The writer is a defence analyst who retired as a lieutenant-colonel in the Pakistan Army
President Obama said in his speech that “we are safer because of our efforts”. I wish the “we” he had referred to was not just Americans but the whole world. Every drone strike that the US carries out in Pakistan leaves Pakistanis more insecure and vulnerable to the likely act of vengeance by the Taliban. It is the people in this country who bear the brunt of the Taliban’s reprisal. How can the US be so blind as not to consider this? The latest US drone strike proves only one point — US policy will continue to cater to American interests and in no way to Pakistani interests.
Elaborating the US anti-terrorism strategy, President Obama said in his speech, “we must make decisions based not on fear, but hard-earned wisdom and that begins with understanding the threat we face”. The hard-earned wisdom should have been used not only to understand the threat faced by the people of America but also that faced by the people of Pakistan. Drone strikes only suggest that the US was not interested in providing the opportunity to Nawaz Sharif’s incoming government to initiate and execute the planned peace process with the Taliban. With its persistence to use drones as a military instrument to attack and degrade our sovereignty, the US hardly acts as a partner. With democracy beginning to take firm root in Pakistan, it is only natural that the people’s representatives and the armed forces of the country implement and execute the will of the people, which calls for an end to drone strikes.
The US, with its actions, contributes and furthers the social and political instabilities that we face today. The older and more traditional threats to our national security, in the present day, are obscure and have been replaced by newer ones. The US must realise that its actions contribute to the causes and effects of these growing internal threats that Pakistan faces today. Considering the current security dilemma faced by Pakistan, to which the US actions directly contribute, one is puzzled to imagine by which definition should the US be called a friend and an ally?
The use of drones seems very much military in dimension. But the cause and effect they create for us as a country are mostly non-military in dimension. As a consequence of now almost over eight years of drone strikes, Pakistan is left to deal with a whole spectrum of challenges — social and political instability, growing hatred against America, proliferation of sub-nationalism, etc. Seen in this context, the US must question the usefulness of these instruments of military reach. Their use, without the approval and connivance of our state, results not only in diminishing control on the developing circumstances but in the continued loss of our national integrity as well.
In the global war on terror, the negative forces of change can only be stopped through mutually agreed policies and actions reached through consensus at the global scale. The political and public pressure on the government of Pakistan to preserve national integrity and sovereignty will only grow and build in the coming days. The US should understand that and rebuild a relationship of dependence and trust with the Pakistani government and security establishment. It’s not the utility of drones and the terrorists that they eliminate that is questionable; it is in how they are used and how that puts to doubt our national integrity and sovereignty that needs to be debated to seek the solution to the drones conundrum.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 5th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (14)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1731570357-0/elon-musk-(1)1731570357-0-165x106.webp "article")
-(1)1717678110-0/Kendrick-(1)-(1)1717678110-0-165x106.webp "article")
When one becomes an ally of the Evil, then it is the Evil which determines on the course of war or peace. Musharaf says in a documentry film " Th Price of Revenge" now being shown on Aljazeera TV net work, that he joined in the war against Afghanistan because of India, who offered the US military the base for invasion through Pakistan territory. It is upto Nawaz Sharif now how he etricate Pakistan from the Ally.
Rex Minor
@Riaz Ahmad:
Pakistan is issuing bulk visas to CIA agents, facilitating destabilising of the country and violation of sovereignty,
You mean the entire NWA is occupied by CIA agents visiting Pakistan on valid visas? And drones are hunting these CIA agents?
Wonders never cease.
Seems like everyone in Pakistan believes that drone attacks kill innocent Muslims everyday - yet you rarely read a news article after a drone attack that mentions innocents being killed, never see a picture of innocents being killed, and never read the names of the innocents who were killed. Why in the World would the Taliban or Pakistan authorities not provide pictures/names etc of this alleged slaughter knowing it would be a public relations disaster for the USA. The answer is obvious - the elephant in the room that no one wants to see.
President Obama referred to in his speech to “tighter scrutiny and oversight in the future US drone campaign”...and a drone went and eliminated TTP's # 2. What is the author's complaint...that it should have targeted TTP's # 1 ?
"The US should understand that and rebuild a relationship of dependence and trust with the Pakistani government and security establishment. It’s not the utility of drones and the terrorists that they eliminate that is questionable; it is in how they are used and how that puts to doubt our national integrity and sovereignty that needs to be debated to seek the solution to the drones conundrum."
Pakistan should understand and rebuild a relationship of dependence and trust with its two most important neighbors, Afghanistan and India and respect their national integrity and sovereignty before asking others to respect theirs. Tableegh starts at home, practice what you preach and maybe the US will cede some space for you to establish your integrity and sovereignty.
This is one of the most misleading Op Ed in ET. While most victims and their families are celebrating the elimination of known terrorists one after the other some are upset at the killing of their strategic assets! The logic that the more drone strikes and the more US kills the terrorists the more they would kill innocent Pakistanis so we should be against drone strikes makes no sense. Even before the drone strikes the extremist terrorists had ethnic cleansing going in Pakistan and it would continue till after the US forces are gone. How can any fair minded person support the killings of tens of thousands of innocent Pakistanis because the US and Taliban at war?
"It is the people in this country who bear the brunt of the Taliban’s reprisal. How can the US be so blind as not to consider this...The US, with its actions, contributes and furthers the social and political instabilities that we face today. "
The decision to foster militancy has been Pakistan's. Since 2001 the U.S. has severely limited Pakistan's ability to export that militancy abroad. The proper course of action - as detailed in post-9/11 UNSCR 1373 - would be for Pakistan to shut down the terrorist funding and training machine, sending in its own armed forces as needed. Pakistan did not and will not, so the drones do some of the work - doubtless saving many Pakistanis from "bearing the brunt of the Taliban's reprisal."
We've really been too good to you, haven't we?
Which sovereignty? When Pakistan's ambassador in connivance with the president of Pakistan is issuing bulk visas to CIA agents, facilitating destabilising of the country and violation of sovereignty, how on earth can you ask US to respect your sovereignty.
The political and public pressure on the government of Pakistan to preserve national integrity and sovereignty will only grow and build in the coming days
And will that lead to
A. Wresting back Pakistani territory (read NWA) from illegal occupation? This will 'preserve national integrity'.
AND,
B. Hitting back at those responsible for beheading Pakistani soldiers and bombing innocent citizens? This will assert 'sovereignty'.
The main reason for this 'drone speech' by Obama is because other countries like Russia and China are developing drone technology and if USA does have a precise policy clarifying under which circumstances drones attacks will take place, USA cannot condemn them if these countries use this in their areas of interest in future. Other than that one should not read too much in that speech.
Why does Pakistan need to ask others to change their way of thinking and acting so as to cause no harm to its interests? Why do we never talk of changing ourselves?
"...The US should understand that and rebuild a relationship of dependence and trust with the Pakistani government and security establishment."
The United States has done that and a LOT MORE. Without the billions of dollars of aid that pour into Pakistan from the US and allies every year, Pakistan would have faced an economic collapse already and imploded by now. But why would someone who served as a "lieutenant-colonel in the Pakistan Army" know about the economic travails that afflict their country when their esteemed military faces no hurdle in getting their hands on MOST of the country's budget? They don't. But how about those Army-wallas acknowledge and show some gratitude for some of the billions of dollars that the army itself has been receiving every year from the US and the West in aid? Is that too much to ask for too?
And for the boogeyman drones, I have a solution: why not Pakistani army, instead of gleefully eating up all the country's scarce resources and amassing more bungalows and plots in Defense, do its job of protecting the country and cleansing the militants? You wouldn't need drones if the army was so woefully incompetent. If someone is doing the job for you and taking out the bad guys through drones that YOU should be taking out then we should be grateful for their help Why engage in this naked false and malicious propaganda instead? Don't we have any shame left?
"...The US should understand that and rebuild a relationship of dependence and trust with the Pakistani government and security establishment."
The United States has done that and a LOT MORE. Without the billions of dollars of aid that pour into Pakistan from the US and allies every year, Pakistan would have faced an economic collapse already and imploded by now. But why would someone who served as a "lieutenant-colonel in the Pakistan Army" know about the economic travails that afflict their country when their esteemed military faces no hurdle in getting their hands on MOST of the country's budget? They don't. But how about those Army-wallas acknowledge and show some gratitude for some of the billions of dollars that the army itself has been receiving every year from the US and the West in aid? Is that too much to ask for too?
And for the boogeyman drones, I have a solution: why not Pakistani army and "security establishment", instead of gleefully eating up all the country's scarce resources and amassing more bungalows and plots in Defense, do its job of protecting the country and cleansing the militants? You wouldn't need drones if the army was so woefully incompetent. If someone else is doing the job for you and taking out the bad guys through drones that YOU should be taking out then we should be grateful for their help Why engage in this naked false and malicious propaganda instead? Don't we have any shame left?
"As a consequence of now almost over eight years of drone strikes, Pakistan is left to deal with a whole spectrum of challenges — social and political instability, growing hatred against America, proliferation of sub-nationalism, etc"
SO 1) Sub-nationalism is a new phenomenon in Pakistan which only surfaced after 2004 when the drones started? Do you remember 1971? What about the Baloch who were rebellling in the 70s? 2) Is anti-Americanism a post 2004 phenomenon? Why then did people dance in the streets on 9/11?