The Duty of Any Nation
Cato the Elder was a Roman Senator during the Third Punic War who was known for his hawkish views on Carthage. Our Cato, a Washington University student, holds that force is a valid expression of American policy and intends to explore American policy in the Middle East and why our involvement there is justified. Cato will further expand this analysis to American policy in the Pacific, Russia, and the European Union in the same vein.
American drone strikes within Pakistan and Yemen have captured the headlines recently. Much cited are statistics pointing to the collateral damage, the deaths of civilians and bystanders as American missiles are fired at their neighbors, who happen to be militants bent on killing Americans.
Detractors of the American drone campaign sometimes depict the scenario as soulless and detached; a man in Nevada uplinks into the Predator drone hovering over a village on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. He presses a button to kill a half dozen people, completely separated from the carnage he has wrought.
What these critics fail to realize is that we, the American people, are fighting a war. This war transcends borders, especially in rapidly shifting tactical situations where militants fight in Afghanistan by day and hide in Pakistan by night. American lives and interests are at stake.
Without these drone strikes, these militants have safe haven within a country that shelters them. From this safe haven they plan the retaking of Afghanistan once American troops leave, the revival of the Taliban government, and finally, more attacks on American soil. It’s obvious that something must be done and leaving them unchecked is an option with too great a cost. The best course of action the United States has to combat these militants inside an uncooperative Pakistan is the continuation of drone attacks. If the consequence of protecting our nation and our people is the deaths of a few innocents the American Government has no direct responsibility to, it’s a small price to pay. The fact that it’s done from a distance is even a benefit, as we do not risk American lives when killing our enemies.
This efficiency has not come at the expense of effectiveness, and the drone program has led to significant gains in the War on Terror. Successes include the death of Anwar Al-Awlaki, the publically confessed recruiter and public relations representative of Al-Qaeda to the world. He also happened to be an American citizen which compounds his crime from a “simple” waging war against the United States to the much more serious treason. Critics complain that as an American citizen, he should not have been assassinated. In truth, an American citizen should be held to a higher standard than a foreign citizen. A foreigner has the right to protect his own country, even if that means attacking the United States. The problem is, he is risks being killed because of that decision.
When an American decides to destabilize the United States or to kill innocent Americans, he has forfeited the rights enjoyed by the citizens of the country he seeks to destroy.
To a government, the lives of its own citizens are infinitely more valuable than the lives of a foreign citizen; a sovereign nation has no obligation other than to ensure the wellbeing of its own citizens. Some nations do not prioritize this value–we should not take for granted that the United States does.
Callous, maybe, but the alternative is the deaths of American citizens; one American life is worth more to the government of the United States than the life of a citizen of Pakistan, or any other nation for that matter.
I invite any reader to debate this issue in the comments below. The First Amendment is a vital part of the American democratic nature and the decisions we make as a country need to be made with reasoned debate and discussion.
Carthago Delenda Est.