Policy Question:
What actions, if any, should the federal government take concerning terrorism in the Middle East, and more precisely, actions involving ISIS the burgeoning non-state terrorist actor in the Middle East? Moreover, can innovations in science help in dealing with this situation?
Policy Maker Client:
In this case, the policy maker is the President of the United States. He alone has the authority to manage the security situation. This, of course, due to the President also serving in a capacity as the commander in chief.
Brief Background:
In the past year, ISIS has expanded influence to both Syria, and Iraq. ISIS, of course, is a terrorist organization that gained territorial dominance of both Syria, and Iraq. American air-power is currently there to disrupt, and dissuade this baleful organization. Evidently, airstrikes are decimating mechanized forces indeed because mechanized forces are vulnerable to aerial bombardment. Generally speaking, it is also true most ISIS forces left out in the open are vulnerable to aerial bombardment.
To be clear, there is a new innovation relevant to american air-power. This innovation is indeed drone warfare. Aerial drones are a new technological innovation that Department of Defense has taken advantage of in recent conflicts. Drones provide surveillance, and even some models have offensive capacities. These drones can, in sum, acts as a force multiplier by patrolling the ground that are usually completed by ground forces. Unmanned aerial vehicles provide a low-cost and low-risk solution to troublesome terrorists.
It would appear drone warfare is the inevitable consequence of innovation. Moreover, it is out of regard for citizen-soldiers that normally bear the risk of patrolling on foot. Indeed, drones serve the double purpose of protecting U.S. citizens, and shielding soldiers. It is clear, then, drone technology use is a consequence of pragmatic policy.
References:
Mirski, Sean. "The Big Cost of Success: The Rise and Ultimate Fall of ISIS."The National Interest. N.p., 18 Oct. 2014. Web. 26 Oct. 2014. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-big-cost-success-the-rise-ultimate-fall-isis-11492
Davis, Daniel L. "Double Trouble: American Strategic Options Regarding ISIS." The National Interest. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 26 Oct. 2014. http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/double-trouble-american-strategic-options-regarding-isis-11474
Kaag, John, Scott Pratt, and Sujata Bhatia. ""Democracy and the Necessity of Drones?"" Democracy and the Necessity of Drones? Belfer Center, 29 Sept. 2014. Web. 26 Oct. 2014. http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/24616/democracy_and_the_necessity_of_drones.html?breadcrumb=%2Fproject%2F39%2Fscience_technology_and_globalization
You explained the background information very explicitly, but I think in the question statement, you can include the desired result. For example: to reduce the terrorism in Middle Ease. You can also mention the current situation of drone use. Has it been applied to military use? If not, why?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Richard,
DeleteI commented your blog by mistake because I first looked the wrong way on the list. I put back my comment in case it can help you think about this question again. Don´t think I am criticizing, I am just promoting an alternative point of view.
Your policy question seems to be very interesting. However, it is not neutral and has some severe bias. First of all, the United States are breaking the rules of international law using force in foreign countries. There is no mandate for the United States to apply weapons in Siria and Iraq, and, of course, the President does not have any authority to manage security situation on the territory of foreign countries. Only the United Nations Organization has authority to apply force anywhere in the world, and such a decision has to be taken by the Security Council, not by a single country alone.
The drones have indeed proved to be an efficient tool against the terrorist organizations. However, there have been casualties among civilians as well. So you might want to question the effectiveness of the current US security policy: how does the use of weapons in these countries really influence security of the US population? The more force the US applies - the more people convert to terrorists because of the rise of hatred against the US in the Middle East.
The issues of international relations are very sensitive, so it seems more prudent to focus the policy question on the internal affairs of the United States. For example, it would be really interesting to research the issue of commercial use of drones. There is currently a heated debate on this topic, so there can be a really valuable contribution to it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete