World  
comments_image Comments

U.S. Has Nothing to Say About 10-Year-Old Killed in Drone Strike

Officials refused to comment on a June 9 drone strike in Yemen that allegedly killed a 10-year-old boy.
 
 
Share

Photo Credit: U.S. Army

 
 
 
 

On June 9, a U.S. drone fired on a vehicle in a remote province of Yemen and killed several militants,  according to media reports.

It soon emerged that  among those who died was a boy – 10-year-old Abdulaziz, whose elder brother, Saleh Hassan Huraydan, was believed to be the target of the strike. A McClatchy reporter recently confirmed the child’s death with locals. (Update: The London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism today  reported that there was "strong evidence" it was a U.S. drone strike, but it could not confirm the fact.)

It’s the first prominent allegation of a civilian death since President Obama  pledged in a major speech in May “to facilitate transparency and debate” about the U.S. war on al Qaida-linked militants beyond Afghanistan. He also said “there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured” in a strike.

So what does the administration have to say in response to evidence that a child was killed?

Nothing.

National security spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden would not comment on the June 9 strike or more generally on the White House position on acknowledging civilian deaths. She referred further questions to the CIA, which also declined to comment.  

The president’s speech was the capstone on a shift in drone war policy that would reportedly bring the program  largely under control of the military (as opposed to the CIA) and impose stricter criteria on who could be targeted.  In theory, it could also bring some of the classified program into the open. As part of its transparency effort, the administration released  the names of four U.S. citizens who had been killed in drone strikes.

An official White House  fact sheet on targeted killing released along with the speech repeated the “near-certainty” standard for avoiding civilian casualties. Secretary of State John Kerry reiterated it a few days later, when  he told an audience in Ethiopia: “We do not fire when we know there are children or collateral — we just don't do it.”

But White House press secretary Jay Carney  said in late May that “this commitment to transparency…does not mean that we would be able to discuss the details of every counterterrorism operation.”

The new White House statements don’t address what happens after a strike, even in general terms.

CIA Director John Brennan offered one of the few public explanations of how casualties are assessed during his nomination hearing in February. Before his confirmation, Brennan was the White House counterterrorism adviser, and is  considered to be  the architect of Obama’s drone war policy.

He told senators that, “analysts draw on a large body of information — human intelligence, signals intelligence, media reports, and surveillance footage — to help us make an informed determination about whether civilians were in fact killed or injured.”

Brennan also said the U.S. could work with local governments to offer condolence payments. As  we’ve reported, there’s little visible evidence of that happening.

At the hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked Brennan if the U.S. should acknowledge when it “makes a mistake and kills the wrong person.”

“We need to acknowledge it publicly,”  Brennan responded. Brennan also  proposed that the government make public “the overall numbers of civilian deaths resulting from U.S. strikes.”

Neither overall numbers nor a policy of acknowledging casualties made it into Obama’s speech, or into the fact sheet. Hayden, the White House spokeswoman, would not say why.

The government sharply disputes that there have been large numbers of civilian deaths but has never released its own figures. Independent counts, largely compiled from news reports, range from  about 200 to around 1,000 for Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia combined over the past decade.

 
See more stories tagged with: