The Academic Perspective: Growing Incidences and Widespread Accusations
Understanding the phenomenon of state-sponsored assassinations has gained importance, particularly due to recent global accusations among nations. For instance, Canada and the United States recently accused India of engaging in such actions, and the U.S. released photos suggesting an Iranian plot against former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. These cases surface in news cycles regularly, yet the commentary often portrays state-sponsored assassinations as rare, primarily associated with rogue or non-democratic states. This perception, however, fails to account for the broader historical reality. Since the Cold War, both democratic and authoritarian states, Western and non-Western alike, have engaged in such practices, citing various justifications rooted in historical, political, and legal precedents. This misconception highlights the need to analyze the underlying motives and methods beyond superficial assumptions.
The Practical Perspective: Limited Consequences and Persistent Disinformation
On a practical level, the global response to state-sponsored assassinations is frequently characterized by disbelief and misinformation. Typically, nations prioritize diplomatic, strategic, political, or financial interests over penalizing perpetrators of assassinations. Human rights concerns often become secondary considerations, surfacing primarily when cases garner extensive public scrutiny or display egregious recklessness. For example, while Russia has conducted multiple assassinations in the UK, significant sanctions only emerged following the brazen poisoning of Sergei Skripal, though even these were not as severe as the penalties imposed after the Ukraine conflict began. Similarly, despite Rwanda's involvement in extraterritorial assassinations, Western nations, particularly the United States, France, and Britain, maintain favorable relations with Rwanda for strategic reasons, often avoiding confrontations on human rights abuses. Saudi Arabia, too, faced limited repercussions after the high-profile murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Such cases reveal the hesitancy of many governments to address or condemn these actions fully.
The Prevalence of Assassinations and the Process of Inter-State Learning
Widespread Practice Among Nations
State-sponsored assassinations are, indeed, more common than often assumed. There exists a learning process among states, formal and informal, whereby nations observe and adopt the assassination strategies and operational structures of others. Historically, countries with a reputation for covert operations and counterinsurgency have shared their expertise formally with other states. For example, French officials who served in Algeria trained counterparts in Latin America. Similarly, the United States trained Latin American forces during the 1960s to 1980s through the well-known 'School of the Americas,' effectively transferring knowledge on covert practices.
Adoption of Practices Through Informal Channels
Beyond formal training, intelligence agencies worldwide informally study the operational tactics of states like Russia, the U.S., and Israel, adopting similar methods and institutional structures. In some cases, states justify their actions by aligning them with those of Western countries. For example, leaders may argue that if the United States or Israel conducts assassinations in the name of counterterrorism, other nations facing similar strategic situations are justified in doing the same. This emulation sometimes extends to the use of similar terminology; for instance, various states now justify such killings by labeling them as counter-terrorist actions, mirroring the rhetoric used by the U.S. and Israel for their targeted killings.
Conclusion: The Broader Implications of State-Sponsored Assassinations
Understanding state-sponsored assassinations in both historical and contemporary contexts reveals a complex web of political calculations, strategic alignments, and evolving practices. Far from being an aberration associated with a few states, these practices have woven themselves into the geopolitical fabric, adopted and justified by a broad spectrum of nations. This reality urges a reevaluation of state accountability and international norms, highlighting the importance of informed discourse and policy responses to address the ethical and legal ramifications of state-sponsored assassinations.
No comments:
Post a Comment