Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Counter Terrorism Operations

29 April, 2015 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Counter Terrorism Operations Dr. Dhrubajyoti Bhattacharjee* Modern warfare has undergone a significant transformation in the last two decades. Being more cost effective and target oriented, technology today makes an attempt to enable deeper and more comprehensive conflict resolution.1 Nowadays, unmanned aerial vehicles or drones have turned into the new face of war.2 It is one of the most sought after and favoured weapon in the present conflicts being fought in the Middle East and South Asia due to its supposed visual superiority .3 Drones have been used extensively for counter-terrorism operations, especially in carrying out pre-emptive strikes, surveillance on specific locations as well as eliminating threats. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles – Types and Functions Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have been referred to variously as drones, robot planes, pilotless aircraft, Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs), Remotely Piloted Aircrafts (RPAs), and other terms, which describe aircrafts that fly under the control of an operator with no person aboard. They are most often called UAVs, and when combined with ground control stations and data links, form unmanned aerial systems (UAS) or lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).4 UAVs vary widely in size and capacity. UAVs, in non-military roles, operate in diverse environments and high risk areas, which include scientific research in the fields of atmosphere, oceanography, geophysics, mineral exploration, imaging spectrometry, telecommunications relay along with police surveillance, border patrol and reconnaissance, ICWA Issue Brief survey and inspection of remote power lines and pipelines, traffic and accident surveillance, emergency and disaster monitoring, cartography and mapping, search and rescue operations, agricultural spraying, aerial photography, promotion and advertising, weather reconnaissance, flight research, and fire-fighting monitoring and management. There are four main UAV technologies: micro and mini UAVs, tactical UAVs, strategic UAVs and special task UAVs.5 The types and forms of UAVs are elaborated in the Table below. Table 1. Types and Forms of Drones and Their Activities6 Category Maximum Altitude (m) Flight Hours Missions Micro (MAV) Maximum take of weight (kg) 0.10 250 1 Mini <30 150-300 <2 Close Range 150 3000 2-4 Short Range Medium Range 200 150-500 3-6 6-10 Long Range Endurance 500-1500 Medium Altitude, Long Endurance 1000-1500 3000 30005000 5000 50008000 50008000 Strategic UAVs High Altitude, Long Endurance 250012500 1500020000 24-48 Special Tasks UAVs Lethal 250 3-4 Decoys Stratospheric 250 TBD <4 >48 Exo-stratospheric TBD 30004000 50-5000 2000030000 >30000 Scouting, NBC sampling, surveillance inside buildings Film and broadcast industries, agriculture, pollution measurements, communications relay and EW RSTA, mine detection, search & rescue, EW BDA, RSTA, EW, mine detection BDA, RSTA, EW, mine detection, NBC sampling BDA, RSTA, communications relay BDA, RSTA, EW, communications relay, NBC sampling BDA, RSTA, EW weapons delivery, communications relay, NBC sampling BDA, RSTA, EW, communications relay, boost phase intercept launch vehicle, airport security Anti-radar, anti-ship, anti-aircraft, anti-infrastructure Aerial and Naval Deception - TBD - Micro/Mini UAVs Tactical UAVs 6-13 12-24 24-48 Drones are best known for their use in military operations including the use of weaponized drones for targeted killing.7 Drones provide several advantages over manned armed flights and sea-based launches. They are claimed to do less collateral damage than either missiles or manned aerial bombing; they can hover overhead for relatively long periods of time to gather information for a strike; they can strike quickly, and the missile can be 2 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief diverted from its original target in an intentional miss. 8 They are also less expensive than manned platforms. Unlike other delivery systems, however, they require a permissive environment, which is likely to limit their utility in some theatres, which has been witnessed in the forests of Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh of India where Naxal or Maoist insurgency is taking place.9 Challenges of Using UAVs in South Asia Though none of the governments in South Asia has opened up its skies for such UAVs, which is not under the command and control of local or national law enforcement, it's easy accessibility makes the entire security structure volatile. It has been recently reported by the Indian media that Pakistani spy drones were spotted flying just 300m away from the Indian territory near the international border adjoining Ganganagar, Jaisalmer and Bikaner in Rajasthan. It can be noted that Pakistan has developed indigenously armed UAVs, Burraq and Barq .10 In China, there are more than 250 developers of UAVs. It has adapted the technology extensively in military, R&D, and is fast turning it into an economic delivery system for commercial use. China tested its first stealth combat drone, Sharp Sword on November , 2013, making it the fourth power capable of putting a stealth drone in the sky after the US, the European Union and Britain.11 The detection of such drones within the Indian airspace remains a serious issue of worry. Another distinct problem that the countries in the South Asian region face is its geographical nature and its overlapping borders. UAVs can pose a major challenge within nations, which already have long persisting misunderstandings and mutual suspicions within and about each other. Naturally, neither the Bhutanese government would take a Nepali drone in their territory very lightly, nor will Bangladesh consider an Indian drone in its airspace as a friendly mistake. The situation is same in the West with Pakistani drones flying in Indian or Afghanistani air space or vice versa. Drones can be outfitted with high definition and infra-red cameras, and even license plate readers and Internet packet sniffing technology. Drones present unique threats to privacy, in the words of one privacy advocate, and when such technology can be easily 3 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief misused, the challenge of UAVs then becomes significant.12 It seriously challenges and undermines the safety and security of national institutions, hacking of sensitive information, which concerns national security as well as the flying of unauthorised UAVs, especially in high-risk zones, especially like airports, military bases, important government institutions, etc. It poses a serious threat to public safety, aviation safety and national security. It also threatens to seriously jeopardise the protection provided by security and law enforcement agencies to national, international and important dignitaries, leaders and individuals, due to their practical invisibility and easy accessibility. In 2014, drones caught the attention of the common masses as airwaves and newspaper columns were filled with the news that Amazon planned to use drones for parcel delivery, while nationalist football fans used one to disrupt a match between Serbia and Albania. As the year drew on, drones were found buzzing close to a nuclear power station in France, and a near miss was reported between a small drone and a passenger aircraft landing at Heathrow airport. 13 The issue of the federal wiretapping statute gets further complicated with the advent of UAVs, as it strengthens the argument of the protection of the privacy of the common citizens.14 In documents retrieved from terrorist cells, it has been found that with devices costing less than US$ 000, one can infiltrate the drone s waves and frequencies, finding out the intention and mission of the drone.15 With the widespread rise of extremist groups and terrorist organisations throughout South Asia as well as in its extended neighbourhood, unbridled use of such technology will seriously challenge the general well being of nations. In e-commerce portals, between Thanksgiving and Christmas, more than 7600 units of UAVs were sold per week in 2014.16 Fortunately, there is no law in India that allows the usage of UAVs by civilians as well as for commercial purposes. But as it has been seen that the misuse of this technology is rather easier than other sophisticated gadgetry and technology, it seriously necessitates the government to put in place immediately measures, which should include both legal as well as technological knowhow, which could act pre-emptively in preventing the misuse of such technology or can speedily put in place a strategy to counter such threats as well as have in place remedial technologies. 4 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief The use of UAV s would significantly bolster counter-insurgency and counter terrorism operations in the states experiencing conflict and violence on the basis of Communist ideologies, the Kashmir Valley as well as in specific areas in the North Eastern states of India. However, if this exact technology falls in the hands of the insurgent and terrorist groups, it would become a significant challenge to counter and deter such operations, as pinpointing the location from where the UAV is being operated would remain difficult. As has been rightly pointed out by analysts that down the ages, weapons of war have become increasingly lethal providing an operational edge to the side which possessed technological superiority 17 and when such weapons of war get enmeshed in non-war zones, the chances of these being misused remains high. Drones in Counter Terrorism in South Asia In the present century, there is a growing interest in Unmanned Aircraft Vehicle (UAV) in most of the developed and developing states. Presently, UAVs are proving as an efficient application for a wide spectrum of military missions. There have been reports that terrorist and extremist groups made elaborate plans to carry out their attacks on military and non-military targets with the use of UAVs, though carrying out such operations successfully still remains rare. Table 2. Media Reports of Terrorist Attempts to Employ UAVs18 Date 199519 Organisation/Individual Aum Shinrikyo, Japanese Terrorist Group Nature of Threat Attacked the Tokyo subway 200120 Osama bin Laden June, 200221 November, 200322 Al-Qaeda Planned to kill George W. Bush and other heads of state at the G-8 Summit in Genoa, Italy Planned to attack passenger aircraft To attack the House of Commons March, 2004 A British National held at Camp Delta, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba A Palestinian Extremist Group To attack a Jewish settlement in Gaza sect 5 | www.icwa.in Level of preparation Planned to use Remote control helicopters to spray sarin gas Considered using remote-control airplanes packed with explosives Support Base Japanese Terrorist Group Considered using model airplanes Acquire a drone to attack with anthrax Al-Qaeda Use of a UAV loaded with explosives Palestinian Extremist Group Al-Qaeda Al-Qaeda ICWA Issue Brief From a technical standpoint, the use of UAVs to deliver weapons of mass destructions (WMDs) is a feasible task for terrorists. In fact, terrorist UAVs may cause considerable damage even if they carry conventional payloads. The most worrisome situation stems from model aircraft, where uncontrolled access to the knowledge, skills and equipment required for mini-UAV assembly exists. Existing air defence systems are ineffective against terrorist mini-UAVs, since they are developed to detect different kinds of threats. This is where the real challenge exists for the state. The main effort of dealing with the threat of terrorist UAVs needs to be on preventive measures.23 Under such circumstances, the role of actionable intelligence becomes very important. Also, there is a need to make the public aware of this likely threat and its potential consequences.24 No dignitary or leadership, whatever level of security he or she might be provided with, can be protected from such threats. International regimes, such as the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the Wassenaar Agreement aim at preventing such threats.25 In particular, the MTCR prohibits export of any UAV capable of delivering a payload weighing more than 500 kilograms and it restricts exports of all UAVs capable of flying farther than 300 kilometres. In addition, it restricts a list of technologies and accessories, which is regularly revised at MTCR sessions.26 However, UAVs have been extensively used in both Afghanistan and Pakistan in counter-terrorism operations. The terrain in these regions has remained extremely beneficial in carrying out such operations. The problem of carrying out successful counter terrorist operations has been witnessed in the Naxal affected states of Chhattisgarh in India, as due to dense forest cover, UAVs failed to properly distinguish between Naxal insurgent camps and regular rural hamlets, which led to risking as well as actual loss of lives of counter insurgency operatives during raids carried out on the information collected from the UAVs.27 The counter-terrorist operation in Pakistan has also received a mixed bag of reaction. Pakistan has absorbed more drone strikes—some four hundred in its northwest region—than any other country, and has been a test bed for Administration s hypotheses about the future of American airpower.28 6 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief Table 3. Drone Attacks in Pakistan29 Year Incidents Killed Injured 2005 1 1 0 2006 0 0 0 2007 1 20 15 2008 19 156 17 2009 46 536 75 2010 90 831 85+ 2011 59 548 52 2012 46 344 37 2013 24 158 29 2014 19 122 26 2015 4 27 7 Total* 309 2743 343+ There is a problem regarding UAV attacks as there always remains a difference between perceived and practical targets, attacks and casualties. It has also been seen that immediately after a drone attack, there is a retaliatory terrorist attack that weakens the logic of a UAV attack. One study conducted by the CUNY Graduate Center and the Institute for the Study of Labour in Bonn, Germany stated that the drones have been more effective in Taliban movement and activities in Pakistan than in Afghanistan, which varied from a positive vengeance effect in the first week following a drone strike to a negative deterrent/incapacitation effect in the second week following a drone strike.30 In 2010, 118 UAV strikes were reportedly launched in Pakistan, of which 14 were successful.31 (Success may have been too narrowly defined as a strike in which a militant leader was killed.) The bulk of studies, to date, contradict this finding and detail the erosion of core al Qaeda and Tehreek-e-Taliban leaders. UAV strikes are designed to deplete or incapacitate enemy ranks and deter future attacks. However, the vengeance effect that is created on targeted groups proves to be more detrimental than a deterrent. In general, at least one study concluded that there was little or no [statistically significant] effect of drone strikes on Taliban violence in Afghanistan, but only on Taliban violence in Pakistan. 7 | www.icwa.in 32 ICWA Issue Brief Analysts commented that the drone strikes have not helped to win the war on terror and they are actually a major reason of why this victory has not yet occurred.33 Most of these counter terrorist operations have been carried out by the US; it created serious ramifications regarding violation of every conceivable international law as well as the sovereignty of Pakistan as well as Afghanistan. Hina Rabbani Khar stated, What the drones are trying to achieve, we may not disagree. If they re going for terrorists, we do not disagree. But we have to find ways which are lawful, which are legal. 34 Pakistan has maintained a steady double standard regarding bad and good terrorists. So, when the US drones targeted foreign al-Qaeda operatives and the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the opposition from the Government as well as the Pakistani Army was weak. However, when the US drones started targeting the Haqqani network and Pakistani Taliban commanders, such as Hafiz Gul Bahadur, the signatory of a peace deal with the military in North Waziristan, Pakistan government seriously admonished the US government against such attacks in all forums.35 Obama himself accepted the fact that drone attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan have not been foolproof and there had civilian casualties, which for him are heartbreaking tragedies , which would haunt him and those in his chain of command for as long as we live. 36 The use of UAVs for more than a decade has also developed the skills within terrorist groups of avoiding being seen by them. Starting from the use of body covers, which hide heat signatures,37 using Anti-Drone Technology, such as EW/ECM Data link Jammers, GPS/RF Jamming Technology for Micro-drones, using Russian made Sky Grabber Software for signal hacking, using reflective glass or Plexiglas on roof/car tops, hiding under trees, underneath dense concrete structures, affixing woven reed mats to vehicles, and using countersurveillance techniques, such as using mannequins, dolls, and staged equipment to trick drone operators, the primary focus is placed upon visual camouflage and evasion.38 Such evasion has been successful many a times as many human targets survived multiple attempts on their lives.39 8 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief Conclusion Though the UAV has been used as a major element in counter terrorism operations, its rate of success, its practicality and manner of use has been under significant scrutiny and apprehension. Still, there is little doubt that UAVs are becoming increasingly important and it will be difficult to keep the technology entirely under the aegis of the military and the government. With a glocalised world, the role of technologies would reach fast different corners of the society, which would enhance the scope of such technology being seriously misused if it falls into the wrong hands. Though such technology has not yet been used by extremist and terrorist groups, one should not be sluggish in having preventive measures in place.40 As a counter terrorist measure, it has been mostly used by the US and NATO forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and has not yet been adopted by the ANSF or the Pakistani or Indian Army. Though some local law enforcement agencies in India have started the use of UAV s in crowd dispersal and management, its usage in South Asia for counter terrorist activities still remains largely under-utilised or untapped. With the increasing number of extremist, anti-national and terrorist groups in the nations falling within the South Asian region as well as in its immediate neighbourhood, there is a need to innovate the use of UAVs rather than keeping its function well within the perimeters of functioning as chalked out by the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan *Dr. Dhrubajyoti Bhattacharjee is Research Fellow at the Indian Council of World Affairs, New Delhi. End Notes Jonathan Crook (2011), “The Growing Contribution Of Technology To Democracy And Conflict Resolution”, Briefing Paper, IDCR: Knowledge for Governing the World, April, p.2, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.471.921&rep=rep1&type=pdf 2 Qandeel Siddique (2013), “The United States’ Drone Program In Pakistan: An Analysis of the Efficacy and the Pakistani Government’s Complicity”, Centre for International and Strategic Analysis, April 8, Haslum, Norway, p. 4, http://strategiskanalyse.no/publikasjoner%202013/2013-04-08_SISA4_DroneProgram_QandeelS.pdf 3 Matt Delmont (2013), “Drone Encounters: Noor Behram, Omer Fast, and Visual Critiques of Drone Warfare”, American Quarterly, Volume 65, Number 1, March, pp. 193-202, p. 193 4 Gertler, J. (2012). “Homeland Security: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Border Surveillance. Congressional Research Service”. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA524297; Matthias Bieri and Marcel Dickow (2014), “Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems: Future Challenges”, CSS Analyses in Security Policy, No.164, November. 1 9 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief Ann Cavoukian (2012), “Privacy and Drones: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”, August, Information and Privacy Commissioner, Ontario, Canada. 6 Maria de Fatima Bento (2008), “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: An Overview”, Inside GNSS, January/February, http://www.insidegnss.com/auto/janfeb08-wp.pdf. 7 Steve Coll (2013), “Remote Control: Our Drone Delusion”, The New Yorker, May 6, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/06/remote-control?currentPage=all%3b 8 Micah Zenko (2013), “Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies,” Council on Foreign Relations Special Report No. 65, January; David Deptula (2013), “Drones Best Weapons We’ve Got for Accuracy, Control, Oversight; Critics Don’t Get It,” Breaking Defense, February 15, http://breakingdefense.com/2013/02/retired-gen-deputula-drones-best-weaponsweve-got-for-accurac/ 9 Jacqueline L. Hazelton (2013), “Drones: What Are They Good For?”, Parameters, 42(4)/43(1) Winter-Spring, p. 30 10 Shamsher Singh (2015), “Exclusive: Pak drone spotted spying on Indian territory along IB in Rajasthan”, India TV Online Edition, April 11, http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/pakistani-drone-spotted-spying-on-indian-territoryin-rajasthan-49625.html 11 S. Gopal (2015), “Drones: The Game Changers in Future Wars”, Indian Defence Review, vol 30, no.1, JanuaryMarch, http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/drones-the-game-changers-in-future-wars/0/ 12 “Using Unmanned Aircraft Systems within the Homeland: Security Game Changers?” (2012), Hearing before SubCommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management of H. Comm. on Homeland Security, 112 th Cong. 3(statement of Amie Stepanovich, Counsel. Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)), Washington DC. 13 “Civilian Use of Drones in the EU” (2015), House of Lords, 7th Report of Session 2014-15, European Union Committee, p. 7. 14 Margot E. Kaminski (2013), “Drone Federalism: Civilian Drones and the Things They Carry”, California Law Review Circuit, vol. 4, May, Berkeley Law Scholarship Repository, The Circuit. http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=clrcircuit 15 The Al-Qaida Papers – Drones (2011), Associated Press. http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_international/_pdfs/al-qaida-papers-drones.pdf. 16 Frank Bi (2015), “Drone Sales Soar Past $16 Million on eBay”, Forbes, January 28. http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankbi/2015/01/28/drone-sales-soar-past-16-million-on-ebay/ 17 S. Gopal (2015), “Drones: The Game Changers in Future Wars”, Indian Defence Review, vol 30, no.1, JanuaryMarch, http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/drones-the-game-changers-in-future-wars/0/ 18 Ajay Lele and Archana Mishra (2009), “Aerial Terrorism and the Threat from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”, Journal of Defence Studies, Vol 3. No 3. July, p. 62. 19 Sue Mahan and Pamala L. Griset, Terrorism in Perspective, (New Delhi: Sage Publication, 2008). 20 Michael Gips, "A Remote Threat", Security Management Online, October 2002 21 Michael Gips, "A Remote Threat", Security Management Online, October 2002 22 Dennis M. Gormley (2004), Testimony Before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Affairs Of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform, March 9, CNS Testimony, http://cns.miis.edu/testimony/testgorm.htm 23 Ajay Lele and Archana Mishra (2009), “Aerial Terrorism and the Threat from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles”, Journal of Defence Studies, Vol 3. No 3. July, p. 61. 24 Eugene Miasnikov, “Threat of Terrorism Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Technical Aspects”, Centre for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies at MIPT, Dolgo-prudny, June 2004, pp.26. 25 http://www.mtcr.info/ and http://www.wassenaar.org/. 26 Eugene Miasnikov, “Threat of Terrorism Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Technical Aspects”, Centre for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies at MIPT, Dolgo-prudny, June 2004, pp.16 27 Yatish Yadav (2012), “Heron Drone Proves a Dud in Tracking Maoists in Chhattisgarh”, India Today, New Delhi, January 3, http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/heron-uav-fails-to-track-maoists-inchattisgarh/1/166919.html. 28 Steve Coll (2014), “The Unblinking Stare: The Drone War in Pakistan”, The New Yorker, November 24, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/24/unblinking-stare: Abdul Rehman (2013), “Impact of Drone Attacks in Pakistan and the War on Terror: A Consideration of the Effects of Drone Attacks in Pakistan and whether They are 5 10 | www.icwa.in ICWA Issue Brief Helping or Not to Win the War on Terror!”, Thesis, Malmö University: Department of Global Political Studies, October, http://dspace.mah.se/bitstream/handle/2043/16281/droneattacks&waronterror.pdf?sequence=2 29 “Drone Attack in Pakistan” (2015), South Asia Terrorism Portal, April 5, http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/pakistan/database/Droneattack.htm. 30 David A. Jaeger and Zahra Siddique (2011), “Are Drone Strikes Effective in Afghanistan and Pakistan? On the Dynamics of Violence between the United States and the Taliban”, CUNY Graduate Center and the Institute for the Study of Labour, Discussion Paper No. 6262, December, Bonn. 31 Christopher Olver, “Are Drone Strikes Effective in Afghanistan and Pakistan? On the Dynamics of Violence between the United States and the Taliban.” Harvard Kennedy School, Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, February 12, 2013. 32 Ibid. 33 Abdul Rehman (2013), “Impact of Drone Attacks in Pakistan and the War on Terror: A Consideration of the Effects of Drone Attacks in Pakistan and whether They are Helping or Not to Win the War on Terror!”, Thesis, Malmö University: Department of Global Political Studies, October, http://dspace.mah.se/bitstream/handle/2043/16281/droneattacks&waronterror.pdf?sequence=2 34 “Pakistan backs drones’ aim not method: Minister”, The Express Tribune, 28 September 2012, http://tribune.com.pk/story/443740/pakistan-backs-drones-aim-not-method-minister/. 35 Peter Bergen, Katherine Tiedemann (2010) “The Year of the Drone: An Analysis of U.S. Drone Strikes in Pakistan, 2004-2010”, New America Foundation (NAF), February 24, http://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/the_year_of_the_drone; Drones: Myths and Reality in Pakistan (2013), International Crisis Group (ICG) Asia Report N°247, May 21, http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/asia/southasia/pakistan/247-drones-myths-and-reality-in-pakistan.pdf 36 Steve Coll (2014), “The Unblinking Stare: The Drone War in Pakistan”, The New Yorker, November 24, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/24/unblinking-stare 37 Rowan Scarborough (2015), “Terrorists adapting to avoid U.S. drones”, The Washington Times, January 4, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/4/al-qaeda-in-the-arabian-peninsula-adapts-to-avoid-/?page=all; 38 “How to Hide from Predator Drones UAV – Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Survival Guide” (2013), USCrow, March 24, http://uscrow.org/2013/03/24/how-to-hide-from-predator-drones-uav-unmanned-aerial-vehicles-survival-guide/ 39 “41 Men Targeted but 1,147 People Killed: US Drone Strikes – the Facts on the Ground” (2014), The Guardian, November 24, http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147 40 For details see Jack Nicas (2015), “Criminals, Terrorists Find Uses for Drones, Raising Concerns”, The Wall Street Journal, January 28, http://www.wsj.com/articles/criminals-terrorists-find-uses-for-drones-raising-concerns1422494268; Ben Farmer (2014), “Terrorist 'could use drones for chemical and biological attacks”, The Telegraph, October 22, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11177388/Terrorist-could-use-drones-forchemical-and-biological-attacks.html 11 | www.icwa.in