Drone strikes are the signature tactic of American and British counter-terrorism operations. They are supposed to work by identifying and killing militant leaders in an accurate and targeted way, without collateral damage. But this doesn’t always happen: drones sometimes kill civilians, enraging communities and turning them against the United States. They also raise serious concerns about whether the US government has the right to kill certain individuals.
Non-state actors have incorporated drone use as part of their asymmetric warfare strategy. It helps them avoid conventional military engagements with a superior force that would likely lead to defeat, but can still provide them with effective tools for countering a larger power.
These tools include psychological warfare, such as the alleged use of a “double-tap” strike, in which a first strike is followed by another strike that targets the responders to the initial attack. This is a clear violation of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and this Note suggests that it may also be a war crime under the War Crimes Act of 1996 in the United States.
Since the invention of piloted flight in 1903, militaries have tried to weaponize unmanned aircraft. Early experiments involved attaching bombs to balloons and floating them over enemy territory with a timed fuse, but the Wright brothers’ invention of powered flight pushed drone experiments away from balloons and toward airplanes. The development of this technology allowed for the rapid adoption of drones by both state and non-state actors.