LEGAL+-+KENYA

Rucha Bhide Kenya Legal Arundel High School January 22, 2014

Topic 1: Combat Drones within the Laws of War: How Far is too Far?

Drones, airplanes without pilots which are used to spy on or kill enemies, have become a controversial topic in this day and age because of their ethical and moral implications. Some countries believe that using drones promotes violence and is a threat to national sovereignty while others argue that it is a necessary measure to keep their countries safe. Overall, there is no consensus on whether or not using drone warfare is considered right or wrong as many countries have varying viewpoints. Kenya, for example, promotes the use of drones to monitor their wildlife and alert park rangers of potential poachers that kill animals for their body parts. However, the Kenyan government is skeptical when it comes to using drones for military purposes, though they do use them occasionally to prevent terrorist threats. The drone warfare conflict could be solved through a series of compromises between pro drone countries and those countries that condemn its use, provided all countries are willing to settle.

Drone warfare is described to be the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that can locate and take down targets without having a pilot physically present in the aircraft. Though the drone warfare conflict is considered a recent issue, the beginnings of these machines have been around as early as World War I.The true use of drones though, started on February 4, 2002 when the CIA deployed an unmanned Predator drone with the intent to kill. Despite the fact that the drone was intended to kill Osama bin Laden and members of Al Qaeda, the only victims were innocent civilians collecting scrap metal. By 2010, Predator flights were accumulating approximately 500 surveillance hours a day in Afghanistan. Although President Bush initially deployed UAVs, President Obama was the one that has drastically increased their usage. In fact, through the United States's continued use of drone warfare, many other countries, like China and North Korea, have strengthened their military programs, in an effort to rival or at least match the power of the United States militia. Furthermore, the main reason drone warfare is such a controversial issue is because it raises ethical and legal concerns. These machines are extremely efficient when bringing down targets, but the killer never has to directly face their opponent. B y allowing governments to deploy unmanned killing machines instead of their own troops, it is probable that the tolerance for death and destruction will increase greatly, as the antagonist never has to directly combat in war. Additionally, organizations like the Human Rights Working Group declare the use of drones as a violation of international human rights and national sovereignty - by launching attacks led by unmanned machines in villages where there // might // be possible terrorists creates animosity, destruction, and too many civilian causalities. Instead of resolving conflicts, it creates even more violence and opposition in the countries that are being targeted (primarily the Middle East when it comes to U.S. involvement). The use of UAVs also push the limits of legality, as assassination and "targeted killing" is considered illegal under international law. Overall, the efficiency drone warfare is supposed to have on disbanding terrorist groups seems over-exaggerated - only 2% of total deaths by UAVs were high value terrorist targets. However, supporters of drone warfare argue that they create less causalities than conventional warfare because there are less people fighting face to face. Countries that use drone warfare also quickly and efficiently destroy potential threats - ensuring the safety of their citizens.

In the past few years, Kenya has begun to use drone warfare both to preserve their wildlife and protect their citizens. The Ol Pejeta Conservancy in northern Kenya is now deploying drones that monitor wildlife centers and alert park rangers about potential poachers. Somehow the country has been able to transform these brutal killing machines into a peaceful method to keep their wildlife safe from poachers who kill animals for valuable body parts. However, Kenya has also used drones to protect their country, specifically during their warplane bombing in Somalia. In October 2013, Kenyan drones (that were initially mistaken to be U.S. drone planes) bombed al-Qaeda Islamists in Somalia to avenge the al Shabaab Islamist group's attack on a Nairobi mall a month earlier. The attack on Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya killed at least 67 people, but to put an end to the threat, the Kenyan government successfully eliminated two leading members of al Shabaab with their drone strike. Thus, though the Kenyan government doesn't feel as strongly as countries like the U.S. about using drone warfare in adverse situations, it believes in using the technology for extreme situations like terrorist attacks and has certainly found peaceful ways to employ these machines as well.

Drone warfare, though dangerous, can be useful in certain, extreme cases. There should be strict parameters set for when a country should be permitted to use a UAV. Deploying drones to monitor wildlife reserves, like many African countries for example, constitutes as a peaceful way to use these supposedly harmful machines. Additionally, countries should be allowed to deploy drones in emergency situations, like when their national security is truly in danger. There should be a United Nations committee composed to determine whether or not a country is abusing its drone-deploying privileges if the drone warfare conflict continues to play a role in international politics. It seems as if most nations could come to consensus on the solutions to the drone warfare conflict proposed above, but a few, like the U.S. and Western European nations might find it too restricting whereas countries that condemn the use of drones, like Geneva, Afghanistan and Pakistan might find the proposed solutions too generous.

Though different countries might conflict in their opinions towards the use of drones, it will be interesting to see the reasons behind each country's opinion on this controversial issue. Overall, the issue of drone warfare affects countries all around the world because of their ability to wreak havoc and destruction so easily on unsuspecting targets.

Rucha Bhide Kenya Legal Arundel High School January 29, 2014

Topic 2: Laws of the Sea: Piracy in Somalia

Somali pirates take innocent victims hostage, holding them for ridiculously large sums of ransom money. Over the past few years Somali piracy has spread from the Somali coast to as far as the Indian Ocean. Their violent raids of merchant ships have costed many people their lives and have seriously impacted trade near the Suez Canal. Kenya, specifically, feels the effects of Somalian piracy as their cargo ships pass directly through the pirate infested waters. This nation has taken it into their own hands to prosecute Somalian pirates because Somalia's decentralized government isn't stable enough to do it themselves. Somalian piracy could be stopped for good if measures were taken to eradicate any support Somali citizens may have for the pirates.

Piracy on the Somali coast has increased dramatically in the past few years due to decentralization of the Somali government and economic instability. After a civil war broke out in 1991, the country was divided into assorted regional governments. Poverty rates rose and the Somali National Army (SNA) was disbanded, leaving the Somali coastline unmonitored and a playground for money hungry pirates. Additionally, illegal fishing from foreign companies depleted local fishermen's revenue, totaling $100 million in 2005, according to the UK's Department for International Development (DFID). Because of the food shortages and economic instability Somali fishermen still face, they sympathize with the pirates, weakening the nation's resolve to fix their piracy issues. Furthermore, waste dumping from international industries in Somali waters has resulted in an unusually high number of respiratory infections, mouth ulcers, hemorrhages and skin infections in the country. Reports show that because of the problems international companies have been creating by dumping their waste into Somali waters, 70% of Somalis support piracy as a form of self defense. However, as numbers of hostages and ransom amounts are growing, the international community has been left with no choice but to put an end to Somali piracy. Countries have begun to arm their merchant ships crossing the waters of Somalia with tactics of self defense - from weapons to armed security guards. Many countries - India, Australia, China, Norway, and so on - have sent vessels to guard the Somali coast. Arresting and criminally trying pirate gangs and promoting extensive media coverage on the piracy issue has also helped dissuade pirates, but despite the drastic measures taken, there issue of piracy still remains.

Kenya is one of the few countries that is trying and prosecuting pirates. Many shipping routes to Kenya have been compromised as cargo ships face routine attacks from Somali pirates and their tourism industry has declined significantly as well. Most accused pirates are being handed over to Kenyan authorities because the Somali government isn't considered stable enough to prosecute their own lawbreakers. Consequently, a Kenyan court recently sentenced 24 Somalis to seven years of prison each because of their attempted takeover of an Iranian merchant ship on the Gulf of Oman in October 2010. Overall, Kenya has taken the offensive route to curb Somali piracy for good.

To stop Somali piracy for good, measures should be taken to eradicate the support any Somali citizen might have for the pirates. A strict law prohibiting illegal fishing should be instituted (companies that violate these measures put in place are subjected to heavy fines and possibly being shut down) and incentives should be offered to Somali fishermen to increase their revenue (lowering taxes, putting tariffs on imported goods, monitoring fish product prices) in exchange for their promise not to help the pirates. Heavy laws banning waste dumping should be put in place as well, to improve the health of Somali citizens along the coast. Additionally, the Somali government should be restructured (with as little help from outside resources as possible) to build a centralized, strong bureaucracy. Once the Somali economy and political atmosphere is reestablished, the country should be able to get rid of the pirates however they see fit. In the meantime though, the United Nations and other countries should continue to send military personnel to guard the coast as well as actively tracking and attacking pirate ships. The terms stated above may seem not forceful enough to countries like the United States, but for the most part it is reasonable to assume that countries will be willing to come to a consensus.

Though the issue of curbing piracy is a difficult one to conquer, it is realistic to believe that by coordinating tactics to destroy Somali pirates with nations all across the world, Somali piracy will soon come to an end. It will be interesting to see each nation's opinion on this topic as well as how they plan on resolving this problem.