5th Global Conference
Session Four: The IRA, LTTE and Al Qa’ida: Three Unholy Terrors
Chair: Tara Hopkins
Like a Phoenix from the Ashes
Timothy Hoyt
Strategy and Policy, US Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island, USA
No abstract is presently available
Tiger, Tiger Burning Bright
Graeme Goldsworthy
Harvard Medical School,
Vrij Universiteit Medisch Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
No abstract is presently available
The Legality of Targeted Killing as an Instrument of War: The Case of Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi
Avery Plaw
Department of Political Science, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, MA, USA
On 4 November 2002 a CIA-controlled Predator unmanned aerial vehicle appeared over a car speeding along an isolated highway 100 miles east of Sanaa, the capital of Yemen. The Predator launched a laser-guided hellfire missile which struck the target and exploded, leaving only charred remains. American and Yemeni officials claimed that the cars’ occupants had been six members of al-Qaeda, including Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi, one of the terrorists the CIA believed to be responsible for the bombing of the US destroyer Cole in 2000. Based only on the carbonized remains, forensics specialists were unable to confirm the identity of the victims.
Despite the difficulties with identification, Paul D. Wolfowitz, the then Deputy Secretary of Defense praised the venture as “a very successful tactical operation,” and indicated that such operations would be a key element in America’s arsenal in fighting the new war on terrorism. In fact, American officials now acknowledge having carried out at least 19 successful targeting operations in the war on terror.
Yet, the UN, the EU and many states, NGOs and legal experts denounced the American operation as an extrajudicial killing or assassination, both banned under international law. The US and many other states and legal experts responded that it was a legitimate exercise of self-defense under international law.
This essay examines the legality of targeted killing under international law by focusing on this first, defining case. It evaluates the principal arguments offered by critics and defenders with particular reference to both international humanitarian and human rights law. It concludes that while there is a strong case for the legality of the al-Harethi operation, this case relies on elements that have not been present in some other instances of targeted killing. The al-Harethi case thus helps to define the legal limits of targeted killing.
