John O. Brennan, testifying at a confirmation hearing Thursday as President Obama’s nominee to head the Central Intelligence Agency during his second term, defended drone strikes against terrorist targets but insisted that it was better to detain terrorists than kill them.
Appearing before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Brennan also rebutted accusations that he did not follow through on his concerns about harsh interrogation techniques by taking his reservations to superiors in the CIA.
In response to questions from Sen. Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), the top Republican on the committee, Brennan disputed the suggestion that it was “better to kill [terrorists] with a drone” than for the CIA to detain them. “I never believe it’s better to kill a terrorist than to detain him,” Brennan said. He said he did not want the CIA to be in the detention business but that detaining and interrogating terrorists could produce valuable information to prevent further attacks.
As Brennan began testifying Thursday, he was repeatedly interrupted by antiwar protesters, who were escorted out by guards. One protester carried a sign that read, “Stop CIA murder.”
After several such disruptions, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who chairs the committee, ordered the hearing room cleared.
Brennan, 57, a 25-year veteran of the CIA who currently serves as Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, appeared before the panel after submitting written testimony in which he defended drone strikes and warned of continuing threats from al-Qaeda, cyberattacks and nuclear proliferation.
Brennan told senators that drone strikes against terrorist targets meet “rigorous standards” and that no new legislation is needed to govern them.
In opening the hearing, Feinstein said it was important to “ensure that drone strikes are carried out in a manner consistent with our values.”
She said she planned to ask about civilian casualties from drone strikes — one of strongest criticisms of the program by opponents. While Brennan once said he had no “confirmed” reports of civilian casualties, he later revised those remarks in the face of widespread reports on the ground, especially in Pakistan.
According to the New America Foundation, which tracks drone strikes, the number of civilian casualties has dropped fairly dramatically in Pakistan, with no civilian deaths reported yet this year and only five last year in 48 strikes, compared to between 56 and 64 in 73 strikes during 2011. Other trackers have placed the figures somewhat higher, and new criticism about civilian deaths has risen in Yemen, where the number of drone strikes is fast increasing.
In written responses to questions from the committee, Brennan said that drone strikes “are conducted in full compliance with the law” to prevent terrorist attacks on the United States and save American lives.
“We must, however, use these technologies carefully and responsibly” he wrote in answering the “prehearing questions,” which the committee released Wednesday. “Consequently, we apply rigorous standards and a rigorous process of review.” He added that “we are working to refine, clarify and strengthen this process and our standards.” But the government currently has the authority to conduct drone strikes “against al-Qaeda and associated forces” without “geographical limitation,” he said. “Consequently, I do not believe additional legislation along these lines is necessary.”
Brennan defends drone strike policies
This article
Brennan defends drone strike policies
can be opened in url
http://newssubstantiate.blogspot.com/2013/02/brennan-defends-drone-strike-policies.html
Brennan defends drone strike policies
