IMI-Aktuell 2015/592
»Intercept«-Entüllung in Kürze
(23.10.2015)
Letzte Woche wurde von »The Intercept« ein Dossier anhand der Informationen eines Whistleblowers über den geheimen Krieg mit Drohnen und Spezialeinheiten der USA veröffentlicht (siehe Aktuell 2015/574). Eric Umansky hat sich in einem Podcast mit zwei Autoren des Dossiers unterhalten. Im begleitenden Text auf »Pro Publica« fasst Umansky die wichtigsten Informationen des Gesprächs noch einmal kompakt zusammen:
▪ The U.S. often doesn’t quite know who’s been killed. During an operation a few years ago in Afghanistan, nearly 90 percent of those killed in strikes weren’t the intended target. The documents show about 200 people killed over one five-month period – just 35 of them were the men the U.S. meant to kill. That doesn’t mean everybody else was innocent. It’s just not clear who they were.
▪ The Intercept’s source — who leaked the classified documents — said that men killed in drone and other airstrikes are classified as the enemy unless evidence emerges otherwise. That is in line with previous reports about so-called „signature strikes“, in which the U.S. doesn’t actually know the identity of men being killed.
▪ One study by a Pentagon think tank found that drone strikes in Afghanistan were actually far mor likely to kill civilians than conventional airstrikes. Part of the explanation for that is the „soda straw effect,“ which refers to the fact that drones’ cameras can actually give a quite limited view of what’s happening on the ground.
▪ An internal Pentagon study noted that drone strikes have a big downside. Basically, if you kill people, you can’t ask them questions later. Or as the the study put it: „Kill operations significantly reduce the intelligence available from detainees.“
»Spiegel Online« fasste ebenso etwas ausführlicher die wichtigsten Erkenntnisse zusammen und erstellte einen anschaulichen Begleittext. (mh)