Photo: AFP/Getty
Yesterday (4/12/12) Pakistan’s parliament unanimously voted in favor of a resolution that, among other things, calls for an immediate end to CIA drone strikes in their country.
The Washington Post‘s account of this news included this curious observation:
From Washington’s perspective, the debate in Parliament was a healthy exercise in democracy but one that is unlikely to affect the drone war. The military leaders of both nations see the drones as efficient and effective in eliminating hard-core Islamic militants that plague both the U.S. and Pakistani armies.
I know that the Post is merely conveying “Washington’s perspective,” but let’s think about this for a second. A sign of a healthy democracy is one where civilian political leadership has no power over the military–either in its own country or a nominal ally launching air attacks on its soil?
The New York Times, meanwhile, had this take (4/13/12):
Still, the demand for an “immediate cessation of drone strikes” has no easy solution. In 2008 Parliament also demanded an end to drone strikes, only for the CIA to continue attacking Taliban and Al Qaeda targets in the tribal belt along the Afghan border.
Actually, there is an easy solution to Pakistan’s demand: Stop launching drone attacks.
Some deep dish condescension in that “healthy exercise in democracy” comment, don’t you think?
And an unsurprising omission of the “efficient and effective” murder of civilians.
I hope they are not paving the way for inviting a foreign occupier to make drone strikes on American soil with no domestic recourse…
the answer to u.s. drone strikes in pakistan is for pakistan to shoot down u.s. drones flying over it’s territory. that’s simplistic isn’t it?
What could be more democratic than Collateral Damage from impartial, foreign drones?
Yeah well yesterday our Parliament(sic)voted unanimously to ask one more time for a straight answer from the Pakistani parliament- on the question rolling about our minds like a hot pin ball.When did you know, and how long did you help hide, OBL’s whereabouts? And how long would you of taken our billions to hunt him down(Never admitting he was next to your war college in a neighborhood of ex generals,two blocks from a Police station.) ?Im still wondering how many in that Parliament who demand an end to drone strikes knew where he was ,and lose payoff money every time we drop a bomb on one of those mass murderers heads.Our dear friends the Pakistanis.
All war planes are monstrous, and kill many people who have had no trial. The drones are horrible to see, and death-delivering to children, teenagers, mothers, fathers, grandparents, single and innocent old people–causing all the anguish and emotional suffering that loss or injury to family members and friends causes everywhere in the world. They encourage deep resentment, thus being the opposite of “protective” to anyone. Shame and sorrow beyond comprehension are the lot of those responsible–and that is every American citizen, in the “last analysis”. War is NOT the answer to humankind’s search for freedom and the pursuit of happiness!!
Wow!
“From Washington’s perspective, the debate in Parliament was a healthy exercise in democracy…”
Let them just practice not commit democracy.
michael e: so you believe that story about Bin Laden? Tell me, has it occurred to you that all leaders of nations tell their people that they are the best people on earth with the best possible government? All nations have the same potential for it’s powerful to engage in manipulation of information. I find so much ethnocentrism in nationalism. Before you go off into a debate about different types of government please understand and address my actual point: Any form of government is only as good as the intent of the individuals of the moment. If one is in government to line their own pockets, then they are going to have a conflict of interest. Follow the money Micheal. Who came away with those “billions” at the end of that chase for Bin? I’m thinking Cheney for one. He’s heavily invested in the commerce of war. Bush? I’m sure you can name a few. It definately wasn’t the foot soldier. Why do you choose to believe that particular story about Bin Laden? Can we agree that we don’t actually know what happened?
The NYT’s comment: “It declared that “no overt or covert operations inside Pakistan shall be permitted” — a broad reference that could be interpreted to include all C.I.A. operations.” doesn’t make sense. Of course Pakistan wouldn’t prohibit the U.S. military from flying drone missions while allowing the C.I.A. to do so. What is the NYT’s trying to insinuate?
Claudin I can’t answer you because Im not sure what you are referring to.What Bin Laden story is it that I believe in?
As far as Cheney and Bush doing….. what????What are you insinuating exactly?You are making broad, cloaked,innuendo’s with nothing specific stated.Good for smearing people, but not so good under cross examination.
My general feeling about OBL is that he was an instrumental leader in 911, and other terrorist acts against this country (and others).He ended up hiding in Pakistan obviously with Pakistani collusion.Justice found him when he was formally introduced to seal team six who killed him with maximum prejudice.Fill in the blanks.Were do we disagree?
How much difference is there between, presumably unordered, shooting families in their beds, bombing human occupied
dwellings and drone bombing individuals–all murders by the so-called Christian nation supposedly living by the Golden Rule and the Commandment “Thou shalt not kill”? No legal trials for these victims so no way of determining guilt (with the possible exception of Sgt. Bales who will not be tried in the land where murder was committed). Without a trial, the assassination of OBL was also a crime. But our “pro-life” faction only believes in saving fetuses, not human beings, so death by war has become our way of life.
@michael e: you are conflating two different issues. If the Pakistan military was knowingly hiding Bin Laden then the US may well want to take some action in retaliation. The question posed here is are drone strikes a legitimate form of retaliatory action? I don’t think so, for reasons of sovereignty (the Pakistan parliament has voted that they cease), morality (they are too indiscriminate in who they kill) and legality (assassination without trial is illegal by US laws).
It seems you are for them, so can you please provide some reasoning? How would you feel if a foreign government drone strikes your neighbour, who they had reason to believe was a terrorist, and oops, don’t you know it killed you entire family by accident. A little peeved perhaps?
Well Sean you are only scratching the surface of the fact…the fact that with Pakistan,we are dealing with a country who may not be our friend, and in fact may even be an enemy to us.Their ties to terror, and their ownership of the bomb, makes our ties to them unpalatable -yet necessary.As far as our drone attacks into the country my guess is Pakistan is playing two cards.On one hand their top leadership knows of it.Accepts it.Even gives intel to help it.Yet in the other hand in public they yell and scream that it must stop to save face.
Are drone strikes a legitimate form of attack?No taking of any life can be ligitimized.Not Hitlers -not OBL if you look at it from a moral or religious view.But we are dealing with a practical military view of killing an enemy before he kills you(at some point)If OBL hides in a home and the family who lives there is all killed in the strike we see the reality of war.On 911 those who began this were more than aware of those realities.And of the PR bonanza they would reap upon our retaliations.But by strictly faulting our advanced and very effective attack methods against them- you play into their hands.
As the crypto-Zionist Noam Chomsky claimed last year that Washington doesn’t want democracy in the Musli world – as it brings anti-Israel regimes.
Pakistan has been victim of Zionist lobby groups even before the country was established in 1947 – for All India Muslim League leaders’ opposition to partition of British mandate Palestine to solve Europe’s centuries-old ‘Jewish Problem’.
“It is essential that we strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans,” – David Ben Gurion, first Prime Minister of Zionist entity.
Pakistan has been controlled by a pro-USrael administration and military establishment since the assassination of its first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan in the early 1950s. The current PPP government and country’s 20% president Asif Ali Zardari were installed by the US whose ambassador in Islamabad is a defacto ‘Viceroy’ of Pakistan.
America has always used bribe to control Muslim countries like Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia and Nigeria. Last year, Iranian ambassador in Islamabad told the nation that it cannot gain its sovereignty until it learn to stand on its own feet. Therefore, I think Pakistani parliament’s show of hands is nothing but to fool the nation – just like the US Congress and Senate. The close cooperation of Washington and Islamabad will continue as usual.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/vultures-over-pakistan/
“As the crypto-Zionist Noam Chomsky claimed last year that Washington doesn’t want democracy in the Muslim world – as it brings anti-Israel regimes.”
You’re trying to make it sound like Chomsky is pro-Israel.
Quit peddling bullshit
You see, those brown “Muslim” half way across the world are un-people. We can attack their countries against international law (both Afghanistan and Iraq), and occupy them, torture them, and execute them extra-judicially. And yes Michael e, Obama is a racist but not against caucasoids, he is a racist against those un-people.
Rehmut where do you find this stuff?I hope the Israeli leadership and Obama read this sight so they can learn what it is they have been up to.Im sure it would be news to their ears.
I must ask. Why would a force not deploy a state of the art weapon? Unless, The cost of blow-back is unthinkable politicians and generals will not be moved. Like every innovation in killing, countermeasures will soon arrive and the drones will just be another ineffective weapon.
Drones are only part of the move to minimize risk to “living soldiers”.Accuracy -to minimize loss of innocent life.Time to acquire, and decide on target placement.Stealth, and spy capabilities to enhance forward force deployments and intel acquisition..Ability to project lethal force without the diplomatic quagmire of “boots on the ground”,or the use of overwhelming ( so called) dumb bomb, or….. smart bomb “fire and forget” lethality.It is a step forward in all these aspects.Its use is not mistake free.There is no such thing in combat operations.It does rankle both declared enemies(who can not strike an enemy face to face) and others because it allows us to strike from an office in Washington while enjoying a big Mac.So war becomes stranger and stranger.
Michael E
Right so because we were afraid of Osama Bin Laden we should, like cowards, drop unmanned drones on civilians and kill them. Not where I want my tax money spent, thank you.