Spring 2015 (29.1) Internal

Toward a Drone Accountability Regime: A Rejoinder

We very much appreciate the fact that Neta Crawford, Janina Dill, and David Whetham have taken our proposal for a Drone Accountability Regime (DAR) seriously and have offered various critiques and suggestions in their responses to it. In the lead article to this symposium we took pains to emphasize that the details of our proposal are clearly contestable; that there is no guarantee of political feasibility; and, indeed, that it would be desirable to establish what we called an “experimentalist regime” to take into account the need to adapt to circumstances that are not now foreseeable. We are therefore pleased to see that our article initiated a lively discussion of the characteristics of a Drone Accountability Regime, and of the international political and legal context within which its provisions should be framed.

To read or purchase the full article, click here.

More in this issue

Spring 2015 (29.1) Feature

From Moral to Political Responsibility in a Globalized Age

In a world beset by empirical global problems and global collective inaction, we need less to speak of the moral responsibility of political agents than ...

Spring 2015 (29.1) Feature

Distant Intimacy: Space, Drones, and Just War

Critical engagement with the concept of space, rooted in political geography, augments established ethical critiques of drone strikes. As drone use grows, it is crucial ...

Spring 2015 (29.1) Review

Power in Concert: The Nineteenth-Century Origins of Global Governance by Jennifer Mitzen

REVIEW BY ANDREAS OSIANDER Mitzen contends that when states publicly commit to joint action in pursuit of a common goal, this fact will exert an ...