Drone drift

The truth is that had the state done an efficient job, the drone strikes may never have been necessitated.


Editorial May 24, 2013
US President Barack Obama speaks about his administration's counterterrorism policy at the National Defense University at Ft McNair in Washington, May 23, 2013. PHOTO: AFP

There appears to have been a change, or at least a drift, in US policy on drone strikes. Speaking on the controversial attacks by unmanned aircraft at Washington’s National Defence University, US President Barack Obama broke away to some extent on his predecessor George W Bush’s stance on drones, stating that in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan, their use would be “limited” and they would be deployed only when the capture of a key target was impossible. He also said civilian casualties would be avoided at all costs. It may be noted that drone attacks have recently come under fierce criticism from rights groups including Amnesty International, which has said they are illegal. The drone attacks have, of course, been a key issue of political and humanitarian debate at home, figuring prominently in the recent election campaign.



President Obama’s words on more controlled use of drones are welcome, but they are simply not enough. The strikes need to be stopped completely — given the deaths of civilians they have caused and the deep sense of outrage they have given rise to. They, of course, also erode Pakistan’s sovereignty. This, too, has been an issue brought up many times at home. The damage inflicted by the drones comes in many forms. But putting emotion aside for a while, we need also to look at reality.

The truth is that had the state done a more efficient job, the drone strikes across the north may never have been necessitated. We need to consider why various key militants, including the late Baitullah Mehsud, were reached by drones, obviously on the basis of very sound intelligence, but could not be captured by our own apparatus. Other examples exist, too. Yes, the drone attacks must stop; the death and terror they bring must end. We hope President Obama will recognise this and accept that limiting strikes is not enough. But to make this more likely we must also consider our policy at home and ensure that at our own end, we are doing everything possible to remove the militants from our midst, ensuring no other force feels the need to do this for us.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 25th, 2013.

COMMENTS (2)

Imran Ahsan Mirza | 10 years ago | Reply

No one can govern Americans in executing drone strikes ethically; it is all political talk to appease anti drone campaigners rather alleviating Pakistan’s concerns. One US President would say one thing and another would come later saying the opposite, we have been treated like this far too long by them. We as a nation must reflect and find out why we provide opportunity to the so-called mightiest power on earth to decimate our sovereignty in the name of defending themselves. We had created Taliban but neither made Al Qaeda nor did we generate the anti-American sentiments amongst the Muslims around the world, Americans are to be blamed themselves. We are unfortunately a nation of beggars unable to choose our destiny amongst the comity of nations. We pay our bills but somehow the money doesn’t end up in purchasing fuel for the power stations. Our neighbours, namely China and India are progressing so fast that we would be left far behind soon; this is because we are not moving in the same direction as yet. We are more interested in religious agenda for Pakistan rather scientific and technological. We are ashamed of ourselves and hope that one day a leader would emerge to take us out of this mess and tap on our real potentials. The new leaders must sense our great expectations. Our respect is so much lost that drones symbolise this insult.

unbelievable | 10 years ago | Reply

Tactful Editorial. One might argue that "efficient" was too polite a term to use since the Pakistan military has effectively allowed 1/2 the country to fall into the hands of the militants.

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ