Targeted Killings: A Western World Method for Asymmetric Warfare

Operations Center

Executive Summary

This article examines the evolution and impact of targeted killings in asymmetric warfare, focusing on Israel's extensive use of the tactic and the rise of armed drone strikes. Key points include:

• Israel pioneered targeted killings as a counterterrorism tool, conducting hundreds of operations since the 1950s with mixed tactical successes and strategic consequences.

• Targeted killings appear most effective when used selectively as part of a broader counterterrorism strategy that includes diplomatic, economic and social measures.

• Technological advancements, particularly in drone and precision-guided munitions, have revolutionized targeted killing capabilities. Recent developments include drones with 40+ hour endurance and advanced sensors for improved target identification.

• Nearly 100 countries now possess military drone technology, raising concerns about proliferation and lowering thresholds for use of force.

• The United States has conducted over 14,000 drone strikes since 9/11, primarily in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya.

• Research indicates targeted killings can have short-term disruptive effects on terrorist groups, reducing attacks for 1-4 weeks in targeted areas, but may not reduce overall attacks or recruitment long-term.

• Operations have driven significant capability building and technological innovation within military and intelligence agencies.

• Future trends point to continued technological advancements alongside growing challenges related to regulation and potential misuse by both state and non-state actors.

 1.      Effectiveness and Strategic Considerations

Israel's use of targeted killings dates back to the 1950s, but it was during the Second Intifada (2000-2005) that this strategy came to the forefront of its counterterrorism efforts. The policy aims to eliminate specific terrorist leaders and operatives, disrupting planned attacks and deterring future violence.

From 2000 to 2005, Israel conducted hundreds of targeted killing operations, resulting in the deaths of approximately 300 suspected terrorists. However, these operations also led to civilian casualties, with estimates ranging from 129 (according to Israeli sources) to 681 (according to independent researchers).

The effectiveness of targeted killings remains a subject of intense debate. Tactically, Israel has successfully eliminated numerous high-value targets, disrupting terrorist operations and degrading organizational capabilities. The killing of Hamas leaders Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi in 2004, for example, significantly impacted the group's leadership structure.

However, the strategic value of these operations is less clear. Critics argue that targeted killings may fuel resentment and aid terrorist recruitment, potentially undermining long-term counterterrorism goals.

As terrorism emerged as a primary security concern, traditional military tactics proved inadequate against non-state actors operating from civilian areas. Targeted killings offered a way to strike at terrorist leadership without resorting to large-scale military operations that could result in significant civilian casualties.

Strategic considerations driving the adoption of targeted killings include:

1. Preemptive action against imminent threats

2. Deterrence through demonstration of reach and capability

3. Disruption of terrorist command structures

4. Rapid response to time-sensitive intelligence

The decision-making process for targeted killings involves a complex interplay of intelligence, military, and political leadership.

2.      Attack Drones

The evolution of drone technology has revolutionized targeted killing operations. From early Predator drones to advanced systems like the Reaper, unmanned aerial vehicles have become increasingly sophisticated, with improvements in endurance, payload capacity, and sensor capabilities.

Advancements in surveillance and intelligence gathering have been particularly crucial. High-resolution cameras, multi-spectral sensors, and real-time data transmission allow for unprecedented situational awareness. The integration of artificial intelligence for pattern recognition and target identification has further enhanced operational capabilities.

Precision-guided munitions have also seen significant developments. Smaller, more accurate missiles like the Hellfire variants have reduced collateral damage through improved targeting systems. This has allowed for more precise strikes, even in densely populated urban areas.

Operational tactics have evolved from isolated strikes to integrated campaigns. The controversial practice of "signature strikes," based on behavioral patterns rather than positive identification, emerged as a result of improved surveillance capabilities.

3.      Attack Drone Proliferation

The proliferation of drone technology has led to a new era in warfare, with nearly 100 countries now possessing military drone capabilities. Major players like the United States, Israel, China, Russia, Iran, and Turkey have developed advanced armed drone programs, while many other nations are rapidly catching up.

This proliferation extends beyond state actors. Non-state groups, including terrorist organizations, have increasingly gained access to commercial drone technology. ISIS, for example, has used modified commercial drones for both surveillance and makeshift bombing attacks. Hezbollah has also demonstrated drone capabilities, presenting new challenges for counterterrorism efforts.

International efforts to control drone proliferation have had limited success. The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) places some restrictions on the export of drone technology, but its effectiveness is limited by the dual-use nature of many drone components.

The widespread adoption of drone technology raises concerns about lowering the threshold for the use of force in international conflicts. As more actors gain access to these capabilities, the risk of drone-enabled conflicts and terrorist attacks increases. This has sparked an arms race in counter-drone technologies, as nations and organizations seek to protect themselves from this emerging threat.

4.      Impact on Terrorist Organizations and Their Operational Capabilities

Targeted killings have had significant, though complex, impacts on terrorist organizations and their ability to operate effectively. Research on the effects of these operations reveals both tactical successes and strategic challenges.

a)      Tactical Disruption and Organizational Degradation: Studies indicate that targeted killings, particularly those conducted by drones, can have immediate local effects on terrorist activities. In Pakistan, for instance, drone strikes have been shown to reduce the number of terrorist attacks and fatalities for periods of one to four weeks in areas where strikes occur. This reflects both the direct loss of valuable operatives and changes in terrorist behavior to avoid strikes, which can render their operations less efficient.

b)      The campaign against al-Qaeda core (AQC) in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) provides a notable example. Qualitative evidence, especially from al-Qaeda correspondence, suggests that strikes significantly weakened top AQC leadership. This degradation, combined with other counterterrorism measures, likely contributed to reducing the risk of al-Qaeda attacks against Western targets.

c)      Resilience and Adaptation: However, the long-term strategic impact on terrorist organizations is less clear-cut. Research indicates that the U.S. targeted strike campaign has not caused the overall decline of al-Qaeda or reduced the number of its attacks worldwide. This resilience reflects al-Qaeda's network structure, where local affiliates can operate with considerable autonomy within broad leadership guidelines.

d)      Studies on other campaigns suggest that targeting leadership is less effective against groups that are not organized hierarchically or dependent on a charismatic leader. Moreover, as terrorist groups mature, many develop quasi-bureaucratic features that make them more resilient to leadership targeting.

e)      Operational Changes: Targeted killings have forced terrorist organizations to adapt their operational methods. Groups have become more security-conscious, limiting communications, changing movement patterns, and dispersing leadership. While these changes can hinder terrorist effectiveness, they also make intelligence gathering more challenging for counterterrorism forces. In some cases, the elimination of experienced leaders has led to the rise of younger, potentially more radical elements within terrorist groups. This shift can result in less strategic thinking and potentially more indiscriminate violence, as seen in some al-Qaeda affiliates following leadership losses.

f)        Recruitment and Public Opinion: Contrary to some expectations, rigorous research does not support the claim that opposition to drone strikes translates into greater support for terrorist groups or increases in terrorist recruitment in affected areas. Local populations often harbor resentment towards both the strikes and the terrorist groups operating in their midst. However, opposition to strikes can impair counterterrorism effectiveness by reducing local willingness to provide intelligence and undermining the perceived legitimacy of partner governments.

g)       Regional Variations: The impact of targeted killings can vary significantly based on regional context. While strikes in Pakistan's FATA region showed some tactical success against AQC, similar campaigns in Yemen and Somalia have had more mixed results. This variation underscores the importance of understanding local dynamics and the specific organizational structures of targeted groups.

5.      Geopolitical Ramifications and Shifts in Regional Dynamics

The practice of targeted killings, particularly through drone strikes, has had significant geopolitical implications and has altered regional dynamics in several key areas of conflict.

• Sovereignty and International Relations: The use of targeted killings, especially in countries not officially at war with the operating state, has raised serious questions about national sovereignty. U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia have strained diplomatic relations with these countries and their neighbors. For instance, Pakistan's government has often publicly condemned U.S. drone strikes while privately acquiescing to them, creating a complex and sometimes tense bilateral relationship.

• In the Middle East, Israel's targeted killing operations have contributed to ongoing tensions with its neighbors and the broader Arab world. The assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists, attributed to Israel, has escalated tensions between Israel and Iran, potentially influencing the regional balance of power and nuclear proliferation issues.

• Changing Nature of Warfare: Targeted killings, especially those conducted by drones, have redefined the boundaries of modern warfare. The ability to conduct lethal operations without putting personnel at risk has lowered the political threshold for military action in some cases.

• Impact on Counter-terrorism Cooperation: Targeted killings have both enhanced and complicated counter-terrorism cooperation between nations. On one hand, shared intelligence and operational capabilities have strengthened alliances in the fight against transnational terrorism. The U.S.-Israel relationship, for example, has been reinforced through technological and intelligence cooperation related to targeted killing operations.

• On the other hand, controversial operations have sometimes hindered cooperation. Public backlash against civilian casualties from drone strikes has forced some governments to limit their cooperation with the United States, potentially reducing intelligence sharing and operational effectiveness.

• Regional Power Dynamics: Targeted killing capabilities have altered regional power dynamics, particularly in the Middle East and South Asia. States with advanced drone and intelligence capabilities have gained strategic advantages over their regional rivals. This has led to efforts by other regional powers to develop similar capabilities, potentially triggering arms races and increasing regional instability.

• In the case of non-state actors, the targeted killing of key leaders has sometimes led to power vacuums and shifts in the internal dynamics of terrorist organizations. These changes can have unpredictable effects on regional stability and conflict dynamics.

6.      Future Trends and Potential Developments in Targeted Killing Strategies

As technology advances and geopolitical landscapes shift, the future of targeted killing operations is likely to evolve in several key areas:

a)      Advancements in Drone Technology: The next generation of drones is expected to be more sophisticated, with improvements in stealth capabilities, endurance, and autonomy. Future drones may incorporate advanced AI, allowing for better decision-making in complex environments.

b)      Miniaturization is another trend, with the development of "micro-drones" that can be deployed for reconnaissance in confined or hard-to-reach areas. These smaller drones could potentially be used for more discreet targeted killing operations, further blurring the lines between espionage and military action.

c)      Integration with Other Systems: Future targeted killing operations are likely to involve greater integration of drones with other military and intelligence systems. This could include real-time coordination with satellite systems, ground forces, and naval units, creating a more comprehensive and efficient combat network. Such integration could enhance situational awareness and operational effectiveness but may also increase the complexity of decision-making processes.

d)      Counter-Drone Technologies: As drone use in targeted killings becomes more prevalent, we can expect significant advancements in counter-drone technologies. These may include improved electronic warfare capabilities to jam drone communications, directed energy weapons to disable drones, and AI-driven systems to detect and intercept hostile drones. The development of these technologies could lead to a technological arms race between drone operators and defenders.

e)      Shifts in Strategic Focus: As the nature of global threats evolves, there may be a shift in the strategic focus of targeted killing operations. While counterterrorism has been the primary driver of such operations in recent decades, future targeted killings might increasingly be directed at other types of threats, such as cyber terrorists, transnational criminal organizations, or state-sponsored covert operatives.

7.      Impact on Israeli Security Forces and Intelligence Agencies

a)      Capability Building: Israel's extensive use of targeted killing operations has led to significant capability building within its security forces and intelligence agencies. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Mossad, and Shin Bet have developed specialized units and expertise focused on intelligence gathering, target identification, and precision strike capabilities. This has resulted in the creation of elite units such as Sayeret Matkal and the Mossad's Kidon unit, which are specifically trained for high-risk, covert operations including targeted killings.

b)      Technological Advancements: To support targeted killing operations, Israel has invested heavily in developing cutting-edge technologies. This includes advanced drone systems like the Heron TP, which can stay airborne for over 30 hours and carry significant payloads. Sophisticated surveillance equipment, such as the EL/M-2055 SAR/GMTI reconnaissance system, has enhanced Israel's ability to track and monitor potential targets. State-of-the-art command and control centers, like the one operated by Unit 8200, Israel's signals intelligence corps, have significantly improved real-time data processing and decision-making capabilities.

c)      Israel has become a global leader in military technology, with many of these innovations driven by the demands of targeted killing operations. The Iron Dome missile defense system, while not directly related to targeted killings, demonstrates Israel's technological prowess in developing precise, responsive defense systems.

d)      Operational Changes and Adaptations: The focus on targeted killings has led to significant changes in operational doctrine and tactics. Israeli forces have adapted to operate in complex urban environments, developing new methods for minimizing collateral damage. This includes the use of "roof knocking" tactics, where non-explosive devices are dropped on a target to warn civilians before an actual strike.

e)      Israeli forces have also improved their ability to rapidly process and act on real-time intelligence. The "sensor-to-shooter" cycle has been significantly compressed, allowing for quicker response times when high-value targets are identified.

f)        Intelligence Gathering and Analysis Improvements: The demands of targeted killing operations have driven major improvements in Israel's intelligence capabilities. This includes enhanced SIGINT (signals intelligence) and HUMINT (human intelligence) gathering methods. Unit 8200, for instance, has developed sophisticated cyber capabilities to intercept and analyze electronic communications.

g)       Israel has also developed advanced data analysis tools to process large volumes of information quickly and accurately. Machine learning and artificial intelligence are increasingly being used to sift through vast amounts of data to identify patterns and potential threats.

8.      Review of Notable Targeted Killing Operations

Key Israeli Operations (2000-2024):

1. Assassination of Salah Shehade (2002): On July 22, 2002, the IDF dropped a one-ton bomb on a residential building in Gaza City, killing Hamas military commander Salah Shehade. The operation was controversial due to the high number of civilian casualties (14 civilians, including 9 children).

2. Killing of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (2004): On March 22, 2004, Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was killed by an Israeli helicopter gunship strike as he left a mosque in Gaza City. This high-profile operation marked a significant escalation in Israel's targeted killing campaign.

3. Elimination of Imad Mughniyeh (2008): On February 12, 2008, Hezbollah's international operations chief Imad Mughniyeh was killed by a car bomb in Damascus, Syria. While Israel never officially claimed responsibility, it is widely believed to have been behind the operation.

4. Operation against Iranian Nuclear Program (2010-2012): A series of targeted killings against Iranian nuclear scientists, including Masoud Alimohammadi, Majid Shahriari, and Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, were attributed to Israel. These operations aimed to slow down Iran's nuclear program.

5. Killing of Ahmed Jabari (2012): On November 14, 2012, Ahmed Jabari, the second-in-command of Hamas's military wing, was killed in a precision airstrike on his car in Gaza City. This operation marked the beginning of Operation Pillar of Defense.

6. Assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (2020): On November 27, 2020, Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was killed in a sophisticated operation near Tehran. While Israel did not officially claim responsibility, it was widely attributed to Mossad.

7. Elimination of Fuad Shukr (2024): On July 30, 2024, the IDF eliminated Fuad Shukr, Hezbollah's most senior military commander and the head of the organization's strategic array, in a strike on Beirut. This operation was in response to a Hezbollah rocket attack on the Druze village of Majdal Shams that killed 12 children and teenagers.

8. Killing of Ismail Haniyeh (2024): On July 31, 2024, Ismail Haniyeh, head of Hamas' political bureau, was killed in an attack on the building where he was stayingin Tehran. While Israel did not claim responsibility, it was widely attributed to them. Haniyeh was in Iran for the swearing-in of the new Iranian president.

High-profile U.S. Targeted Killings:

1. Anwar al-Awlaki (2011): On September 30, 2011, U.S. citizen and al-Qaeda propagandist Anwar al-Awlaki was killed by a drone strike in Yemen.

2. Osama bin Laden (2011): On May 2, 2011, al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was killed in a U.S. special forces raid on his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

3. Qasem Soleimani (2020): On January 3, 2020, Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani was killed by a U.S. drone strike at Baghdad International Airport, significantly escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran.

Operational Successes and Failures:

Many of these operations successfully eliminated high-value targets and disrupted terrorist activities. The killing of Ahmed Jabari, for instance, significantly degraded Hamas's military capabilities in the short term. The elimination of Fuad Shukr was seen as a major blow to Hezbollah's military leadership and strategic planning capabilities.

However, operations like the Salah Shehade assassination, which resulted in high civilian casualties, faced international condemnation and may have undermined Israel's strategic objectives. The killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran was particularly controversial, as it occurred on Iranian soil and led to increased regional tensions and threats of retaliation from various actors in the "resistance axis."

The long-term impact of these operations remains debated. While they have disrupted terrorist networks and eliminated key leaders, they have also sometimes led to escalations in violence and potentially increased support for extremist groups among affected populations. For example, the killing of Haniyeh led to calls for revenge from Hamas and other Palestinian factions, as well as threats of retaliation from Iran and its allies.

These operations also demonstrate the evolving nature of targeted killings, from air strikes and car bombs to more sophisticated methods, such as the use of explosive devices planted in advance (as alleged in Haniyeh's case). They also highlight the increasing willingness of states to conduct such operations on foreign soil, even at the risk of international condemnation and potential escalation of conflicts.

The effectiveness of these operations in achieving long-term strategic goals remains a subject of intense debate among policymakers, military strategists, and international relations experts. While they may provide short-term tactical advantages, their impact on overall conflict dynamics and regional stability is complex and often unpredictable.

9.      Comparison with Other Counterterrorism Strategies

Relative Effectiveness of Targeted Killings: Studies on the effectiveness of targeted killings compared to other counterterrorism strategies have yielded mixed results. Research by political scientists like Jenna Jordan suggests that leadership decapitation (i.e., targeted killings of leaders) is often ineffective against religiously motivated terrorist groups and may even be counterproductive in some cases.

However, other scholars, such as Bryan C. Price, argue that leadership decapitation can be effective, especially against younger terrorist organizations. The effectiveness seems to depend on various factors, including the structure of the targeted organization, its age, and its ideological motivation.

Compared to conventional military operations, targeted killings often result in fewer civilian casualties and less infrastructure damage. They also allow for more precise application of force against specific threats. However, they may lack the capacity to fundamentally alter the strategic landscape in the way that larger military operations can.

Economic sanctions, while potentially effective in pressuring state sponsors of terrorism, often have limited impact on decentralized terrorist networks. Diplomatic efforts, while crucial for long-term conflict resolution, may not address immediate security threats effectively.

Synergies with Other Security Measures: Targeted killings are most effective when integrated into a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy. They can complement other security measures in several ways:

1. Intelligence Gathering: The intelligence infrastructure required for successful targeted killings can also enhance overall counterterrorism efforts, improving situational awareness and threat detection.

2. Deterrence: The threat of targeted killings can deter terrorist activities and force groups to expend resources on protection rather than planning attacks.

3. Disruption of Operations: By eliminating key personnel, targeted killings can disrupt terrorist operations, creating opportunities for other counterterrorism measures to be more effective.

4. Support for Conventional Operations: Targeted killings can weaken terrorist leadership, making conventional military operations more effective when they are necessary.

5. However, targeted killings can also potentially conflict with other counterterrorism efforts. They may undermine diplomatic initiatives, complicate relationships with allies, and potentially hinder counter-radicalization efforts by fueling grievances among affected populations.

Conclusion

Targeted killings, particularly through drone strikes, have become an integral yet controversial component of counterterrorism strategies over the past two decades. While tactically effective in eliminating high-value targets and disrupting terrorist operations in the short term, their long-term strategic value remains debated. The practice has driven significant technological advancements and operational changes within military and intelligence agencies.

As drone technology proliferates globally, with nearly 100 countries now possessing military drone capabilities, the future is likely to see continued evolution of targeted killing capabilities alongside growing challenges related to regulation and potential misuse. Moving forward, policymakers must carefully weigh the tactical benefits of targeted killings against their broader strategic, diplomatic, and ethical implications.

Ultimately, targeted killings are most effective when integrated as part of a comprehensive counterterrorism approach that also addresses root causes of extremism through diplomatic, economic and social measures. Their limited influence when used in isolation, particularly against veteran terrorist organizations, underscores the need for a multifaceted approach to counterterrorism that goes beyond just eliminating individual targets.

Targeted-Killings-A Western World Method for Asymmetric Warfare.pdf

Download PDF • 599KB