Fact Check: Obama did the drone attacks

The Claim: "Obama did the drone attacks"

The assertion that "Obama did the drone attacks" refers to the significant expansion of the U.S. drone strike program during President Barack Obama's administration. This claim implies that Obama was directly responsible for the implementation and escalation of drone warfare as a key component of U.S. counterterrorism strategy.

What We Know

1. Drone Strike Authorization: Barack Obama authorized more than 400 drone strikes between 2009 and 2013, marking a substantial increase in the use of drones for military operations compared to his predecessor, George W. Bush, who authorized approximately 50 strikes during his presidency 25.

2. First Drone Strike: The first drone strike authorized by Obama occurred on January 23, 2009, just three days after he took office. This strike targeted militants in Waziristan, Pakistan 9.

3. Civilian Casualties: Estimates of civilian casualties resulting from drone strikes during Obama's presidency vary. Reports suggest that between 2,500 and 3,900 individuals were killed in non-battlefield areas, with a significant number of these being civilians 68.

4. Policy Framework: In July 2016, Obama signed an executive order aimed at addressing civilian casualties in drone operations, which indicates an acknowledgment of the ethical and legal implications of drone warfare 4.

5. Legacy and Criticism: Obama's drone policy has been described as a defining aspect of his foreign policy legacy, with critics arguing that it set a precedent for future administrations regarding the use of drone strikes 510.

Analysis

The claim that "Obama did the drone attacks" can be substantiated by multiple credible sources that detail the extent of drone warfare during his administration. However, it is essential to critically evaluate these sources for reliability and potential bias.

• Source Reliability: The New York Times articles 56 are generally considered reliable, as they are well-researched and provide data from credible organizations. However, they may carry a liberal bias, given the publication's editorial stance. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) 910 is also a reputable source, known for its non-partisan analysis, but it may have its own biases depending on the specific authors and their affiliations.

• Conflicts of Interest: Some sources, such as the Swarthmore International Relations Journal 1, may have academic biases but are less likely to have direct conflicts of interest. The use of academic journals can lend credibility to the analysis, although the interpretation of data may still reflect the authors' perspectives.

• Methodological Concerns: The estimates of civilian casualties and the effectiveness of drone strikes can vary significantly based on the methodologies used to collect and analyze data. For example, the figures cited in the Wikipedia entry 8 are aggregated from various reports, which may not all adhere to the same standards of evidence. This variability raises questions about the accuracy of casualty estimates.

• Supporting vs. Contradicting Evidence: While many sources support the claim that Obama expanded drone strikes, there are also critiques of the program's effectiveness and ethical implications. For instance, some argue that the reliance on drone strikes has led to increased anti-American sentiment and recruitment for terrorist organizations, suggesting a complex relationship between drone warfare and its intended outcomes 3.

Conclusion

Verdict: True

The assertion that "Obama did the drone attacks" is substantiated by evidence indicating that President Barack Obama significantly expanded the U.S. drone strike program during his administration, authorizing over 400 strikes and establishing drone warfare as a central component of U.S. counterterrorism strategy. Key evidence includes the number of strikes authorized, the first strike occurring shortly after he took office, and the acknowledgment of civilian casualties through policy measures.

However, it is important to recognize the complexity surrounding this issue. While the data supports the claim, the estimates of civilian casualties and the effectiveness of drone strikes are subject to methodological variability and potential biases in reporting. Furthermore, the implications of drone warfare extend beyond mere statistics, encompassing ethical considerations and geopolitical consequences that merit careful examination.

Readers should remain aware of the limitations in the available evidence and the potential for bias in sources. It is crucial to critically evaluate information and consider multiple perspectives when forming conclusions about complex issues such as military policy and its ramifications.

Sources

1. Ava Shafiei, "Invisible Precedents: The U.S. Drone Strike Program under the Obama Administration," Swarthmore International Relations Journal, Spring 2017. Link
2. R Wargaski, "U.S. Drone Warfare and Civilian Casualties," Eagleton Political Journal. Link
3. "Secret War: U.S. Drone Strikes in Pakistan," University of Cincinnati Law Blogs. Link
4. "Executive Order -- United States Policy on Pre- and Post-Strike Measures," The White House Archives, July 1, 2016. Link
5. "Obama's Embrace of Drone Strikes Will Be a Lasting Legacy," The New York Times. Link
6. "Opinion | Preventing a Free-for-All With Drone Strikes," The New York Times, March 16, 2017. Link
7. "Drone Program Strikes - Counter Terrorism Attacks," The Washington Post. Link
8. "Civilian casualties from the United States drone strikes," Wikipedia. Link
9. "Obama's Final Drone Strike Data," Council on Foreign Relations. Link
10. "Evaluating the Obama Administration's Drone Reforms," Council on Foreign Relations. Link