2016/09/01 by Michael Walzer · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #War, Ethics, and Justification #Torture, Ethics, and Law #International Law and Human Rights
paper · doi:10.1162/daed_a_00408
openalex publication_date 2016/09/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Targeted killing in the “war on terror” and in war generally is subject to familiar and severe moral constraints. The constraints hold across the board; they don't change when drones are the weapon of choice. But the ease with which drones can be used, the relative absence of military risks and political costs, makes it especially tempting not only to use drones more and more, but also to relax the constraining rules under which they are used. It seems clear that the rules have, in fact, been relaxed in the course of the American experience with drone warfare – by presidential decision and without public debate. This essay is an argument for the opening up of the decision process to democratic scrutiny and in defense of the familiar constraints.