The New Age of Assassination

The transformation of targeted killing and international order

“…Only few scholars have extended the scope further by addressing the effects of targeted killing on the current international order. Ward Thomas ( 2001 , 2005 ) focuses on the anti-assassination norm that has consolidated together with the Westphalian international order and argues that the rise in targeted killing, or what he calls “the new age of assassination” (W. Thomas, 2005 ), has resulted in a decline of this norm. While Ward Thomas addresses normative decline, Fisher ( 2006 ) concludes in his work that a “norm permitting the use of targeted killing for counter-terrorism purposes appears likely to emerge [emphasis added] and spread successfully” (p. 757; see also Jose, 2016 ; Lantis, 2016 ).…”

“…The rise of this norm followed not only from growing moral revulsion against treacherous killing (e.g. by poisoning), but also from concerns about instability and disorder that would follow from the killing of state leaders (W. Thomas, 2001 , 2005 ). More recently, the United Nations ( 1973 ) and the Charter of the Organization of African Unity (1963) explicitly prohibit the killing of high-level state representatives.…”

“…Driven by growing moral revulsion against the slaying of state leaders and concerns about political instability that would follow these acts, a norm stigmatizing the targeted killing of state leaders developed as an element of the emerging order of sovereign states. What had been a widespread and legitimate practice came to be regarded as uncivilized and perilous (W. Thomas, 2001 , 2005 ). In spite of the norm, states have occasionally attempted to kill foreign (state and non-state) leaders, but they have tried hard to conceal their actions and faced international resistance once they were disclosed (Alston, 2010 , p. 5).…”

“…In 15th- and 16th-century Europe, the killing of foreign leaders was both widespread and largely accepted as morally legitimate. In subsequent centuries, however, changing moral principles as well as the development of norms and laws at domestic and international levels restrained the use of targeted killing (W. Thomas, 2005 ). Although states (and non-state actors) continued to engage in targeted killings (Ford, 1985 ), they largely did so under the cloak of secrecy (Alston, 2010 , p. 5).…”

“…Few scholars (e.g. Fisher, 2006 ; Fisk & Ramos, 2014 ; W. Thomas, 2005 ) have focused on the flipside of the relationship between targeted killing and international order, that is, on the question of whether and how the current transformation of targeted killing is transforming the global international order. So our knowledge of the impact that the use of targeted killing has on the ideas, norms, and rules of the global international order is still very limited.…”