Blurred Lines: An Argument for a More Robust Legal Framework Governing the CIA Drone Program

Abstract

Due to its basic organizational structure and failure to present itself formally as a recognizable armed force, al Qaeda lacks the legitimacy to participate in armed conflict and is not entitled to its concomitant privileges under international law. However, prominent academics argue that the same case can be made about the status of the reportedly civilian CIA employees who operate the armed, unmanned aerial drone counterterrorism strikes against al Qaeda militants. That has led many to question whether the CIA civilian drone operators who engage in armed attacks against members of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their associated forces might share the same legal status as the terrorists they combat. This Essay attempts to unpack that potential irony, laying out the legal framework that governs the law of armed conflict. More importantly, however, we propose possible courses of action that the Obama Administration could take to realign, revise, and strengthen the legal framework on which its highly effective drone program is based.

Keywords: Drone, UAV, law of war, law of armed conflict, international humanitarian law, CIA, Pakistan, Yemen, al Qaeda, al Qaida