On Killing Remotely

March 22, 2021
Military veterans Phelps and Grossman (On Killing) deliver an in-depth yet uneven exploration of the psychological toll of drone warfare on the crewmembers of remotely piloted aircraft, or RPA. Drawing on surveys and interviews with RPA personnel, the authors argue that while drones seem to be a much cheaper and more convenient option for the military, the cost “is paid by the employee’s mental health as opposed to the employer’s dollar.” They describe how RPA crewmembers, many of whom live in the U.S. and work long hours in isolated shifts, become “emotionally invested” in their missions, despite their physical distance from the scene of combat, and suffer from PTSD and sleep deprivation. The authors also discuss how RPA crewmembers deal with the collective responsibility of killing, and note that one squadron refused to kill Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Qaeda imam with American citizenship, because they considered the order illegal. (Al-Awlaki was later killed in a CIA-directed drone strike.) Alternating between dry, acronym-heavy jargon and jocular phrasing (“this isn’t your granddaddy’s war”), Phelps and Grossman sidestep accusations that drone strikes are “indiscriminate, illegal, and immoral killings,” but convincingly argue that RPA crews deserve the respect and consideration afforded to frontline soldiers. This well-intentioned study misfires.