There is public condemnation of drone strikes, but beneath the rhetoric and populist rants there is a culture of compliance and cooperation by a range of state organs. PHOTO: FILE
The government of Pakistan is also guilty of a range of human rights violations. Specifically, that the government has failed to protect and enforce the rights of victims of drone strikes. Furthermore, there is possible complicity at state level by some organs of state, individuals within those organs and private citizens that provide support or facilitation for the drone programme. Whilst the authors of the report thank the government of Pakistan for its assistance in its compilation, they note that no government official was willing to answer any questions regarding the drone strikes; which goes some way to confirming the perception that the government — past and present — speaks with a forked tongue. There is public condemnation of drone strikes, but beneath the rhetoric and populist rants there is a culture of compliance and cooperation by a range of state organs, civil and military, that can only exist because political and military decisions have been taken and acted upon allowing their existence. The government has always had, and never exercised, the option of shooting the drones out of the sky — indicating subservience or complicity, or more likely both. The evidence is crystal clear and irrefutable, the guilty named and plain to see.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 24th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (12)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
This editorial was published before the most damning revelations that the former PM Gilani as well as ISI endorsed drone attacks and latter even cooperated with US to earmark targets for these attacks. These revelations have deflated the hype created by Nawaz Sharif on drones issue as an attack on the sovereignty of the country, but also put him in the most embarrassment situation due to complicity of his own establishments supporting them covertly. Obama completely ignored drones issue raised by NS, instead grilled him regarding exporting terrorism to both India and Afghanistan and making no headway on 26/11 case. Drone issue raised by Pakistan has thus been laid to rest and which will continue regardless, despite its serious objections.
@powvow...: You are not getting me. In fact I am sad. 67 years ago we were together. We are the same. Then what wrong did a ordinary Pakistani do to deserve this? Why should he be attacked by drones and we be happy about it? True, the terrorists have to be eliminated and America thinks this is the best method. Its just that the ordinary person becomes the fodder. In fact what paap did ordinary Pakistani do that they cannot claim Taj Mahal and Raisina Hill to be theirs just as we claim. In 1937 he did not vote for Muslim League.
@C. Nandkishore - "If I am not mistaken drones will not be limited to KP. Even Punjab will come under it. Pakistan cannot do anything. "
Tere muh mein ghee-shakkar!!!
The drones will continue. Its a dream weapon. The enemy gets killed without you being there. They will increase once America gets out of Afghanistan. If I am not mistaken drones will not be limited to KP. Even Punjab will come under it. Pakistan cannot do anything.
Drones are beyond the established international law. In other words they are an exception to the rule.
USA isn't using drones to target other countries (atleast not as a matter of routine). It is doing so in Pakistan due to Pakistan's disregard for the established international law. It allowed itself to become a rogue nation by permitting terror groups to use its soil to train, fund and host attacks on other nations.
If you create swamp that breeds mosquito, claim inability to clean the swamp, and the mosquitoes are spreading disease across neighbourhood - then it is futile to crib when neighbourhood watch comes to clean up the swamp themselves. And when they clean the swamp, they may spoil a bit of your garden too.
So, a better approach is to ask for assistance from the world to clean up the swamp yourself.
The Amnesty report needs to be studied in conjuction with these newer revelations of approval by Pakistan Government.It was notified on a regualr basis about the attacks. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/top-pakistani-leaders-secretly-backed-cia-drone-campaign-secret-documents-show/2013/10/23/15e6b0d8-3beb-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_story.html
drone - the evidence that pakistan is epicentre of terrorism.
Drone the evidence that pakistan still is the epicentre of terrorism nothing else nothing else.
A better read of all should be the article in the October 19th issue of THE ECONOMIST, page 44, titled "Drop the Pilot" which starts out with "A surprising number of Pakistanis are in favor of drone strikes". The unreported reality is that any Pakistani in favor of drone strikes is at risk of being killed! The 2010 "Peshawar Declaration" in support of drone strikes resulted in many of the signatories fearing for their lives! I quote from the article. "Many (media) commentators admit to approving of drones in the absence of (Pakistani) government moves to clear terrorist sanctuaries. But they dare not say so in print"!
Equally the report published alongside this detailing excesses of Pakistan security forces while operating in FATA has received no attention. Civilians killed in shelling of the Army are worth less than those killed in drone strikes.
Two lawsuits should be submitted to the International Court that adjudicates war crimes -
The first one would be against America for their drone war that is killing civilians by the hundreds in our tribal areas
The second one should be against Pakistan establishment (government, army) who have proven to be incompetent in protecting innocent civilians that are killed by the thousands in our cities in the past few years - not to mention loss of territory and sovereignty in North Waziristan and tribal areas.
There is human rights violation in both cases.
One has to read the Amnesty International report carefully. It claims the U.S. may have broken international law because the U.S. hasn't defended itself from such charges in detail. One can suppose that's to avoid unnecessary embarrassment to Pakistan's leaders: under post-9/11 Security Council Resolution 1373 - as a Chapter 7 resolution, binding in international law - they are supposed to eliminate terror financing, terror-training camps, and terror refuges from Pakistani territory and their failure to act to do so consequently costs according to 1373 its claims to sovereignty in these areas. What can the U.S. gain by advertising Pakistan's generals as weaklings and incompetents? Nor does Amnesty International acknowledge the change UNSCR 1373 had made to international law.
Rather more damning, while the report attempts to finger the U.S. and its Western Allies, saying their drone strikes may constitute crimes or human rights violations, the report reiterates its previous proofs demonstrating that Pakistan's military really is guilty of such misconduct: see pages 43-45.
Conclusion: The drone issue may be sensational but eliminating them from the conflict will make matters even worse; without the drones either the terrorists will prosper and kill many innocent Pakistanis, or else the Pakistani military will intervene and kill many more innocent Pakistanis than would have happen had the drones been allowed to remain in use.