The friendly (for us) skies

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

There is much we don’t know about the American citizen who is the target of a potential U.S. drone strike in Pakistan. He is believed to be associated with al-Qaida. He reportedly has been involved in plotting attacks against the United States. His name hasn’t been revealed, but we imagine he is avoiding rooftops and other open-air venues that have proven fatal to other terror chiefs.

What we know is that U.S. government officials have been debating since last summer whether to authorize a strike against the man. What’s taking so long? If he poses an imminent threat, this debate should take hours or days, not months.

There’s a lot of speculation about this saunter to judgment.

Officials still may be building a convincing case that the suspect is a serious threat to American security, even though one former U.S. official told the Wall Street Journal that the CIA already has concluded that he meets the criteria for a drone strike.

Another possible reason for delay: The strike would need to be launched by the CIA, not the Pentagon as U.S. leaders prefer, because Pakistan refuses to allow open American military action on its territory.

The danger: One of America’s most effective anti-terrorist programs may be strangled by red tape.

At a congressional hearing earlier this month, U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said: “Individuals who would have been previously removed from the battlefield by U.S. counterterrorism operations for attacking or plotting to attack against U.S. interests remain free because of self-imposed red tape.”

We can’t think of a more dangerous prospect than U.S. drones tangled in bureaucracy and purely political second guessing, missing the chance to eliminate al-Qaida and Taliban terrorists.

Last May, Obama defended the extraordinarily effective drone program while promising to narrow its scope and increase oversight and transparency. We supported that decision. But we also warned: The United States risks losing the advantage of surprise if individual drone strikes become entangled in slow-motion bureaucracy back home.

We fear U.S. warriors shrinking from what in effect are battlefield decisions because they have one eye on Congress, or judges, or some other overseer who is not their commander-in-chief.

The drones need to keep flying. If they’re in the cross hairs, so is the security of America and its allies.

Editorial, Pages 14 on 02/18/2014