Drone Attacks
What. A. Mess.
Over the past 8 years or so, Pakistan has experienced a wave of attacks on its soil. And no, I am not talking about the countless suicide attacks under the cloud of which Pakistan remained. But in fact, I am talking about the 300-plus strikes via drone attacks sanctioned by the CIA (US) and more importantly by President Obama and prior to him President Bush. While the US government has repeatedly claimed the successes of these attacks using un-manned drones by claiming numerous high profile terrorist targets, skeptics have disputed those successes and pointed to the loss of civilians.
Regardless of the success or failure of these attacks, these attacks have been denounced by the United Nations Human Right Council claiming that these attacks have led to human rights violations. On top this, International Law (UN) depicts that these attacks can be deemed as a violation of the country’s sovereignty and can be interpreted as an act of war. In order words, The US is engaging in what is an act of war against Pakistan and Pakistan reserves the right (as per International Law) to retaliate.
Also supporting this interpretation of the law is this statement by President Obama (made on 19 November 2012) in the face of Israeli attack on Gaza:
“There’s no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders. We are fully supportive of Israel’s right to defend itself.”
Based on this above statement, Obama is technically endorsing any retaliation (if that ever happens) from the Pakistani government on US soil. Or am I wrong in assuming that?
I genuinely believe that the drone attacks on Pakistani soil are counter-productive, not just because it violates Pakistan’s sovereignty. I have my three fold reasoning.
Firstly, the problem with the drone attacks is the lack of accuracy. Be it the accuracy of the target or the accuracy of intel which leads to the target. For me, there are far too many civilian deaths for targets which at best are mid-level targets, they aren’t even these big guns of any terrorist organizations. To be fair, even if they are high level targets, it doesn’t justify the killings of innocent civilians as collateral. It is ironic that America, which strives on protecting every civilian life in the US from a robbery case to a terrorist case, is so determined to wipe out potential terror operatives at the risk of multiple civilian lives. According to the highly reputed nonpartisan American organization Brookings Institution, for every mid-level terrorist operative there are about a dozen civilian deaths. In my opinion, that is far too many.
Secondly, the fact remains that when there are a certain number of civilian deaths, it enrages the family and friends of the victims. What it does is it creates this feeling of hatred towards whoever inflicted the damage to them, in this case, the Americans. As a result, these emotionally vulnerable people are very easy recruitment grounds for the terrorist organizations. They are immediately able to target and in some way brain-wash these people and establish a common enemy and create an army for themselves. This is how I believe the Taliban and Al-Qaeda recruit their people; they essentially capitalize on those vulnerable people who have a common enemy with themselves. I genuinely believe that if the drone attacks stop, it would make it much, much harder for these terror organizations to recruit an army that they possess at present.
Pakistanis have been skeptical of the Americans because there is an element of the lack of trust. Pakistanis just cannot trust Americans because they have been responsible for innocent lives, many of them women and children, in Pakistan. This problem is so deep-rooted that the Obama administration has run ads on Pakistani TV highlighting the improvement in trade relations between the two countries and touting the aid program for disaster relief areas within Pakistan to build a certain level of trust with the Pakistani people. Although, this hasn’t yielded any rewards as Pakistanis remain skeptical of the Americans and their government.
Finally, I want to bring people’s attention to the fact that one of the drone strikes killed a known terrorist, an American citizen named Anwar-al-Awlaki. Isn’t that the point of the drone strikes to target and kill terrorists? Americans certainly believe it is. So, why was this one death of an American citizen so heavily criticized in America? The uproar ranged from everyday citizens to high stature politicians like Rand Paul (a US Senator) over the killing of an American life when Pakistani lives are taken on a daily basis and we experience higher causalities (including a very high number of innocent women and children). So, why the double standard? If they are so open and willing to taking Pakistani lives, then why have a restriction for American lives even despite them not even being innocent? My point is not that they should be taking out Americans using drone strikes; it is that no lives should be taken. And, the idea that American lives are more important than Pakistani lives is absurd and that is me being polite.
Therefore, based on all these reasons, I am firmly against the drone attacks that Pakistanis have been subjected to for close to a decade. My analysis is that they have been nothing but counter-productive and are essentially a total mess.
In other words, I would like America to adopt a very Ron Paul-like foreign policy approach, at least with Pakistan. They have been subjected to these drone attacks for far too long and its high time that they are stopped for good.
