Questioning Precision: Discourse Ethics and the Recognition of Noncombatants in Drone Warfare

Abstract

The study of discourse assists scholars in understanding and explaining the ways in which words, utterances, and dialogue impact occurrences within international relations. Jürgen Habermas' discourse ethics situates communicative processes within a context of equitable discourse that, upon reaching consensus between parties, can arrive at just conclusions. Critics believe that power constructs within societies, however, abridge the occurrence of equitable communication, representative of minority and marginalized populations. Thus, on a theoretical level, this thesis seeks to account for the short-comings of Habermasian discourse ethics by placing it into conversation with Axel Honneth's theory of recognition and Judith Butler's theory of grievable life. This theoretical conglomeration allows for the discourses of minority groups to be accounted for within the public sphere of discourse, especially in regard to issues of contemporary military engagement and security. Technological advancements in warfare have produced weapons that are designed to protect soldiers through speed, precision, and the ultimate removal of humans from the battlefield. This focus on casualty aversion has redistributed the risk from soldiers to noncombatants through impersonal delivery systems like Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), prioritizing the lives of soldiers over the lives of noncombatants. Understanding the importance of discourse ethics, this dominant discourse of casualty aversion should be placed into deliberate conversation with subversive discourses that would allow for the voices of noncombatants who have been victimized by drone warfare to be included within the public sphere. Thus, this thesis questions the prevalent utilization of precision-based weaponry that fails to recognize the voices and lives of noncombatants in warfare.