For a complete copy of the letter submitted click here.

Canada’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Program is reviewing the request from Lawyers against the War that Canada arrest and prosecute Dick Cheney for torture if and when he enters the country.

[image error]

Dick Cheney is still scheduled to appear. Anti-torture activists are scheduled to move forward in their plans to demonstrate against the former U.S. Vice President.

The Facebook page for the protest can be viewed here.

[image error]

 

 

The European Drone War

By Chris Cole

While there is rightly much media attention on the US drone war in Pakistan and Yemen, there is a very different but over-looked “drone war” taking place in Europe right now. In parliamentary committee rooms, in company boardrooms, and in packed public meetings, arguments rage about whether Europe should embrace or reject the use of armed drones.

Many European armed forces already have unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), commonly known as drones, in their armories for reconnaissance, intelligence and surveillance purposes.  Increasingly, however, European countries are under pressure to follow in the footsteps of the US and embrace the use of armed drones.

The UK has been a long-time partner with the US in using armed drones, with British military forces using US Predator drones in Iraq starting in  2004 before acquiring their own Reaper drones for use in Afghanistan in 2007. Since then, the UK has launched more than 400 missiles and bombs from its drones in Afghanistan and this is likely to increase as the UK doubles its armed drone fleet over the next year while also now directly operating drones from UK as well as US soil.

So far no other European country has used armed drones. French forces have used unarmed Harfang drones (based on Israel’s Heron) in Afghanistan, Libya and Mali; German forces in Afghanistan have been using unarmed Luna and Israeli Heron drones, and Italy has been operating unarmed drones alongside the US in Libya and Afghanistan from a joint Italian-US ground control station at  Amendola airbase in southeast Italy.

But despite widespread public opposition, growing pressure from the pro-drone lobby and military companies is pushing European countries to acquire armed drone capability.  After much debate, French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian suddenly announced in the summer that France would be acquiring armed US drones. Very rapidly French pilots have begun training on Reaper UAVs in the US and it looks likely that France will put armed drones over Mali by the end of the year. In Germany,despite huge opposition, the German Defense Minister Thomas de Maizière declared, “We cannot keep the stagecoach while others are developing the railway.”

Across Europe, the acquisition of armed drones is highly controversial. Many political parties are divided on the issue  - or flatly oppose it – and there is much public hostility. A Pew Research Poll conducted in 2012 showed widespread opposition to drone strikes, including 59% of people in Germany, 63% in France, 76% in Spain, 55% in Italy, and a whopping 90% in Greece.  Only the UK did not have a majority of its public against the use of armed drones but even so, only 44% were in favor.

In the US, opposition to the drone wars is focused on the use of drones for targeted killing. In Europe however, the focus is much more on whether the so-called “risk free” nature of drone warfare  - at least to your own forces – will simply lead to more armed conflict, as well as an expansion of targeted killing and a lowering of global security in general. Across Europe. protests, parliamentary hearings and public meetings on the use of armed drones are increasing.

But the pro-drone lobby is not running up the white flag just yet.  Behind the scenes, the drone lobby is trying to persuade European governments to ignore the public anxiety and commit to armed unmanned systems. Their strategically placed Op-Eds extol the economic virtue of developing armed drones and of not being “left behind”.  At the same time, NATO and European Union officials are urging European countries to increase spending on drones. US military companies are actively trying to amend international treaties in order to export armed drone technology to Europe. And senior arms company executives are directly lobbying European governments to commit to developing and building a future European armed drone. Already European military companies are devoting much effort and resources towards future combat drones, with known programs under development including BAE System’s Taranis and Mantis drones, Dassault’s Neuron and EADS’ Talarion. There are also on-going covert programs that are not as yet public.

As US and European combat forces withdraw from Afghanistan over the next 12 months , the war over drones in Europe is likely to get more intense. The drone lobby will try to clinch deals citing that a war-weary public is unlikely to support putting “‘boots on the ground”’ anytime soon and will therefore support remotely controlled warfare.  Skeptics will be demanding more transparency and information about exactly how drones have been used in Afghanistan – including proper casualty data – in order to assess the professed “pin point” accuracy of armed drone strikes and make informed decisions about future use.  And opponents will ramp up their protests. For the moment at least, there will be no ceasefire in Europe’s drone war.

 

Chris Cole is a renowned expert on European drones and the director of Drone Wars UK.

$40 million allocated for drone victims never reaches them

Recent reports on US drone strikes by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the UN have heightened international awareness about civilian casualties and have resulted in new calls for redress. The Amnesty International drone report “Will I be next?” says the US government should ensure that victims of unlawful drone strikes, including family members, have effective access to remedies, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. The Human Rights Watch report “Between a Drone and Al-Qaeda” calls on the US government to “implement a system of prompt and meaningful compensation for civilian loss of life, injury, and property damage from unlawful attack.”

Several human rights groups have approached lawmakers asking them to sponsor legislation calling for such a fund. But congresspeople have been reluctant to introduce what they consider a losing proposition. Even maverick Congressman Alan Grayson, who is hosting a congressional briefing for drone victims from Pakistan on October 29, turned down the idea. “There’s no sympathy in this Congress for drone strike victims,” he said.

But unbeknownst to Grayson, the human rights groups and drone strike victims themselves, Congress already has such a fund.

The peace group CODEPINK recently discovered that every year for the past four years, a pot of $10 million has been allocated for Pakistani drone strike victims. That would make a total of $40 million, quite a hefty sum to divide among a few hundred families. But it appears that none of this money has actually reached them.

The Pakistani Civilian Assistance Fund was modeled after the ones that exist in Iraq and Afghanistan, where money was allocated to help alleviate the suffering of civilians harmed by US military operations as part of a strategy to “win hearts and minds.” In the case of Pakistan, where the CIA operates its drones, the money is supposed to go directly to the families of innocent drone victims, or for needs like medical expenses or rebuilding homes.

But Tim Rieser, the long-time staffer for Senator Patrick Leahy who has worked to get this Pakistani civilian assistance fund included in the yearly Foreign Operations budget, expressed his exasperation about the use of the funds. “It’s been like hitting a brick wall every time we push the administration to use these funds for drone victims, since for years they wouldn’t even acknowledge the existence of drone strikes,” said Rieser. “I seriously doubt that any of this money has reached the victims it was intended to help.”

Instead, it appears that the Conflict Victims Support Fund gets farmed out to US-based non-governmental organizations like International Relief and Development that, after taking their cut, provide humanitarian assistance for Pakistanis who are not drone victims and are not even living in the tribal areas of Waziristan where the US is carrying out the strikes.

Sarah Holewinski, the executive director of Civilians in Conflict, agrees with Rieser that the funds are being misused. “Sure, it’s not easy to assess damage and compensate families in Pakistan where there are no boots on the ground to do a military investigation and where the drone operations are covert,” said Holewinski. “But the State Department does have personnel in Pakistan, including AID staff, and they could work with communities to figure out what harm occurred, why, by whom, and then determine what the civilians need/want/expect in order to feel dignified and assisted.”

Doing this, however, would require cooperation from the CIA, which carries out the drone strikes while refusing to talk about them, and it would contradict the US government assertion that the drone strikes have caused only a handful of civilian casualties.

To make up for the US lack of help, the Pakistani government says it steps in to offer assistance. But the victims covered in the Amnesty report said they either did not receive compensation from the Pakistani government or that it was inadequate. The family of 68-year-old Mamana Bibi, who was killed in North Waziristan while tending her crops, was furious when they were offered $100, given that their costs for medical expenses, repairs to their home and loss of livestock totaled about $9,500.

A 45-year-old Pakistani farmer told investigators of another report, Living Under Drones, that after his home was destroyed by a drone, he didn’t have the $1,000,000 rupees [US $10,500] to build a new house, so he and his family live in a rented room. “I spent my whole life in that house, my father had lived there was well….I belong to a poor family. I’m just hoping that I somehow recover financially,” he said.

If this farmer had lived in Afghanistan and had been harmed by a drone, he would have been entitled to compensation for loss of life, medical problems and/or property damage. The payments in Afghanistan are usually small (about $5,000 for a death or injury or $5,000 for property damage), but this can make a big difference to a poor family. But next door in Pakistan, there is no help. This inconsistency is the reason staffer Tim Reiser pushed for the Pakistan fund and now thinks a Yemen fund should be created. “Anywhere innocent people are harmed due to our mistakes, we should help them out,” says Rieser. Even John Brennan, CIA chief who is the mastermind of President Obama’s drone policy, said during his confirmation hearing that he thought the US should offer condolence payments—in fact, he thought the US was already doing that.

Most activists in the US and abroad are focusing, rightly so, on trying to stop the drone killing spree. But those already harmed deserve help. Mohamad al-Qawli, who just formed a network of drone strike victims in Yemen, thinks it’s the least the US should do. Al-Qawli’s brother was killed in a drone strike, leaving behind a distraught wife and three young children. “In our tribal culture, if someone commits a crime or makes a terrible mistake, they have to acknowledge the wrongdoing, apologize and provide restitution. The US government won’t even acknowledge the wrongful death of my brother, much less apologize and compensate his family. Could it be that my tribal culture is more evolved than the justice system of the United States,?” Al-Qawli asks.

Medea Benjamin (@medeabenjamin), cofounder of Global Exchange and CODEPINK: Women for Peace, is the author of Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control.