Military Review English Edition September-October 2014 | Page 81

MACRO-ETHICS

idea of probe-sense-respond in order to discover
emerging practices. For argument’s sake, let us assume
that the current use of drones is an example of probing.
Should we amplify it?
To answer these questions, let us consider the views
of Lt. Col. Douglas A. Pryer, as presented in a paper in
Military Review in 2013. Pryer maintains that drones
tend to perpetuate war and endanger our nation.44 He
states that using drones to wage war by proxy may not
be unethical (morally prohibited), but it is unwise.45
According to Pryer, waging war in this way may be good
tactics, but it is bad strategy because it can destroy the
possibility of a lasting peace by creating undue fear and
trauma in enemy territory.46 At first glance, this may
appear to be a good outcome; we want our enemies to
fear us. Nevertheless, it may have unforeseen strategic
consequences.
For example, Pryer asserts that drones may create
more terrorists.47 He cites a 2012 Pew Research Center
publication saying that from 2009 to 2012, the number
of Pakistanis who considered the United States to be the
enemy rose sharply, to 74 percent.48 According to Pryer,
this period corresponded with increased drone strikes.49
He cites data showing a similar correlation in Yemen.50
Pryer concludes that fighting remotely may, on the
surface, appear to save lives.51 However, in reality, using
drones fuels terrorist attacks that cost more lives in the
end.52
If we consider our use of drones as an example of
probing to find effective tactics that are ethically permissible, or at least ethically dubious, then we can conclude
this probing is producing an undesirable strategic outcome. Should we abandon it?
Additionally, as noted, the use of drones delegitimizes
our narrative and undermines our counterinsurgency
goals by producing international and domestic outrage
due to the collateral damage drones cause in terms of
dead civilians. Moreover, with regard to propaganda
generated by our enemies’ global sympathizers, the use of
drones in general is used to depict Americans as cowards
who kill from afar, which feeds the general anti-American and anti-Western narrative.
Consequently, a morally permissible action we are
using at the tactical level is producing results that run
counter to our overall strategic goals and to a morally
acceptable outcome—because it is not shortening the
conflict.
MILITARY REVIEW  September-October 2014

Another consequence is that the use of drones is
atrophying our strategic and moral judgment. Who
among our leaders is thinking strategically and therefore
macro-ethically? For example, what is the long-term
strategic goal behind the long-distance killing of what
are currently regarded as legitimate targets? Does this
tactical decision lead to that goal? Or, are we becoming
complacent, using an analysis suited for making decisions
in an obvious domain but not for a complex domain?
In using drones, are we, therefore, in danger of falling
over the cliff into moral as well as operational chaos with
regard to our fight against terrorists in areas where we
are using drones?

Conclusion
Complexity is at the heart of many, if not most, strategic-level decisions. Like the strategic corporal example,
seemingly small tactical actions can have far-reaching
strategic implications. Conversely, through technology,
generals and presidents can make tactical decisions at
the risk of ignoring the likely strategic outcome.
This highlights that our profession of arms requires
leaders at all levels to understand and visualize their operational environments—the higher the level, the larger
the environment. Hence, the need for macro-ethics. As
our environments grow ever larger and more complex,
leaders need to understand, visualize, and more closely
consider the strategic outcomes of their tactical decisions
using macro-ethics as a guide.
Leaders need to acknowledge that certain otherwise morally permissible acts on the tactical level could
have grave moral consequences on the strategic level.
Conversely, morally dubious acts on the tactical level
may produce morally desirable consequences on the
strategic level. A useful tool to navigate this complex
situation is the Cynefin Framework which helps frame
complex macro-ethical considerations. By using ethical
probes,