A Philosopher’s Take on Drone Warfare: Bradley Strawser’s Controversial Advocacy
At first glance, Bradley Strawser fits the image of a humanities professor. With a beard and casual jeans, he evokes the comforting persona often associated with academia. He quotes philosophers like Augustine, humorously labels himself a “hippie,” and holds strong views against capital punishment, the invasion of Iraq, and the policies of neo-conservative hawks. Yet, beneath this gentle exterior lies a provocative advocate for one of the most contentious military strategies of our time: drone strikes.
An Academic Rise
Strawser’s office offers a serene view of Monterey’s tranquil campus, dotted with the beauty of California’s nature. Residing in nearby Carmel, often celebrated for its artistic community, he has published works on metaphysics and has a particular affinity for Immanuel Kant. His academic journey has recently led him to a tenure-track position as an assistant professor of philosophy at the Naval Postgraduate School. This elite institution caters to military officers and policymakers, reflecting a blend of military and ethical discourse.
A Moral Justification for Drones
Despite his seemingly pacifist inclinations, Strawser argues that the United States not only has the right to employ drone strikes but may be morally obliged to do so. He states, “There’s no downside. Both ethically and normatively, there’s a tremendous value.” For him, the use of drones ensures the safety of pilots and highlights a potential increase in operational accuracy. He believes that the burden of proof should shift to those who oppose drone warfare, posing the question: “Why not do this?”
His strong defense of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) forms the crux of his academic focus and has garnered attention in military ethics spheres. As he puts it, “This is the future of all air warfare, at least for the U.S.”
The Ethical Implications
Strawser’s scholarly contributions culminate in an upcoming book titled Killing by Remote Control: The Ethics of an Unmanned Military set to be published by Oxford University Press. This work delves into the intricacies of drone warfare, which has transformed the U.S.’s approach to combat against Islamist factions in regions such as Afghanistan and Pakistan. According to reports, the U.S. operates more drones than manned aircraft, emphasizing the technological shift in modern warfare.
However, this evolution raises ethical questions. The American Civil Liberties Union estimates that drone strikes have resulted in 4,000 fatalities since 2002, many of whom are reported to be civilians. Potential violations of human rights and international law have led to increasing scrutiny from organizations like the United Nations, which has labeled some drone actions as equivalent to “war crimes.”
Strained Diplomatic Relations
The use of drones has not only sparked moral debates but has also strained U.S. relations, particularly with Pakistan. Reports indicate significant casualties from U.S. strikes in regions like North Waziristan, leading to protests and heightened tension between the two nations. Former President Jimmy Carter encapsulated this sentiment, suggesting that the U.S. has lost its moral authority on human rights due to its drone policies.
Strawser, however, offers a counter-narrative. Growing up as the son of an academic who worked in aerospace, his military background includes seven years of service in the Air Force. These experiences, along with a shift towards philosophy, undergird his belief in morally justifiable military action—even in remote operations.
Examining Public Concerns
While he acknowledges public discomfort with drone warfare—and the perception that it fosters a lack of valor—Strawser argues that modern operators face significant psychological burdens. “Several of them have had PTSD. Think about what they see all day… you’re watching people die on your screen.” He maintains that even if drone operations seem detached, they can require real moral courage.
Strawser likens drone pilots’ responsibilities to that of police officers in shootouts: “You would want the former to have bullet-proof vests.” For him, the emphasis should be on the justness of the cause, rather than concerns over asymmetry in warfare.
The Slippery Slope of Just War
Strawser’s arguments also address the potential risks of reducing the barriers to military action. He concedes that drones might lower the stakes of entry into conflict but insists that this should not deter their use when justified. He argues that the moral imperative of protection can outweigh apprehensions over potential misuse.
In his view, if drone strikes are justified, they can mitigate ethical problems rather than create them. He believes robust documentation and oversight can enhance accountability, which serves to foster just military practices.
Teaching Military Ethics
As Strawser prepares to instruct officers from various U.S. services and allied militaries, he contemplates the implications of his teachings. While he stands firm in his convictions, he worries that hawks could misuse his arguments to justify unjust actions. “It’s the thought that keeps me up at night. Because if my arguments were going to be misused…”
Despite these concerns, he feels privileged in his role, stating, “I wanted to be a working philosopher and here I am. Ridiculous good fortune.”
With his unique blend of philosophy and military ethics, Bradley Strawser navigates a complex landscape of contemporary moral discourse—a testament to the increasingly intricate relationship between technology and the ethics of warfare.