Morality, Efficacy, and Targeted Assassination as a Policy Tool

• Published date: 01 February 2017
• Date: 01 February 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12276

POLICY ESSAY

TARGETED KILLINGS IN THE WAR

ON TERROR

Morality, Efficacy, and Targeted

Assassination as a Policy Tool

Joseph K. Young

American University

There should be no debate that Jennifer Carson’s article (2017, this issue) has

deep policy significance. The decision to engage in warfare is maybe the most

consequential that a U.S. president makes. Regardless of whether we as scholars

believe that a “war on terror” is a good or a bad policy decision or even a good or a bad name

to use for the broader effort is inconsequential. Like all wars, the essence is elimination of

an enemy and eventual desistance of hostilities. The war on terror has taken many forms,

but one of the most controversial is the policy of targeted assassinations. As Carson notes,

knowing whether these actions lead to deterring future terrorist attacks or backlash that

produces more attacks is critical to knowing whether we should continue or eliminate the

policy.

Framing the Issue

Table 1 offers a breakdown of how to think about this policy from an efficacy and a moral

standpoint. This, I hope, will simply make an untested assumption explicit. That is, there

are two dimensions over which we could make the decision to use targeted killings as a

society. First, we could decide to use targeted killings based on moral reasoning. Without

taking a stand on efficacy necessarily, PresidentObama in remarks to the National Defense

University suggested that these killings would be used in a utilitarian way (minimizing costs

while maximizing benefits):

America does not take strikes to punish individuals; we act against terrorists

who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people, and when

there are no other governments capable of effectively addressing the threat. And

before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be

Direct correspondence to Joseph K. Young, Dept. of Justice, Law, and Criminology, American University, 4400

Massachusetts Avenue, Washington, DC, 20016 (e-mail: jyoung@american.edu).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12276 C2017 American Society of Criminology 225

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 16 rIssue 1