Drone Warfare Oxford Bibliographies

8/24/2017 Drone Warfare - International Relations - Oxford Bibliographies
Drone Warfare
Ulrike Esther Franke
LAST MODIFIED: 23 AUGUST 2017

DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199743292-0223
Introduction
Drone warfare, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (“drones” in public parlance) in military operations, goes back centuries, with
heated discussions regarding the correct start date and relevant technological breakthroughs. Modern drones developed around the
year 2000; in 2001 the notorious US Predator was fitted with missiles and used for a targeted killing for the first time in 2002, thereby
starting what most consider “drone warfare.” By the first few years of the 21st century, unbeknown to the general public, dozens of
militaries around the world already used drones for surveillance and reconnaissance. The public and academic debate, however,
gained momentum only near the end of the first decade of the 21st century, when it became known that the United States used armed
drones for targeted killings at large scales—and outside official warzones. Brookings Institution scholar Peter W. Singer was highly
influential in shaping the debate through the publication of his book Wired for War (see Singer 2009, cited under Textbooks and
General Overviews). Since then, the body of literature on drone warfare in the social sciences has grown exponentially. When more
became known about the US drone operations, drones quickly began to capture the public’s and policymakers’ imagination. Articles
about “robot wars” or “terminator wars” abounded. At the same time, anti-drone groups formed that protested the US use of drones for
targeted killings. Because of the way the debate on drones began, the focus of the literature has for years been firmly placed on issues
surrounding the use of armed drones by the US armed forces and intelligence forces, neglecting other actors and uses, such as the
use of surveillance drones in military operations by actors other than the United States. As a growing number of states (and,
increasingly, nonstate actors) use drones, attention is slowly moving to other types or drone use and other actors. Because the topic,
and hence the literature on it, is comparatively new, there are not yet properly defined schools of thought with specific authors firmly
associated with them. Accordingly, this article is structured not by schools of thought but by themes, to reflect the ongoing discussions
and to give the reader a good idea of the debates and controversies. After an introduction to textbooks and primers that allow students
to familiarize themselves with the subject, this article engages with works that discuss the object of the drone and the concepts
associated with it, providing a list of works that trace the historical development and use of drones or use historical research to draw
parallels to early-21st-century drone use. This section, Drone History and Historical Research, engages with the legal and
ethical/philosophical literature. Given the strong US focus of the drone debate, US Politics provides an introduction to the literature that
discusses US-centric questions in particular, while International Politics engages with the literature on international questions; namely,
drone proliferation, geopolitical implications of drones, and nonstate drone use. Last, this article gives insights into the Critical
Literature.
Textbooks and General Overviews
Although there was some interest earlier, the debate on drone warfare in the social sciences gained momentum mainly with the
publication of Singer 2009. In a book aimed at a broad public, Peter Singer introduced the topic and influenced the direction that the
debate would take for years to come; namely, by portraying drone warfare as revolutionary. Because easily accessible, comprehensive,
academic works on drone warfare were scarce in the early 2010s, activist works such as Benjamin 2013, which provides insights into
the debate while portraying drone warfare negatively, were highly influential in shaping the debate. Since then, a wide range of
academic, unbiased works have been published that allow the reader to get a good general overview of the issues surrounding drone
warfare, such as Kreps 2016 and Plaw, et al. 2015. The journalistic account in Woods 2015 is a treasure trove of well-researched
material, specifically on the US and UK use of armed drones in Afghanistan and outside official warzones such as in Pakistan. Chris
Woods initiated one of the best databases on US drone strikes and casualty numbers, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s Drone
War program. Rogers and Hill 2014 is recommended for those interested in the impact of drone warfare on global security and
international law, while Kaag and Kreps 2014 makes a compelling case about the danger of armed drone use undermining democratic
http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199743292/obo-9780199743292-0223.xml?print 1/13
accountability. Bergen and Rothenberg 2014 is a prime example of an accessible edited volume covering the crucial issues, and it
includes fascinating insights be drone operators.
Benjamin, Medea. Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control. Updated ed. London and New York: Verso, 2013.
A highly influential, early anti-drone view and a good introduction to the topic. It should be counterbalanced with more academic and
analytically rigorous accounts.
Bergen, Peter L., and Daniel Rothenberg, eds. Drone Wars: How Advances in Military Technology Are Transforming Conflict,
Law, and Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
A well-researched, edited volume with twenty-two essays. Well suited for teaching. Interesting disagreement between the authors on
questions such as whether drones are revolutionary, whether US strikes are legal, and about the future of drone operations.
Kaag, John, and Sarah Kreps. Drone Warfare. War and Conflict in the Modern World. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2014.
A compact primer that discusses most issues regarding US drone warfare. The deliberations about the impact of armed drone use on
democratic accountability and the distinction between war and peace are particularly interesting.
Kreps, Sarah E. Drones: What Everyone Needs to Know. What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2016.
A comprehensive synthesis of the current situation and state of knowledge on drones (air, land, sea) in the military and civilian realm. A
good first point of reference for those unfamiliar with the technology and its uses. A good teaching manual.
Plaw, Avery, Matthew S. Fricker, and Carlos R. Colon. The Drone Debate: A Primer on the U.S. Use of Unmanned Aircraft
outside Conventional Battlefields. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
An introduction to the current state of the discussion surrounding the US armed drone campaigns; particularly suited for teaching
because it provides readers with a broad understanding of the US debate. The authors work at the University of Massachusetts
Dartmouth, where Colon and Fricker have cofounded the Center for the Study of Targeted Killing.
Rogers, Ann, and John Hill. Unmanned: Drone Warfare and Global Security. Toronto: Pluto, 2014.
A well-informed work in which the authors explore the implications of drone warfare for international law and global peace, investigating
the consequences not just for the military but also for society and its understanding of war and peace.
Singer, Peter W. Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century. New York: Penguin, 2009.
A crucial work. Singer, and this book in particular, can be credited with causing the hype around drone and robotic warfare and the
narrative about an unmanned revolution. Not an academic work, but a popular science book lined with science fiction references.
Woods, Chris. Sudden Justice: America’s Secret Drone Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Few people know as much about drone warfare as Woods, initiator of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s drone research
program, and few books are as informative. He traces the development of the US targeted killings program, putting a well-deserved
emphasis on the Afghan theater.
Conceptual Questions
What is a “drone,” really? And how should it be called? This debate is still raging in the literature—terminology and definitions matter.
The terms used to describe drones influence how people think about the technology: “unmanned aerial vehicle” emphasizes the
unmanned aspect, while “remotely piloted vehicle” emphasizes the presence of a pilot. “Drone” has a more negative connotation. By
now, the term “drone”—although largely disliked by the military and manufacturers—has emerged as the most widely used term. Exact
definitions are important for research and policy, in particular weapon control regimes rely on exact definitions. As Selchow 2015
shows, the term “drone” is understood very differently in different circles and has been instrumentalized by different actors because it
can refer to many different systems, a fact that tremendously complicates the debate. Any student of drone warfare needs to be aware
of hidden undertones and implications. Rothstein 2015 shows the reader the full range of what a drone can be and what it can be used
for, from the military to the civilian realm, and explores how pop culture and science fiction are influencing the view of drones. Although
the author’s focus is much larger than drone warfare, the work is a good reminder that the public’s and policymakers’ views on drone
warfare are likely to be influenced by the broader context of drone use. Chamayou 2015 is an example of the predominant portrayal of
drones in the public debate—namely, as a hunter preying on its victim. As in most social science works, Grégoire Chamayou focuses
on the armed, military drone.
Chamayou, Grégoire. Drone Theory. Translated by Janet Lloyd. London: Penguin, 2015.
The French philosopher Chamayou argues that drones have transformed warfare into a hunt, with “a hunter that approaches and a
prey that hides or which tries to escape.” Drones are an instrument of power, a weapon of state terrorism. A stimulating and thought-
provoking but ultimately biased book.
Rothstein, Adam. Drone. Object Lessons. New York and London: Bloomsbury, 2015.
Rothstein considers the drone “a heavy object, full of undiagnosed complications.” He looks both at military and civilian applications
and studies the portrayal and role of drones in pop culture, fiction, society, and discourse.
Selchow, Sabine. “The Drones of Others: An Insight into the Imagination of UAVs in Germany.” Behemoth—a Journal on
Civilisation 8.2 (2015): 55–72.
“A drone is a drone is a drone,” Selchow notes in this original contribution. Studying the German reporting on drones, she shows that
“drones” stands for many things—military power, hyperprogress—and both as actor and tool. But all meanings are captured in just one
term—“drone.”
Drone History and Historical Research
Drone warfare, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (“drones” in public parlance), in military operations goes back centuries. Some
consider the advent of hot-air balloons and in particular their use by Austrian forces in 1849 for incendiary purposes against the city of
Venice as drone warfare’s starting point. The Austrians attacked Venice with unmanned balloons loaded with explosives—rather
unsuccessfully, since the balloons could not be controlled remotely and many were blown back over Austrian lines. Modern drone
development began in the interwar years between World War I and World War II. Drones were used by US forces in Vietnam; during
the Cold War, armed forces on both sides of the Iron Curtain invested in unmanned technology. Unbeknown to the general public, by
the first few years of the 21st century, dozens of militaries around the world used drones for surveillance and reconnaissance. The
literature on the history of drone development and use is comparatively well developed and begins before the start of the emotional—
and at times rather irrational—debate on drone warfare of the latter part of the 21st century’s first decade. Initially, this literature
consisted predominantly of factual accounts, such as Newcome 2004, Yenne 2004, and Zaloga 2008, well-informed works that provide
the reader with solid knowledge of the beginnings of drone warfare. Laurence Newcome expertly describes the parallel development of
drones and missiles, while Steve Zaloga helpfully broadens the focus to non-Western technology. Over time, historical drone analysis
developed and in the 2010s is used to draw parallels and make comparisons. Kindervater 2016 uses historical examples to make the
argument that the currently popular use of drones for targeted killings is in fact the coming together of two parallel processes:
surveillance and killing. Satia 2014 makes a highly convincing case that the history of drones is distracted by their unmanned qualities,
which leads researchers to overlook continuities between manned and unmanned operations. Priya Satia draws fascinating parallels
between British aerial campaigns in present-day Iraq following World War I and modern US drone operations in Pakistan, showing how
the former inspired the latter and how the experiences of British campaigns are still relevant and alive in the region.
Kindervater, Katharine Hall. “The Emergence of Lethal Surveillance: Watching and Killing in the History of Drone
Technology.” Security Dialogue 47.3 (2016): 223–238.
Kindervater studies three periods of drone use: World War I to World War II, the Cold War, and the 1990s. She shows how the
processes of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and targeted killing have started to collapse into each other,
culminating in “lethal surveillance.”
Newcome, Laurence R. Unmanned Aviation: A Brief History of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Reston, VA: American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2004.
A good overview of the historical beginnings of unmanned aerial vehicles, with a focus on Western developments, in particular US and
UK advances. “Nuke” Newcome makes a point to emphasize the parallel development of drones and cruise missile technology.
Satia, Priya. “Drones: A History from the British Middle East.” Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights,
Humanitarianism, and Development 5.1 (2014): 1–31.
An original take on the history of drones. Satia draws fascinating parallels between the British aerial campaigns in Iraq in the 1920s
and the American drone campaigns in the AfPak (Afghanistan-Pakistan) region in the early 21st century, noting common cultural
understandings of the region and aerial campaigns.
Yenne, Bill. Attack of the Drones: A History of Unmanned Aerial Combat. St. Paul, MN: Zenith, 2004.
Yenne gives a good account of the origins and beginning of drone warfare, showing how unmanned systems have been used in
military operations in the past. An important book because it breaks with the narrative of drones suddenly leaping into existence in the
War on Terror and details the full range of uses in military operations, beyond targeted killings.
Zaloga, Steven J. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Robotic Air Warfare, 1917–2007. New Vanguard 144. Oxford: Osprey, 2008.
A good addition to Yenne 2004. Zaloga’s account of Russian drone capabilities during the times of the Soviet Union is particularly
interesting.
Debates and Controversies
Drone warfare, specifically the use of armed drones for targeted killings, raises legal and ethical questions for social scientists, legal
theorists, and philosophers alike. These areas remain a growing area of scholarship, in particular as international bodies such as the
UN are discussing regulating armed drone use and export.
Law
Three UN Special Rapporteurs have been tasked to work on aspects of drone warfare. Philip Alston (Alston 2010) was the first UN
Rapporteur to work on drone warfare, in the context of targeted killings. His successor, Christof Heyns (Heyns 2013), studied drone
warfare outside official warzones. The Rapporteurs’ reports focus predominantly on US drone use; only Emmerson 2013 discusses
British and Israeli drone missions in detail. Most legal analysis of the use of drones for targeted killings outside official warzones
concludes that this tactic is illegal under international law. O’Connell 2009 is by one of the leading critics of US covert drone program.
Jeangène Vilmer 2013 argues that some of the legal criticism confounds the tactic and the technology with which it is carried out, and
advocates for a more rigorous approach to the debate. The author sees remotely piloted systems as legally unproblematic (although
specific tactics and usages may still be illegal) but shows more concern for increasingly automated and autonomous systems that
create new legal challenges.
Alston, Philip. Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Philip Alston: Study on
Targeted Killings. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 2010.
Alston was the first UN Special Rapporteur to take on the issue of drone warfare. In this report, he discusses the tactic of targeted
killings, singling out US armed drone use. He recommends disclosing the procedures of choosing individuals for targeted killings, as
well as agreeing on common rules.
Emmerson, Ben. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms While Countering Terrorism. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 2013.
Emmerson focuses on casualties caused by Israeli, British, and American drone operations. He finds that drones, if used in strict
compliance with the principles of international humanitarian law, can reduce the risk of civilian casualties in armed conflict. He urges
states to conduct fact-finding inquiries in cases of civilian deaths.
Heyns, Christof. Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions. Geneva, Switzerland:
United Nations, 2013.
Heyns focuses on the legality of armed drone use, specifically outside official warzones. His report shows the concern that drones
make targeted killing easier. He asks for more transparency regarding drone use and a diligent application of international law
standards. States should capture rather than kill whenever feasible.
Jeangène Vilmer, Jean-Baptiste. “Légalité et légitimité des drones armés.” Politique Étrangère 2013.3 (2013): 119–132.
Distinguishing between the technology (remotely controlled armed drones) and the tactic (targeted assassinations), Jeangène Vilmer
considers armed drones not illegal per se but raises legal concerns regarding the specifics of the tactic and even more about the
increasing automation of drones, specifically the automation of firing decisions.
O’Connell, Mary Ellen. Unlawful Killing with Combat Drones: A Case Study of Pakistan, 2004–2009. Notre Dame Law School,
Legal Studies Research Paper 09-43, 2009.
O’Connell finds US drone attacks in Pakistan illegal under international law, since there is no armed conflict in Pakistan because “there
was no intense armed fighting between organized armed groups.” Because of alleged high casualty rates, the use of drones violates
the war-fighting principles of distinction, necessity, proportionality, and humanity.
Ethics
The debate on the ethics of drone warfare is particularly heated. Two strands exist: the first is concerned with the ethics of killing “by
remote control,” and the other is concerned with future systems able to make decisions about life and death autonomously.
Waddington 2015 is in the first group; the author notes that although many people appear to make an ethical argument against drones,
they are in fact criticizing their use for targeted killings. Drones have thus become the focal point of criticism of the targeted-killing
doctrine. Disentangling the two issues is crucial to allow for an analytically rigorous debate. Strawser 2010 and Strawser 2013 are by
one of the most influential authors in the ethical debate, Bradley Jay Strawser. His paper “Moral Predators” (Strawser 2010) broke
ground as the first paper to make an ethical argument in favor of using remote-controlled systems in warfare. Strawser 2013, an edited
volume, brings together a select group of experts who discuss ethical and moral questions pertaining both to remotely controlled and
autonomous warfare, bridging the divide between the two strands. Individual contributions of this book are listed in other sections of
this article. Docherty 2012 is an article on an early activist organization, Human Rights Watch, critical of lethal autonomous systems—
so-called killer robots. The US roboticist Ronald Arkin (Arkin 2010) is one of the most important proponents of autonomous weapons,
arguing that the programming of laws of war in autonomous weapons is possible; he has published widely on the topic. Sparrow 2007
is on the other side of Arkin’s view on the debate on autonomous weapons, being highly critical of autonomous weapons.
Arkin, Ronald C. “The Case for Ethical Autonomy in Unmanned Systems.” In Special Issue: Ethics and Emerging Military
Technologies. Journal of Military Ethics 9.4 (2010): 332–341.
The roboticist and “roboethicist” is one of the most important voices in the debate about whether ethical behavior can be programmed
into robots. In this article, Arkin argues that better-than-human performance and adherence to the laws of war by robots can be
achieved and should be pursued vigorously.
Docherty, Bonnie. “Losing Humanity: The Case against Killer Robots.” Human Rights Watch (19 November 2012).
An early activist manifesto against the use of lethal autonomous weapons.
Sparrow, Robert. “Killer Robots.” Journal of Applied Philosophy 24.1 (2007): 62–77.
In this early article, which has proven highly influential, Sparrow criticizes autonomous warfare on the basis that it is impossible to hold
someone responsible when an autonomous weapon system is involved in a war crime.
Strawser, Bradley Jay. “Moral Predators: The Duty to Employ Uninhabited Aerial Vehicles.” In Special Issue: Ethics and
Emerging Military Technologies. Journal of Military Ethics 9.4 (2010): 342–368.
A groundbreaking paper on the ethical dimension of drone warfare. Strawser was the first to make an ethical argument for drone
warfare, emphasizing the duty of a commander to keep troops safe.
Strawser, Bradley Jay, ed. Killing by Remote Control: The Ethics of an Unmanned Military. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2013.
An excellent take on targeted killing that serves as a reminder of the merits of scholarly work. This volume brings together thirteen
philosophy scholars who focus on the ethical implications of using remotely controlled and autonomous weapons for lethal missions.
Waddington, Conway. “Drones: Degrading Moral Thresholds for the Use of Force and the Calculations of Proportionality.” In
Precision Strike Warfare and International Intervention: Strategic, Ethico-legal and Decisional Implications. Edited by Mike
Aaronson, Wali Aslam, Tom Dyson, and Regina Rauxloh, 114–132. Routledge Global Security Studies. New York and London:
Routledge, 2015.
Waddington shows convincingly that most ethical criticism of drones is about their use in targeted killing. He identifies several morally
contentious aspects of targeted killings but argues that they are the symptom of a deeper problem.
US Politics
The large majority of literature on drone warfare in the social sciences focuses on US operations, since the public debate on drones
began with revelations about US drone use for targeted killing. The literature on US drone use can be divided into two strands. The first
strand is turned inward, interested mostly in the role that different federal agencies play in drone warfare. The second strand is turned
outward, studying the impact of US drone use in the targeted countries and on the broader drone debate.
Domestic Questions
Tracing the rise of the iconic Predator drone, Whittle 2014 gives the reader detailed insights into the internal debate in the US military
and political decision-making apparatus in the early stages of armed drone use. Fuller 2015, Mazzetti 2013, and Shah 2014 open the
black box of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), allowing the reader to understand
the internal dynamics that led to the control of the targeted-killing program by these two agencies. Braun 2014, a particularly well-
researched paper, argues that the rise of drone warfare is closely linked to the specific circumstances of the War on Terror, meaning
that drone warfare will either abate or change significantly in other types of conflicts.
Braun, Megan. “Predator Effect: A Phenomenon Unique to the War on Terror.” In Drone Wars: How Advances in Military
Technology Are Transforming Conflict, Law, and Policy. Edited by Peter L. Bergen and Daniel Rothenberg, 253–284. New
York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Braun argues that drones were transformative only in the context of the War on Terror because they were ideally suited to the post-9/11
vision of the CIA, and the targeting of individual terrorists. She believes the US Predator program is unlikely to be replicated in the near
future.
Fuller, Christopher J. “The Eagle Comes Home to Roost: The Historical Origins of the CIA’s Lethal Drone Program.”
Intelligence and National Security 30.6 (2015): 769–792.
Adopting a long-term approach, Fuller shows that the US drone campaign, while unique in scale, is not so much a departure from
previous US counterterrorism methods but a continuation.
Mazzetti, Mark. The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth. New York: Penguin, 2013.
The New York Times national-security correspondent discusses the new ways of US military action: “a shadow war waged across the
globe” in which “America has pursued its enemies using killer robots and special-operations troops.” Mazzetti opens the black box of
the CIA, the JSOC, and the Pentagon.
Shah, Naureen. “A Move within the Shadows: Will JSOC’s Control of Drones Improve Policy?” In Drone Wars: How Advances
in Military Technology Are Transforming Conflict, Law, and Policy. Edited by Peter L. Bergen and Daniel Rothenberg, 160–
184. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Fascinating insights into JSOC’s drone operations. Shah argues that the organization’s novelty and support it enjoys means that it
“remains unencumbered by the oversight processes . . . that developed, over time and in response to scandals and public pressure, for
the CIA and conventional military forces.”
Whittle, Richard. Predator: The Secret Origins of the Drone Revolution. New York: Henry Holt, 2014.
Whittle follows the genesis of the iconic Predator drone, from its development to its emergence as the symbol for US foreign policy.
Adopting a US-centric approach risks unduly singling out the Predator, but Whittle’s exceptional access to the entirety of decision
makers, engineers, and operators is unparalleled and worth a read.
International Implications
Ever since the US drone operations in Pakistan became public knowledge near the end of the first decade of the 21st century, a heated
discussion about the effectiveness and international implications of this strategy has been taking place. One particularly contentious
issue is the number of casualties, and civilian casualties in particular, and how casualties affect the effectiveness of drone warfare.
Debates on this, however, depend on reliable data, which are difficult to come by. Plaw 2013 assesses the collection of data on
casualties by the four main databases: the New America Foundation, the Long War Journal, UMass Drone, and the Bureau of
Investigative Journalism. Williams 2013 cautions that the inability of communicating the strikes to the Pakistani public means that they
are effectively counterproductive. While most authors take an American-centric approach, Brian Glyn Williams shows the importance of
studying the population on the receiving side of the operations. Boyle 2013 warns that the strikes may ultimately create more terrorists
than they kill, by giving terrorists new recruitment material. It was these and similar criticisms that led to a revision of the Obama
administration’s drone operations. After a peak in 2010, the number of strikes and more notably the number of casualties per strikes
dropped significantly, pointing to a change in tactic.
Boyle, Michael J. “The Costs and Consequences of Drone Warfare.” International Affairs 89.1 (2013): 1–29.
In this early, widely read and discussed piece, Boyle argues that US drone strikes have had adverse strategic effects that have not
been properly weighed against the tactical gains. The strikes corrode the stability and legitimacy of local governments and create new
recruits for Islamist networks aiming to overthrow these governments.
Plaw, Avery. “Counting the Dead: The Proportionality of Predation in Pakistan.” In Killing by Remote Control: The Ethics of an
Unmanned Military. Edited by Bradley Jay Strawser, 126–153. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Plaw’s chapter is compulsory reading for those interested in the effectiveness of targeted killing via drones. Analyzing the numbers of
civilian casualties in Pakistan gathered by the four main databases, Plaw concludes the strikes have been highly effective in eliminating
high-level enemy operatives, particularly in inaccessible locations such as the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) in
northwestern Pakistan.
Williams, Brian Glyn. Predators: The CIA’s Drone War on al Qaeda. Washington, DC: Potomac, 2013.
Williams, professor of Islamic history at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, convincingly shows that while US drone
operations in Pakistan have killed high-value targets and lower-level operatives, they have alienated the Pakistani public in a way that
makes the operations ultimately counterproductive.
International Politics
The focus on US drone operations has, however, skewed the debate by neglecting other relevant developments and uses by other
actors. Although the focus of the literature remains firmly placed on US drone use, a growing number of authors are discussing non-US
use and questions pertaining to drone proliferation and geopolitics. Authors working on these questions tend to have international
backgrounds.
Proliferation
Drones are proliferating fast. As of 2017, about ninety states around the world operate some kind of military drone system, as do
several nonstate actors. The sophistication of these systems varies dramatically: some countries operate a limited number of small
tactical systems, while countries such as the United States, Israel, and China, among others can deploy a wide range of drones,
including high- or medium-altitude, long-endurance (HALE/MALE) systems and armed drones. Given that the military effectiveness of
drones is disputed, authors have offered alternative explanations as to why drones are used globally and who pursues drones for what
reasons. Sauer and Schörnig 2012 points out the special interest that democratic countries have in unmanned systems, since they
allow states to intervene without risking the lives of their citizens. Franke 2015 notes that drones have become must-have items for
modern militaries, making states procure drones for prestige. Gilli and Gilli 2016, a paper on drone proliferation, attracted much interest
because the authors counterintuitively argue that drones will not proliferate widely—at least the more sophisticated armed types, given
that few countries have the technological abilities to manufacture them and sustain the necessary infrastructures.
Franke, Ulrike Esther. “The Global Diffusion of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), or ‘Drones.’” In Precision Strike Warfare
and International Intervention: Strategic, Ethico-legal and Decisional Implications. Edited by Mike Aaronson, Wali Aslam, Tom
Dyson, and Regina Rauxloh, 52–72. Routledge Global Security Studies. New York and London: Routledge, 2015.
An interesting approach to drone proliferation. Franke argues that drones are procured because of their prestige: drones are portrayed
as the new item a modern military needs. Because drones are easy to procure, states acquire them without a clear idea for their use.
Gilli, Andrea, and Mauro Gilli. “The Diffusion of Drone Warfare? Industrial, Organizational, and Infrastructural Constraints.”
Security Studies 25.1 (2016): 50–84.
The mainstream view predicts that advanced military drones will proliferate globally. Gilli and Gilli develop the theory of diffusion of
military innovations, arguing that the technological and organizational hurdles to developing and manufacturing combat-effective
drones are more substantial than expected. They conclude that concerns about the diffusion of drone warfare are exaggerated.
Sauer, Frank, and Niklas Schörnig. “Killer Drones: The ‘Silver Bullet’ of Democratic Warfare?” Security Dialogue 43.4 (2012):
363–380.
A well-argued paper that shows that unmanned systems hold a special appeal for democracies because they satisfy their democratic
interests and norms. The authors worry that by relying on these systems in an attempt to satisfy said interests, democracies may
thwart them in the long run and render themselves more war-prone.
Geopolitics
What impact does the increasing use of unmanned systems around the world have on geopolitics? Are drones changing how wars are
being seen and what type of military operations countries engage in? These are crucial questions because drones are proliferating
globally. With most attention turned to the US use of drones, the literature on these questions remains scarce, albeit growing. The
Center for a New American Security (Global Perspectives: A Drone Saturated Future) compiled an overview of how ten medium to
great powers use drones that are of great value to scholars interested in the view beyond the United States. Those interested in the UK
use of military drones will find useful information in Brooke-Holland 2012 and Birmingham Policy Commission 2014. The US use of
armed drones for targeted killings provides the context for and influences the national debates on drones in all other countries, and
Dworkin 2013 looks at how European countries view the US strategy. Beauchamp and Savulescu 2013 is important in offering an
interesting addition to the mainstream view that the existence of armed drones will make warfare more likely. If this is indeed the case,
the authors argue, humanitarian missions may become more likely too. Finally, Horowitz, et al. 2016 offers the most comprehensive
study of the likely impact of drones on military operations, by tracing drone use in six types of operations.
Beauchamp, Zack, and Julian Savulescu. “Robot Guardians: Teleoperated Combat Vehicles in Humanitarian Military
Intervention.” In Killing by Remote Control: The Ethics of an Unmanned Military. Edited by Bradley Jay Strawser, 106–125.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
In this thought-provoking paper, Beauchamp and Savulescu address the claim that armed drones make war easier and thus more
likely. But lowering the threshold must not necessarily be bad: the wars that states do not fight are the ones they most ought to. Drones
could significantly improve the practice of humanitarian interventions.
Birmingham Policy Commission. The Security Impact of Drones: Challenges and Opportunities for the UK. Birmingham, UK:
Birmingham Policy Commission, 2014.
An informative resource for students of drone warfare. The Birmingham Policy Commission explored the issues that confront the UK
government in the development, regulation, and use of drones. The report gives a comprehensive overview of British unmanned aerial
vehicle (UAV) capabilities and thinking, and an idea about future drone use by the United Kingdom.
Brooke-Holland, Louisa. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Drones): An Introduction. London: Library House of Commons, 2012.
This report gives insights into British drone capabilities and military usage.
Dworkin, Anthony. Drones and Targeted Killing: Defining a European Position. ECFR 84. London: European Council on
Foreign Relations, 2013.
An important addition to the literature on European drones. Dworkin, a researcher at the European Council on Foreign Relations,
studies the different European countries’ approaches to armed drone use and the US drone campaign.
Global Perspectives: A Drone Saturated Future. Center for a New American Security (2016).
These ten reports written by national experts look at drone capabilities and usages of France, Germany, Russia, India, Indonesia,
Israel, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Vietnam. A much-needed insight into other countries’ approaches to drone warfare that
shows differences in strategic culture and how they translate into differences in drone use.
Horowitz, Michael C., Sarah E. Kreps, and Matthew Fuhrmann. “Separating Fact from Fiction in the Debate over Drone
Proliferation.” International Security 41.2 (2016): 7–42.
This important study analyzes the likely consequences of current-generation drone proliferation in six contexts: counterterrorism,
interstate conflict, crisis onset and deterrence, coercive diplomacy, domestic control and repression, and terrorism. The authors argue
that drones have minimal impact on interstate relations and are unlikely to provoke international crises or incite regional instability.
Nonstate Drone Use
Initially, drones were an exclusively military technology, available only to states. More recently, drones have made their entry into the
civilian market, providing nonstate actors with new opportunities. Nonstate actors may use drones in confrontations with armed forces
—as seen in Iraq and Afghanistan—or to carry out terrorist attacks against civilian soft targets. Nonstate actors may benefit
disproportionally from drones, since they provide them for the first time with an air-based capability. This is one of the interesting
findings of a war game organized by the Center for a New American Security (Sander 2016). The scholarship on nonstate (or terrorist)
use of drones is only beginning to develop. Gormley 2003 is by one of the first authors to warn of terrorist drone use. A few years later,
the author of Yeh 2011 noted the vulnerability of military forces to attacks by drones, a threat that armed forces are now beginning to
take seriously. More research on issues pertaining to nonstate drone use is likely to be published in the coming years.
Gormley, Dennis M. “UAVs and Cruise Missiles as Possible Terrorist Weapons.” Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Occasional Paper 12 (2003): 3–9.
Gormley deserves recognition because he warned earlier than any other author against the use of drones and missiles by nonstate
terrorist groups, when such an idea seemed far-fetched and commercial UAV systems were rare.
Sander, Alexandra. “Game of Drones: Wargame Report.” Center for a New American Security (2016).
In October 2015, the Center for a New American Security held the war game “Game of Drones.” The report explores the drone usages
the different players imagined. The availability of drones increased the options available to players, but in particular for nonstate actors
who disproportionally benefit from access to drones.
Yeh, Stuart S. “A Failure of Imagination: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and International Security.” Comparative Strategy 30.3
(2011): 229–241.
Yeh notes that conventional military forces, and specifically large platforms such as aircraft carriers, are highly vulnerable to armed
UAVs. Equally, urban population centers are impossible to secure against terrorist drone attacks. He warns that these threats are being
overlooked by Western militaries.
Critical Literature
Slowly, the focus of the literature has begun to move on from classic topics in international relations, such as geopolitics, and legal
debates. Increasingly, authors are interested in the role of the drone pilot in drone warfare and adopt a constructivist approach in
studying the role of public opinion on the effectiveness of drone warfare.
Drone Pilots
The interest in those who control the drone—drone pilots or operators—is comparatively recent, dating to the around the second
decade of the 21st century. The first to take an interest were anti-drone activists such as the author of Cole, et al. 2010, who argued
that drone pilots are too distant from their work and hence adopt a “Playstation mentality” that leads to the reduction of strike victims to
pixels on the screen. More academic works followed, in particular Sparrow 2013 and Enemark 2013, which are by two of the most
influential authors studying the impact of drones on military virtue and the experience of war by the drone operator. Peter Lee (Lee
2012) has had unprecedented access to British drone operators. He notes how drone operators suffer from being seen as outcasts
within their own services. Holmqvist 2013, Allinson 2015, and Daggett 2015 are by critical authors who study the ontology of war as it
is changed by drones, examine the inherent biases in drone operators, and put forward a feminist critique of drone warfare,
respectively. One of the authors of Ouma, et al. 2011, Wayne Chappelle, is a psychologist at the US Air Force and has, to date,
provided the best insight into how drone warfare affects drone pilots. He has published extensively on the topic, covering
consequences such as burnout, stress, and posttraumatic stress disorder.
Allinson, Jamie. “The Necropolitics of Drones.” International Political Sociology 9.2 (2015): 113–127.
A critical approach. Allinson takes on the assumption about drone operators as perfectly rational subjects. Drawing on the concept of
“necropolitics” and analyzing a particularly well-documented drone strike in Afghanistan in 2010, he argues that drones, because of
their operators’ biases, “operate within an algorithm of racial distinction.”
Cole, Chris, Mary Dobbing, and Amy Hailwood. Convenient Killing: Armed Drones and the “Playstation” Mentality. Oxford:
Fellowship of Reconciliation, 2010.
An activist’s view. Cole is an important voice in the British debate, and this report had a crucial impact in the United Kingdom. The
report is critical of armed-drone use in general and was one of the first to discuss the impact of drone warfare on pilots, taking up UN
Special Rapporteur Philip Alston’s term “Playstation mentality.”
Daggett, Cara. “Drone Disorientations: How ‘Unmanned’ Weapons Queer the Experience of Killing in War.” International
Feminist Journal of Politics 17.3 (2015): 361–379.
A feminist approach to the drone operators’ experiences. Daggett argues that drones “queer the experience of killing in war,” putting
militarized masculinities—so far resilient in adapting to technological change—under attack.
Enemark, Christian. Armed Drones and the Ethics of War: Military Virtue in a Post-heroic Age. War, Conflict, and Ethics. New
York: Routledge, 2013.
Enemark studies drone warfare as risk-free killing and analyzes the impact of the new capabilities on the status of war and the warrior.
Holmqvist, Caroline. “Undoing War: War Ontologies and the Materiality of Drone Warfare.” Millennium: Journal of
International Studies 41.3 (2013): 535–552.
A critical view. Holmqvist argues that the advent of robotic warfare asks us to rethink the human in war as human experience of warfare
is altered through new technologies.
Lee, Peter. “Remoteness, Risk and Aircrew Ethos.” Air Power Review 15.1 (2012): 1–20.
No other author has had as much access to British drone pilots as Lee. Interested in the impact of drone warfare on those who control
the systems, he studies the personal and collective ethos of those who operate the Reaper drone.
Ouma, Joseph A., Wayne L. Chappelle, and Amber Salinas. Facets of Occupational Burnout among U.S. Air Force Active Duty
and National Guard / Reserve MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper Operators. Dayton, OH: School of Aerospace Medicine, Wright
Patterson Air Force Base, June 2011.
In this study, 426 US Air Force officers and enlisted operators (pilots and sensor operators) of US Predator and Reaper drones were
surveyed. The authors found that occupational stress of drone pilots was reported to stem from operational stress rather than exposure
to combat.
Sparrow, Robert. “War without Virtue?” In Killing by Remote Control: The Ethics of an Unmanned Military. Edited by Bradley
Jay Strawser, 84–105. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Australian philosopher Sparrow expresses concerns that the use of UAVs for military purposes poses a threat to martial virtues such as
physical and moral courage, loyalty, honor, and mercy. For Sparrow, this is a disturbing prospect.
Geography
Geographers have begun to show interest in drone warfare, researching how drones and drone warfare are affecting the geography of
war. One example of this is the bleeding of sovereign countries into regions—“AfPak,” the combination of Afghanistan and Pakistan
into one entity, being the most obvious example. International boundaries matter less as they are increasingly ignored, and sovereignty
becomes illusive. Gregory 2011 notes the diffusion and dispersion of war, and Shaw 2016 focuses on US drone warfare in the War on
Terror and concludes that drone warfare is part of a larger project to surveil and enclose society.
Gregory, Derek. “The Everywhere War.” Geographical Journal 177.3 (2011): 238–250.
A geographical approach to drone war. Gregory notes how the American way of war, specifically drone warfare, has changed the
geography of war by diffusing and dispersing it. At the same time, the everywhere war is also always somewhere—such as in “AfPak
and “Amexica,” borderlands touched by drone warfare.
Shaw, Ian G. R. Predator Empire: Drone Warfare and Full Spectrum Dominance. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
2016.
Shaw examines the histories and geographies of US drone warfare. In addition to providing empirical detail on the rise of drones and
the War on Terror, the book challenges us to see drone warfare as part of a larger project to surveil and enclose society.
Public Opinion
What role does public opinion play with regard to drone warfare? A number of authors have shown interest in the views of the Pakistani
public, since Pakistan remains at the center of the covert US drone program. Cavallaro, et al. 2012 has been highly influential in
placing the focus on the victims of drone strikes, underlining the psychological impact of drone operations. Fair, et al. 2014 and Imtiaz
2014 are well-informed works that allow the reader to place the Pakistani response to US drone operations in a larger context. A
multitude of polls have been done among US citizens about their country’s use of drones. Kreps 2014 looks at these polls in detail,
showing that the US public may not be as univocally supportive of the drone program as the polls have suggested.
Cavallaro, James, Stephan Sonnenberg, and Sarah Knuckey. Living under Drones: Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians
from US Drone Practices in Pakistan. Stanford, CA: International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic, Stanford Law
School, 2012.
An influential report that for the first time studied the impact of drone warfare on the local population in the targeted regions, invoking in
particular the psychological impact of continuous drone surveillance and attacks.
Fair, C. Christine, Karl Kaltenthaler, and William J. Miller. “Pakistani Opposition to American Drone Strikes.” Political Science
Quarterly 129.1 (2014): 1–33.
Fair, Kaltenthaler, and Miller argue that the US drone program is the most important irritant in the US-Pakistani relationship. Using Pew
data, the authors show the low level of knowledge about drone strikes in the Pakistani population and discuss support for the strikes
among Pakistanis.
Imtiaz, Saba. “What Do Pakistanis Really Think about Drones?” In Drone Wars: How Advances in Military Technology Are
Transforming Conflict, Law, and Policy. Edited by Peter L. Bergen and Daniel Rothenberg, 89–110. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2014.
Excellent analysis of US drone operations in Pakistan that puts the campaign in a broader context of US-Pakistani relations. Imtiaz
shows how the Pakistani policy of allowing the strikes, while publicly condemning them, created backlashes in Pakistani-US relations
and negatively influenced Pakistani citizens’ view of US and Pakistani domestic politics.
Kreps, Sarah. “Flying under the Radar: A Study of Public Attitudes towards Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.” Research & Politics
1.1 (2014).
A thought-provoking survey experiment. Kreps notes that polls on US drone operations between 2011 and 2013 register high levels of
public support. The typical question wording of these polls, however, sidesteps legal controversies. She shows that public support
diminishes considerably when controversial features related to international humanitarian law are introduced.
back to top
Copyright © 2017. All rights reserved.

Drone Warfare Oxford Bibliographies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drone Warfare Oxford Bibliographies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

8/24/2017 Drone Warfare - International Relations - Oxford Bibliographies

LAST MODIFIED: 23 AUGUST 2017

Textbooks and General Overviews

Drone History and Historical Research

Debates and Controversies

recruits for Islamist networks aiming to overthrow these governments.

Nonstate Drone Use

Copyright © 2017. All rights reserved.

You might also like