EDITORIAL: On drones, civilian safety should come first in Somalia

EDITORIAL: Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has suggested he wants the US to loosen certain restrictions on the usage of drone strikes in targeting al-Shabaab merchants. But he wouldn't say which of those restrictions he wants to be lifted.

In an interview with Marc Lamont Hill of Upfront on Al-Jazeera, he said he was only looking for the ‘military’ restrictions which he argued “are too many” and should be lifted but was still concerned with civilian safety.

“How many drone strikes were successful without civilian casualties?” the Somali leader posed.

“We are doing everything we can to avoid civilian casualties…and for the last six months that these operations are going on, we succeeded in that.”

There is an obvious urge to finish off al-Shabaab by whatever means. After all, since President Mohamud came on, he has used every tool available: The Somali National Army, the African Union Transition Mission, village vigilantes, and a ban on the media on reporting the Shabaab side of the story. This is why the call for more drone strikes in their hideouts may be understandable. But drone strikes have been controversial before, especially since some of the raids have killed innocent civilians in their wake.

The US military has been the core giver of drone strike service for the last decade, striking targets where Shabaabs hide. In some of the raids, the targets were met with precision, neutralizing terror merchants with ease. In other incidents, it left behind a trail of tears: families left without their breadwinners. Those families it turned out had had nothing to do with terrorism. They had been victims of circumstances.

Owing to criticism against drone strikes, President Joe Biden’s administration last year limited their use to active war zones and required each of those strikes to be approved by the White House. Under that arrangement, field commanders wouldn’t have the leeway to press strike buttons, until approvals come in.

It may have reduced civilian casualties. According to situational reports by the US Africa Command, there was no complaint of a civilian casualty in the first three quatres of this year. The final quarterly report for 2022 is expected next year. This assessment, however, may have a flaw because the data is tabulated by would-be perpetrators of civilian deaths.

This is why civilian safety should punctuate every deal the Somali government has about US drone strikes. In spite of aiding ground troops in targeting al-Shabaab, the reporting on drone use safety has been vague. For example, estimates show that at least 1500 people have been killed in more than 220 strikes in Somalia in the last decade. Security agents usually say most of the dead are terrorists.

Except watchdogs have accused the US of looking the other way on safety, only labeling every casualty as a terrorist. One report by Amnesty International accused AFRICOM of mislabeling casualties, most of whose families came forth to identify their profiles as people who earned a living away from terrorism.

This means that even as Somalia begs to have more drone strikes, it would be important that the US takes responsibility whenever it makes mistakes. Besmirching victims merely as terrorists to close a chapter may run counter to the intent of the authorities to have as much communal support as possible against terrorists.

President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud may know that the war on terror must begin with winning over communities, not smearing their innocent kin with terror tags after they are killed indiscriminately.

GAROWE ONLINE