International organisation says Pakistan failed to protect their citizens and assisted US in the strikes.
Amnesty International recently released a detailed report on US drone strikes in Pakistan titled “Will I Be Next?”, a qualitative assessment based on detailed field research into nine of the 45 reported strikes in North Waziristan between January 2012 and August 2013.
Mustufa Qadri, the Amnesty researcher for Pakistan, not only accused the US of committing violations of human rights, but expressed serious concerns over Pakistan's role in the process.
"The Pakistani authorities have also failed to protect their citizens and people in North Waziristan from drone strikes or to enforce their rights to justice and reparation after falling victim to these strikes."
The official went on to implicate Pakistan in the strikes.
"We're also concerned that Pakistani authorities or aspects of their institutions may also be assisting the US in drone strikes constituting human rights violations."
Referring to the militants, Qadri said that they continue to enjoy impunity.
"These are some of the most dangerous people and the Pakistani authorities have not been able to bring these perpetrators to justice and fair trial without recourse to the death penalty.
"We call on the Pakistani authorities to fulfill their obligations."
Amnesty added that the oft repeated pretense of immediate security concerns does not offer a blanket cover to conduct such strikes or violate rights.
"Drones may have given the US unrivaled access to one of the most remote parts of the world, but immediate security concerns, real or perceived must not and cannot be addressed on the rights of the people in Pakistan's tribal areas."
He thanked the people in the tribal areas for the sacrifices and efforts they underwent in order to bring all their suffering to light.
COMMENTS (27)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Rex Minor: I cast no doubt on the suffering or these facts A.I. unearthed. Rather, their interpretation is at issue: were these deaths war crimes or not? Who was responsible and what were the circumstances?
In the report itself - rather than the sensationalized news release - A.I.'s accusation of U.S. and its allies acting illegally is qualified: they base it on the fact that the U.S. refuses to officially cite which international laws and norms it has in mind when it claims the drone strikes are legal. In other words, Amnesty believes the drone strikes may be perfectly legal. I can guess that Amnesty is aware of UNSCR 1373 but as long as the U.S. won't officially cite it, Amnesty won't, either.
However, the report does reiterate the definite and continuing violations of laws and norms by Pakistan's own military: see pages 43-45. I'm sure you don't find this emotionally satisfactory, but that's how it is.
Where are the so called liberals ?? and advocates of Drones ..
As Ik says Allah alhaq hai .. everything Is becoming clear now ..
Our Government should speak up now against these barbaric attacks on innocent people .
@Solomon2: Nonsense, Amnesty International report is based on fact finding mission that they undertook and spoke to the victims loved ones and saw the suffering children.from the extra judicial killings. This is true that the USA does not recognise the jurisdictions of the International criminal court at Hague, but it is becoming clear to even his allies, who are being spied upon, that the Ship is realy sinking..
Rex Minor
Drone strikes must stop!!!
Trust Amnesty international .... not your army
"India is violating human rights in Kashmir for the last 65 years -"
I understand your approach: the world is to ignore Pakistanis confirmed complicity in the matter of human rights violations because Pakistan has accusations of its own.
Well, if I robbed you and claimed to the world I was entitled to rob you because I say you robbed me even though I don't have proof, how would you feel? Why should the world listen to me, then?
First Pakistan should come up with a national anti terrorism policy and start its implementation.US had to get Osama out of his safe heaven, US is doing Pakistans job of killing Pakistans enemies in drones. If Pakistan has the will and capacity to do it, then please show us that you can. Until now we are talking about opening offices of those who have killed 50,000 innocent Pakistanis instead of making policies to kick them out of this country for good.
US had to come and take obama out otherwise even he was residing peacefully here. OK end the drones and let the pakistan army fight the terrorists! if drones dont kill them, who will? more than 3500 terrorists have died in drones and less than 400 casualties of citizens. 50,000, i repeat 50,000 people died in attacks by Taliban and terrorists. Pakistanis are scared of their lives and kidnappings of their family members by terrorists. there is no surprise why many pakistanis are in favor of drones. yes, pakistanis favor drones because they want to have peace and get rid of terrorism.
India is violating human rights in Kashmir for the last 65 years yet no one cares infact not just in Kashmir but in Assam, Nagaland , Moizam etc. Their state sponsored terrorism is well documented in Gujrat and northern Srilanka over the years.
A surprising number of Pakistanis are in favor of drone strikes
One man from South Waziristan heatedly told her that he and his family approved of the remote-controlled aircraft and wanted more of them patrolling the skies above his home. Access to the tribal regions is very difficult for foreign journalists; but several specialists and researchers on the region, who did not want to be identified, say there is at least a sizeable minority in FATA who share that view. Surveys are also notoriously difficult to carry out in FATA. A 2009 poll in three of the tribal agencies found 52% of respondents believed drone strikes were accurate and 60% said they weakened militant groups. Other surveys have found much lower percentages in favour. But interviews by The Economist with twenty residents of the tribal areas confirmed that many see individual drone strikes as preferable to the artillery barrages of the Pakistani military. They also insisted that the drones do not kill many civilians—a view starkly at odds with mainstream Pakistani opinion. “No one dares tell the real picture,” says an elder from North Waziristan. “Drone attacks are killing the militants who are killing innocent people.” American claims about the accuracy of its drone attacks are hard to verify. The best estimate is provided by monitoring organisations that track drone attacks through media reports, an inexact method in a region where militants block access to strike sites. However, the most thorough survey, by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, suggests a fall in civilian casualties, with most news sources claiming no civilians killed this year despite 22 known strikes. Though there is ample evidence that the Pakistani government has given its secret blessing to the CIA program, it still allows anti-drone sentiment to blossom. Domestic anger over drones can be a useful negotiating chip on other issues, says one former American official. The government also fears reprisals from militants. Supporters of the drones in Pakistan’s media are even more reluctant to speak frankly. Many commentators admit to approving of drones in the absence of government moves to clear terrorist sanctuaries. But they dare not say so in print. In 2010 a group of politicians and NGOs published a “Peshawar Declaration” in support of drones. Life soon became difficult for the signatories. “If anyone speaks out they will be eliminated,” says Said Alam Mehsud, one of the organizers, who was forced to leave Pakistan for a time. As for Ms Khan, she has had a partial rethink. “I still want the drones to end,” she says. “But if my government wants to do something they should do it themselves, without foreign help.”
AI, do not feed you ! Its Uncle Sam's call, as its been obvious that you won't deal those cockroaches that have infested your Nation and are now classed as major threat to rest of Humanity. They may be your Assets for your messed up policies and views, but are Danger to the rest of Civilised World, so they need to be dealt with in fashion of "Clear and Present Danger" !
So what..??? who cares??? when you say 'this is wrong in public' but 'go ahead in DC',, it has to happen :)
Why Amnesty International is yelling about drone strikes NOW that US guilty of major human rights violations and why not Amnesty International raised its voice when US first drone strike the terreriotial limits of Pakistan?
@Sarah: Glad to see your touching faith in amnesty reports. I am sure you also agree with
Amnesty report on Balochistan http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/press-releases/amnesty-international-says-balochistan-atrocities-continue-to-rise-in-pakistan,
Amnesty report Oppression of Pakistani Shias http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/pakistan-shi-killings-failure-government-protection-2012-11-22!
Amnesty report on Pakistan's Failure to protect religious minorities http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/pakistan-authorities-must-do-more-protect-religious-minorities-2012-03-01
Nobody would complain if U.S. drone strikes killed only lawless jihadists who do not respect the constitution of Pakistan, kill girls for going to schools, bomb school buildings, or do extrajudicial killings in remote areas where they have full control. Killing of such fanatics is legitimate because they themselves have no legitimacy. They are like pirates at sea, but they do that on land, and claim their actions as a will of God!
What is illegitimate in the U.S. drone strikes -and inhuman as well, is the U.S. attitude and training to kill before establishing the facts. But when civilian bodies turn up at the bombing site, they still claim the strike was legitimate. They just blame others, or other factors - but not themselves. The fact of the U.S. strikes is this: If the U.S. intelligence has been searching for a target for years, and then some information comes in that he was spotted somewhere, the U.S. would consider that "a rare opportunity" to take him out. And since "rare opportunities" don't come around very often, the strike is approved. What about the civilians? They are "collateral damage" to the U.S. And of course, collateral damage is acceptable when it happens to someone else, not when it happens to you!
As for Amnesty International, it is a British organization and quite lenient to both Great Britain and the U.S. I won't be surprised if it is also funded by both to just treat the U.S. with a velvet hand. I joined it while a student in the 1970's and tried to free some political prisoners of U.S. puppet Augusto Pinochet in Chile, but the Chilean junta just ignored us, and the U.S. didn't help us to push the Chilean junta. After all, the Pinochet coup was engineered and pushed by the U.S.!
Pakistan's prime minister Nawaz Sharif is meeting Obama at the white house today, and I am sure there will be some tense moments with Obama over U.S. drone strikes. But until drone strikes become just a tool against hardcore Muslim jihadists exclusively, and as long as civilians die in them under any excuse, drone strikes are "war crimes," no "ifs" and no "buts!' Nikos Retsos, retired professor and blogger at "blogger.com"
Where are anti-imran khan commentators.
"......though Pakistan too is not totally devoid of blame, ..........."
Doesn't it tell the real truth? Once again Pakistan is playing a double game with its public. Pakistan is very much a party in drone attacks. Pakistan is just shedding crocodile tears for public consumption.
Drones are counter productive;Jihad narrative is real; Anti Pakistan elements backed by foreign forces are active inside Pak. Sectarian forces have their own agenda. Criminals have their own share of role. So many causes so many motives ....And for some its just bomb, bomb and more bombs is solution.
All amnestry/HRW reports are accepted besides that they should not be on Baluchistan genocide.
Pakistan must also realize that sending Jihadis into India, Afghanistan and Baluchistan is against human right. When you do not respect the sovereignty of other nations, no one respects yours. Its and eye for eye world that is out there and the sooner you Pakis realize it, the better it is for all of us.
@Sarah: Please don't disturb they are sleeping!
US must be guilty for unlawful and barbaric killing of innocent people in Tribal areas of Pakistan. I wonder, International community is still silent on such disastrous crime...
so what if US killed innocent Pakistanis or Muslims.....its there right to kill us coz our leaders have sold us along with their souls....its ok....
"These are some of the most dangerous people and the Pakistani authorities have not been able to bring these perpetrators to justice and fair trial..." So how come killing these same people, through drones or any other means, a bad thing? It would appear Amnesty Internattional is suffering from schizophrenia, and "will I be next?" should be asked of the terrorists who have killed more than 40,000 innocent Pakistani civilians. Where are AI's tears for these victims?
Even this will somehow become IKs fault.
Under post-9/11 UN Security Council Resolution 1373, Pakistan has the binding sovereign obligation in international law to enforce its sovereignty and work to eliminate terrorists, terror-training camps, and terror financing in its territory. Failure to do so - as in North Wazirstan - nulls Pakistani sovereignty with regards to other nations attacking terrorists there; in this regard, N. Wazirstan is an open battlefields - a war zone.
As it is a war zone under international law it doesn't seem possible to classify drone attacks there as "extrajudicial executions". As far as these being "war crimes" one would have to consider case-by-case whether attacks that resulted in civilian deaths were happened because the attacking nation meant to kill civilians deliberately or disproportionately to the target attacked.
Scrutiny of lists of civilian casualties from drone attacks reveal several anomalies. In general, drones attacks result in one to five casualties or so, as the one or two missiles a drone carries have warheads of less than ten kilograms of explosive. A group of drones might kill more.
However, when one sees listed eighty civilians killed in a single drone attack one has good cause to suspect that the drones are being blamed for attacks carried out by some other means. This is not a topic discussed by groups like Amnesty International. Such an attack might be a war crime but drones would not be to blame - nor would the United States.
Drone justifiers????????? And Imran Khan bashers?????