Should we be prepared for more violations?
Obama recently admitted that the drone programme had resulted in some “deadly mistakes”
The writer is the Assistant Coordinator at South Asia Study Group and the president of the Pakistani Society at the University of Sydney. He tweets @ajzeb
Back in October 2015, Nato and the US severely denounced two incursions of Turkish airspace by Russian jets, which violated Turkey’s sovereignty. In contrast, the US has no qualms over violating Pakistani sovereignty. The recent drone strike in Balochistan targeting Mullah Mansoor was preceded by a long hiatus by the US in its drone programme in Pakistan and was followed by President Obama affirming his position on going after targets on Pakistani soil. This and future strikes on a sovereign state, without any UN mandate and the approval of the government in question, by the US’s own definition, is a violation of international law.
Previous drone strikes that the US carried out in Pakistan, mainly in Fata, have resulted in innumerable civilian casualties. There have been at least 319 drone attacks on Pakistani soil resulting in the deaths of at least 1,374 non-combatants. The US Council on Foreign Relations estimates up to 4,404 civilian fatalities. The British Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates that between 2010 and 2011, 385 Pakistani civilians were killed which included at least 160 children. In the same period, the CIA claims that drones killed 600 militants with zero civilian casualties. The figures for innocent casualties are an abnormally large number for a method that Obama repeatedly backs as it saves “American lives”. At the same time, he recently admitted that the drone programme had resulted in some “deadly mistakes”. The deaths of Warren Weinstein and the Italian Giovanni Lo Porto on January 12 in Fata from a drone strike drew media attention and admittance from Obama regarding the “cruel and bitter truth” of the drone programme. However, that has not stopped the US from using drones to strike targets, often in public places, in a sovereign territory at the cost of Pakistani lives.
The US has maintained its position that Pakistan needs to do more in the fight against terror and pursue terrorists using its soil for refuge. Merely hours after the strike, it reaffirmed its position to continue to work with the Pakistani authorities and share intelligence and all other information regarding any such activities. One wonders why this did not happen in this particular incident. It is clear that the warning to Pakistan is this: take action against the Haqqani network and stop ignoring terrorist elements, or the US will come do your work for you, simple. In light of the amount of military aid and other financial assistance that Congress provides to Pakistan in the fight against terror, perhaps the US actually believes that incursions like these are its right.
The response by Pakistan has been relatively soft, with statements from our side indicating that sovereignty violations are counterproductive to any efforts that we make in this war, including getting the Afghan Taliban to talk peace. What seems to be ignored is that at best Pakistan may only have limited influence over the Taliban. Should it dissociate itself from the process of getting the Taliban to the negotiation table? Or should it take its case to the UN, which inherently means a halt to military aid from the US, something that Pakistan cannot afford.
The precedent that this drone strike presents can’t be ignored. It has left every Pakistani wondering if they should be prepared for strikes in Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar, Quetta, or even Islamabad. The US has never taken any Pakistani outcry over incursions into our territory or even the protests against collateral damage seriously. It appears that Pakistan has no choice but to do more in weeding out terrorist elements that have found refuge in our land. Otherwise, our sovereignty will continue to be violated.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 30th, 2016.
Previous drone strikes that the US carried out in Pakistan, mainly in Fata, have resulted in innumerable civilian casualties. There have been at least 319 drone attacks on Pakistani soil resulting in the deaths of at least 1,374 non-combatants. The US Council on Foreign Relations estimates up to 4,404 civilian fatalities. The British Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates that between 2010 and 2011, 385 Pakistani civilians were killed which included at least 160 children. In the same period, the CIA claims that drones killed 600 militants with zero civilian casualties. The figures for innocent casualties are an abnormally large number for a method that Obama repeatedly backs as it saves “American lives”. At the same time, he recently admitted that the drone programme had resulted in some “deadly mistakes”. The deaths of Warren Weinstein and the Italian Giovanni Lo Porto on January 12 in Fata from a drone strike drew media attention and admittance from Obama regarding the “cruel and bitter truth” of the drone programme. However, that has not stopped the US from using drones to strike targets, often in public places, in a sovereign territory at the cost of Pakistani lives.
The US has maintained its position that Pakistan needs to do more in the fight against terror and pursue terrorists using its soil for refuge. Merely hours after the strike, it reaffirmed its position to continue to work with the Pakistani authorities and share intelligence and all other information regarding any such activities. One wonders why this did not happen in this particular incident. It is clear that the warning to Pakistan is this: take action against the Haqqani network and stop ignoring terrorist elements, or the US will come do your work for you, simple. In light of the amount of military aid and other financial assistance that Congress provides to Pakistan in the fight against terror, perhaps the US actually believes that incursions like these are its right.
The response by Pakistan has been relatively soft, with statements from our side indicating that sovereignty violations are counterproductive to any efforts that we make in this war, including getting the Afghan Taliban to talk peace. What seems to be ignored is that at best Pakistan may only have limited influence over the Taliban. Should it dissociate itself from the process of getting the Taliban to the negotiation table? Or should it take its case to the UN, which inherently means a halt to military aid from the US, something that Pakistan cannot afford.
The precedent that this drone strike presents can’t be ignored. It has left every Pakistani wondering if they should be prepared for strikes in Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar, Quetta, or even Islamabad. The US has never taken any Pakistani outcry over incursions into our territory or even the protests against collateral damage seriously. It appears that Pakistan has no choice but to do more in weeding out terrorist elements that have found refuge in our land. Otherwise, our sovereignty will continue to be violated.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 30th, 2016.