By Charles L. Bowman

On a beautiful Sunday, November 15, 2009, approximately 200 peace activists from all over New York State gathered at Syracuse NY’s Hancock Field to protest the controlling of Reaper drones – stationed in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan – at the Syracuse air?eld. The protestors came from Buffalo, Rochester, Binghamton, Ithaca, Albany, Saratoga, New York City, from smaller towns in between, and of course, from Syracuse. Buffalonians represented the largest contingent from any one city.

The event was organized by the Syracuse Peace Council, now celebrating its 73rd year, and by Kathy Kelly of Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Last November, Kathy highlighted the drone attacks in her speech at the WNY Peace Center’s annual dinner to an over?ow crowd of 300.

Why all the fuss? Drones represent a fundamental change in how the U.S. now wages war. Drones are war-planes where pilot and crew sit in front of computer screens in comfortable and safe places – such as Syracuse NY – and drop bombs on targets in foreign countries, such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. After an 8 hour day at the their Syracuse office, pilot and crew can be home with loved ones in time for supper. Not so for their human targets in distant lands, who unknowingly celebrated their last supper with their loved ones.

A year ago, President Obama took the oath of office. At the time it seemed another fundamental change was in store in the way we wage war. Dare we think he’ll wage peace? It seemed possible, as he offered an olive branch to the Muslim world in his inaugural address. But three days later, he ordered his ?rst drone attack in Pakistan, killing at least 14 people. President Obama chopped down an olive tree to offer that branch.

Far from being an isolated incident, President Obama’s drone attacks outstrip President Bush’s drone record. In 2009, there were 46 attacks in Pakistan, killing 558 people. He increased the pace in January 2010 with 10 drone attacks between January 1st and 19th which killed 91 people. So much for the new era of peace and respect with the Muslim world.

The claim is made by drone supporters that collateral damage is minimal, with few deaths of the innocents. It turns out that almost all of those killed by our drones are civilians. A July 20, 2009 Brookings Institution report indicates there were 10 civilian deaths for every militant killed.

And a study of the period between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, indicates the ratio is more like 50 Pakistani civilians killed for every militant. During the later period, there were 60 drone attacks killing 14 militants and 687 civilians. The collateral damage is the militants, not the citizens.

There is no doubt that many surviving members of their families are now strongly opposed to both the United States and their Pakistani government for allowing U.S. drones to kill their families and friends. Our drones generate more hatred than they can ever kill.

The drones represent yet another way to avoid the road to peace through justice: a way to avoid the obvious, and profoundly inexpensive, peace-generating solution of the International Court of Justice. Ironically, the world court had its origins in the Jay Treaty between the U.S. and Great Britain of 1794, which promoted trade between the two countries. That treaty is considered to be the first successful example of international arbitration of disputes.

And so 200 dedicated peace activists converged on Syracuse NY to let Americans see the moral consequences extrajudicial, hate-generating killing being carried out in our name. If only our bombs were duds, instead of our leaders...

References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone attacks in Pakistan
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/inaugural-address/
http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=1