I recently wrote a blog about how a video game I had played made me consider the choices made by UAV* pilots however this reflected a problem I have with campaigns around UAV usage. Many
campaign groups which have attacked the usage of UAV have suggested that UAV make warfare like playing a video game.
Whilst I’ll argue till the cows come home that video games can create
compelling emotionally connecting experiences I will say that from what I know
about piloting a UAV, it is less like a video game than other forms of warfare.
Whilst working for the Methodist Church I had the opportunity
to take minutes whilst experts on the Morality of UAVs helped create a report
on the morality of UAV use. There were some very interesting debates around the
use of UAVs and I highly recommend reading the report.
Something that I found very interesting was some of the arguments on ways in
which UAVs could be more ethical than other forms of warfare. The arguments
against how UAVs are currently used I wholeheartedly agree with and think that
groups should be campaigning against extra judicial killing. My problem is with
the idea that UAVs are simply bad and that they resemble playing a game.
A massive portion of what UAV operators spend their time
doing is simply watching suspects. They establish what military jargon calls a
“pattern of life” but essentially means following a person constantly for days
on end to find out where they go and what they do with their lives. If a
decision is then made that the person should be killed the UAV operator
continues watching afterwards. In order to confirm the kill a UAV operator
watches as weeping relatives dig through the rubble to find bodies. The
psychological costs of being a UAV pilot are only just being recognised. Unlike
other military operations, UAV operators return to civilian life at the end of
the day. After spending the day watching someone in Pakistan going to the market,
they may go into a supermarket on the way home to pick up some milk.
In this way UAVs are completely unlike video games and for
that matter unlike high altitude bombers. Neither of these involve observing
the banalities of a person’s life. Violent video games spend seconds dealing
with the lives of people on the screens, high altitude bombers see the targets
house for less than that. UAV operators may be more distant physically from
their victims but they get to know them far better than anyone else does. To
simplify the job of UAV pilot to playing a video game undermines the emotional
and psychological scars that it can cause them.
If you read descriptions of life as a UAV pilot there are some superficial similarities with playing video games. Whilst both
involve operating a computer in a dark room there is a crucial difference, the
person playing the video games knows nothing that is going on is real. A UAV pilot
knows that the person who they see playing with their kids is real and they
know that when they have to kill them. Although (as far as I know) there has
not been a publicly released systematic study into the prevalence of PTSD
amongst UAV pilots there are several accounts out there. One study of 900 drone operators found high levels of stress in 46% of those surveyed.
Video games don’t bring this kind of
stress. UAV operators have an incredibly difficult job and it should not be
minimised and belittled by talk of PlayStation warfare.
*I use the term UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) rather than
the military preferred RPAS (Remotely Piloted Air System) because it’s better
known but doesn't have the same connotations as the colloquial Drones
No comments:
Post a Comment