Beyond War: Bin Laden, Escobar, and the Justification of Targeted Killing, 69 Wash
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Pace University DigitalCommons@Pace Pace Law Faculty Publications School of Law 2012 Beyond War: Bin Laden, Escobar, and the Justification of arT geted Killing Luis E. Chiesa Pace Law School Alexander K.A. Greenawalt Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty Part of the Human Rights Law Commons, International Humanitarian Law Commons, International Law Commons, Military, War, and Peace Commons, National Security Law Commons, and the Rule of Law Commons Recommended Citation Luis E. Chiesa & Alexander K.A. Greenawalt, Beyond War: Bin Laden, Escobar, and the Justification of Targeted Killing, 69 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1371 (2012), http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty/853/. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Law Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Beyond War: Bin Laden, Escobar, and the Justification of Targeted Killing Luis E. Chiesa* Alexander K.A. Greenawalt∗∗ Abstract Using the May 2011 killing of Osama bin Laden as a case study, this Article contributes to the debate on targeted killing in two distinct ways, each of which has the result of downplaying the centrality of international humanitarian law (IHL) as the decisive source of justification for targeted killings. First, we argue that the IHL rules governing the killing of combatants in wartime should be understood to apply more strictly in cases involving the targeting of single individuals, particularly when the targeting occurs against nonparadigmatic combatants outside the traditional battlefield. As applied to the bin Laden killing, we argue that the best interpretation of IHL would have required the SEALs to capture bin Laden in conditions short of surrender, if he was in fact manifestly defenseless or otherwise could have been readily captured with little risk. Second, we take seriously the possibility that the law should tolerate some targeted killings under conditions that are justified neither by reference to IHL nor by reference to the traditional ∗ Associate Professor of Law, Pace University School of Law. ∗∗ Associate Professor of Law, Pace University School of Law. This Article greatly benefited from the authors’ participation in a University of Pennsylvania Law School conference entitled “Using Targeted Killing to Fight the War on Terror: Philosophical, Moral, and Legal Challenges,” held in Philadelphia in April 2011. The contributions of several other participants are collected in the volume TARGETED KILLINGS: LAW AND MORALITY IN AN ASYMMETRICAL WORLD (Claire Finkelstein, Jens David Ohlin & Andrew Altman eds., 2012). The authors are also grateful to Joanna Meyer and the editors of the Washington and Lee Law Review for their assistance and patience in bringing this Article to publication. 1371 1372 69 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 1371 (2012) justifications available in peacetime. Drawing upon the example of Colombian crime family leader Pablo Escobar, who died in a police raid in 1993 in circumstances suggesting the authorities were not interested in capture, we suggest that targeted killings in these circumstances may be morally—if not legally—justified when (1) killing the targeted individual will protect society from a serious threat, (2) the individual is undeniably culpable for past atrocities, and (3) trying the individual is either logistically impossible or extraordinarily dangerous. Although we conclude that the bin Laden killing does not clearly satisfy the third criterion, this model nevertheless provides—in important ways—a superior framework for understanding public responses to bin Laden’s death than does the war paradigm. Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................... 1373 II. Justifying Targeted Killing in War ............................... 1383 A. The Morality of War and the Limits of International Law ................................................... 1389 B. IHL and Targeted Killing ........................................ 1396 1. The Permission to Kill by Name ....................... 1396 2. Targeted Killing in a Global Battlefield ............ 1400 a. The Feasibility of Capture ........................... 1400 b. The Harm of a Diffuse Battlefield ............... 1406 3. The Problem of Guilt ......................................... 1413 C. The War Paradigm and the bin Laden Killing ....... 1415 III. The Lawfulness of Targeted Killings Beyond War ....... 1420 A. A Typology of Cases ................................................. 1420 B. Targeted Killing as Traditional Defense of Self or Others ........................................................... 1422 C. Targeted Killing as Expanded Defense of Self or Others ........................................................... 1425 D. Targeted Killing as Law-Enforcement Action ........ 1428 E. Targeted Killings as Necessity or Lesser Evils ...... 1431 IV. Another Paradigm for Targeted Killings? The Killing of Pablo Escobar ............................................................ 1434 BEYOND WAR 1373 A. Killing Escobar ........................................................ 1437 B. Domestic and International Reaction to Escobar’s Killing ...................................................... 1440 C. Was Escobar’s Killing Justified? ............................. 1443 V. Pablo Escobar and the Morality of Targeted Killings .. 1447 A. Targeted Killing Partially Justified as Preemptive Action ................................................... 1448 B. Targeted Killing Partially Justified as Retaliatory (Punitive) Action .................................. 1451 C. Targeted Killing Partially Justified Because of Difficulty or Dangerousness of Trying the Perpetrator ........................................................ 1453 D. Justifiable Targeted Killings in TK 4 Cases—In Search of a Test ...................................... 1457 E. Some Qualifications ................................................. 1461 VI. The Killing of Osama bin Laden as Self-Defense or Law Enforcement ...................................................... 1462 A. Was bin Laden’s Killing Justified Pursuant to Self-Defense? ........................................................... 1462 B. Was bin Laden’s Killing Justified Pursuant to Law-Enforcement Authority or the Lesser-Evils Defense? .............................................. 1464 C. Was bin Laden’s Killing Otherwise Justifiable? .............................................................. 1465 VII. Conclusion ...................................................................... 1469 I. Introduction On the evening of Sunday, May 1, 2011, President Barack Obama appeared on television to announce that a United States operation had killed Osama bin Laden following a raid upon the al Qaeda leader’s secret home in Abbottabad, Pakistan.1 In the United States, the news that the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks had finally been taken down after a decade of false leads and 1. See President Barack Obama, Osama Bin Laden Dead, THE WHITE HOUSE BLOG (May 2, 2011, 11:35 p.m.), http://www.whitehouse.gov/ blog/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead (last visited Sept. 24, 2012) (transcribing President Obama’s address) (on file with the Washington and Lee Law Review). 1374 69 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 1371 (2012) intelligence failures was met, understandably, with widespread jubilation, and crowds gathered in New York City and Washington, D.C., to celebrate the event.2 As the New York Times reported the following morning, “Bin Laden’s demise is a defining moment in the American-led fight against terrorism, a symbolic stroke affirming the relentlessness of the pursuit of those who attacked New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001.”3 News reports in subsequent days and weeks revealed additional details of the suspenseful operation against bin Laden: A Navy SEAL team flew clandestinely by helicopter deep into Pakistan and undertook its mission by cover of night in a sprawling compound.4 Analysts debated the significance of the killing for future anti-terrorism efforts and the implications for the United States’ relationship with Pakistan, given the startling revelation that bin Laden was not hiding in the remote tribal areas of the Northwest, where Pakistan has struggled to establish control, but in an affluent suburb only thirty miles outside Islamabad.5 Comparatively little public attention, at least inside the United States, has focused on the killing’s legality.6 Was the 2. See Peter Baker et al., Bin Laden Is Dead, Obama Says, N.Y. TIMES, May 2, 2011, at A1 (describing the American public’s reaction to President Obama’s announcement of bin Laden’s death). For a more detailed summary of existing reports of the operation, see Beth Van Schaack, The Killing of Osama Bin Laden & Anwar Al-Aulaqi: Uncharted Legal Territory, 14 Y.B. INT’L HUMANITARIAN L. 255, 258–60 (2012). 3. Id. 4. See How the Raid Unfolded, N.Y. TIMES, May 7, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/05/02/world/asia/abbottabad-map-of- where-osama-bin-laden-was-killed.html (last visited Sept. 24, 2012) (on file with the Washington and Lee Law Review); Osama Bin Laden’s Death: How It Happened, BBC, (June 7, 2011), http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia- 13257330 (last visited Sept. 24, 2012) (on file with the Washington and Lee Law Review); Nicholas Schmidle, Getting