Can America Assassinate its Citizens Justifiably - Research Paper Example

?Can America assassinate its citizens justifiably? Politicians and professionals who engaged in international politics widely accept the question CanAmerica assassinate its citizens justifiably? And it became a controversial one in their studies and observations in recent years. Government actions against terrorists in the United States often pave the way for both positive and negative debates among the public as well media. Intelligence agencies like FBI, CIA and the National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) have generated an anti-terrorist perspective in their programs assassinating terrorists. The event of the death of Anwar Al-Awlaki through predator drone missile strike raises some relevant questions about the violation of human rights, absence of advance warning and the violation of international law. Preventive measures taken by the government and other intelligence agencies often contributes confusion and fear among the people or America face severe crisis in justifying its actions against terrorist groups. Thesis Statement: The study mainly investigates can America assassinate its citizens justifiably without advanced warning and due process? The doctrine of Radical Islamists discloses that they always require the status of separatist. AL Qaeda and its related extremists groups search a puritanical and strictly fundamentalist Islam. They believe that the modern especially, Western culture and ideologies become act as a prominent threat of their religious faith. In this juncture, one cannot avoid the chance of preventing the threat of global terrorism. Government actions against terrorist groups need a well organized plan it needs an effective criterion in determining its citizens. Through the process of ensuring advanced warning or due process against suspected persons, government can assassinate its citizens justifiably. The counter terrorist strategies and other programs of U.S War on Terror now keep a form of potentially justifiable and self –defensive (Lansford et al 57). As the President remarks, America need to prevent Islam extremists and their mindless killing of “unbelievers” in the name of holy war. It is obvious that battle against global terrorism is an essential one and as a part of their battle against Islamic terrorism, America and its aliens made remarkable progress in preventing the attacks of religious extremism. But the assassination of Al-Awalaki has explored the administrative failure of the Obama government which loosening standards for extra judicial killings could go down in to a horrifying use of administrative power. William Fisher examines that “Most of the major human rights groups condemned the killing as an affront to the U.S. Justice system and the values underlying it” (Fisher). The word “terrorist” is applied to him and has been put on U.S assassination mark without due process. Relevant criticisms had risen against Obama administration and its action against a U.S citizen. Eminent personalities including the Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, have recommended the beleaguered killing of an American could be an impeachable administrative failure for President Obama (Gneiting). His assassination simply highlights the fact that the administration secret standards for putting people, including American citizens, on a hit list. Therefore, If the Government just declare anyone, anywhere a hazard to the national security and assassinate him without due process, the rights of all citizens are in threat. Even though an American citizen, Obama administration had taken the rare way of authorizing the targeted killing of Awlaki (The New York Times). U.S military officials had kept an unclear identifying record about Awlaki’s death and it denotes the injustice. Assassinating a citizen without advanced warning or due process explores the dangerous use of government power. It is part of common knowledge is that the Fifth Amendment ensures citizen’s rights to live without fear. As a citizen who lived in the United States, Al-Awalaki has the right to enjoy liberty that the constitution provided. John R. Vile explains that Fifth Amendment gives “a guarantee against deprivation “life, liberty or property without due process of law” (Vile 337). As a result, one can simply comprehend the fact that government actions against citizens without advanced warning or due process marks the violation of human rights. For that reason violation of citizen rights reveals the government’s effort to crossing the barriers of republic which lead the nation in to dictatorship and tyranny. Exponents of “War on Terror” argue that in wartime, government does not undertake every enemy soldier in a court of law previous to its attempt to kill them. In case of Awalaki, one cannot find the signs of congressional resolution. Ivan Eland rightly comments that “War on terror” advocates will then argue that that is only a technicality, because Congress did pass a resolution authorizing military action against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks” (Consortiumnews). Thus, it is essential that government should keep a record of identifying murderers and the government has the responsibility to ensure human rights for its citizens. Denial of advanced warning or due process towards a person underlines the violation of International Law. “Further fuelling the controversy includes how the killing of Awlaki was justified not only under US laws, but also under international laws of war” (The Layalina Review). Obama administration had failed to submit an inauthentic record on identifying murderers. Arguments made by intelligence officers against Awlaki became irrelevant and it reveals the failure of the government in preparing the ‘hit list’. Raymond A. Schroth observes that “ the claim by the American press that Awlaki was head of the Al Qaeda in Arabia (AQAP) is untrue and that his killing will not reduce the terrorist attacks coming out of Yemen, and that he played no operational role in AQAP” (Schroth). These kinds of preventive measures made by government never enhance its programs to prevent radical Islamism and other terrorist activities. Instead of preventing terrorism, they pave the way for the establishment of new religious extremists. Conclusion In the final analysis, it is evident that America and its intelligence agencies have not marked a complete success in assassinating its citizens justifiably. Without advanced warning and due process, America cannot assassinate its citizen justifiably. Government actions against Radical Islamism and other religious extremists underline its necessity and relevance. In case of Awlaki, U.S government failed to ensure advanced warning of due process. Denial of advanced warning or due process is a serious offence and one can observe this as a violation of human rights. Government action against Awlaki paves the way for debates about the violation of human rights as well International Law. Works cited Consortiumnews. The Slippery Slope of Assassinations. Consortiumnews. Com. Oct 4. 2011. Web. Dec 3. 2011. http://consortiumnews.com/2011/10/04/the-slippery-slope-of-assassinations/ Fisher, William. Awlaki’s Dead, But Was His Assassination Legal? The Public Record. Oct 2. 2011. Web. Dec 3. 2011. 2011 http://pubrecord.org/world/9759/awlakis-dead-assassination-legal/ Gneiting, Kelly. Ron Paul: Obama should be impeached for Al-Qaeda killing. Independent American Party – Official. Dec 3. 2011 Web. Dec 3. 2011. http://www.independentamericanparty.org/2011/12/ron-paul-obama-should-be-impeached-for-al-qaeda-killing/ Lansford, Tom., Watson, Robert P., & Covarrubias, Jack. America's war on terror.2nd Illustrated edn. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2009. Print. Schroth, Raymond A. Who Will Be Next? America Press Inc. Oct 3. 2011. Web. Dec 3. 2011. http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?entry_id=4627 The New York Times. Anwar al-Awlaki. The New York Times Company. Oct. 10. 2011. Web. Dec 3. 2011. http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/a/anwar_al_awlaki/index.html The Layalina Review. Oct 20. 2011. Death of al-Awlaki Stirs Legal Controversy. Layalina Productions, Inc. 2011. http://www.layalina.tv/Publications/Review/PR_VII.21/article2.html Vile, John R. Essential Supreme Court decisions: summaries of leading cases in U.S. constitutional law. 15th edn. Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. Print. Read More