ICRC’s president also provided an answer to the question about who is accountable for the civilians’ deaths using drone strike. He said, “drone operators and their chain of command are accountable for what happens.” Some people might disagree with Maurer at this point. The operators might or might not make decisions on their own whether to strike or not. What if the order for a drone strike comes from the President so the operator had no choice but to press the button to fire a missile? What if the operator did not want to fire because he or she disagreed about the identity of a target? It is difficult to answer and also difficult to held the operator accountable if what he or she did was somehow forced. Maurer do not see a difference between …show more content…
CCCW is about mines, booby-traps and other devices, incendiary weapons, binding laser weapons and explosive remnants of war. Should drones or other autonomous weapons be a part of this convention, therefore be prohibited? The answer to this questions is no. The only difference between the drones and other legal weapons is that drones are unmanned and operated using satellites. The same missiles can be legally used, for example by ships or manned aircraft. The armed drones are not as excessively injurious as other types of chemical or biological weapons, as was previously mentioned, even though drones may be held indiscriminate. In practice the missiles are very precise and the problem with them lies more in the wrong identification of alleged members of terrorist groups, not with how the people are killed or injured. Drones certainly should not be banned completely but be much more regulated and separately addressed in the legislation because drones are great tool to use during any war, especially international war from the attackers’ point of view. Drones are more cost effective too due to the fact that it would be difficult to shot the machine and even if it is destroyed, there is no death of pilot or anyone else because they are not present inside the