Shahid Saeed and Awais Masood
Published in Daily Times
The Pakistan Body Count (PBC) data is highly unreliable and the use of this data for making any claims about drone accuracy would have severe epistemological implications. Moreover, the data, on multiple occasions, ignores reports of al Qaeda leaders and associates killed in drone attacks and the casualties are again reported as civilians. Even if Dr Usmani believes that the Afghan Taliban are not terrorists, militants or any other word as such, data collection on this issue should not classify them as civilians since they are the target of US forces and their deaths at the hands of a drone should count towards the success of the drone — regardless of the ideological leanings of the personnel compiling statistics. If in his defence Dr Usmani could claim that listing somebody as al Qaeda would require names, i.e. confirmation that a certain person has died, then this argument too falls apart since in their defence, opponents of drone strikes must bring names and information about each and every civilian killed in the strikes. The fact of the matter is that data collection on these issues is difficult but newspaper reporters use their local and intelligence sources to ballpark figures. Militant deaths are not reported by name unless it is a leading figure whose death is celebrated as martyrdom by militant groups themselves. Farhat Taj has already challenged the opponents to bring data to back their claims, and now so do we.
There lies no factuality in the rhetoric that strives to create a cause and effect relationship between drone attacks and suicide bombing. These are shallow assertions with hollow foundations and no proof to back them up. They can, they are, and they will be used as a motivating factor, but they are just one amongst the hundreds of motivating factors used by militants. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any suicide bomber has been linked to or a potential bomber that has been apprehended had any acquaintance who died in a drone attack. We challenge the other side to bring forward any news report, intelligence report or a case report that states that the person caught or who carried out the bombing had any relative who died in a drone attack and he was avenging the death of his family member(s). Most of the times, this assertion is made without any evidence. One of the cited examples is of Faisal Shahzad but that is unbelievable since his life story as is tells how he was led to the TTP. Baitullah Mehsud once claimed that a suicide attack was in revenge for a particular drone strike but it is unbelievable that he and the group of his monsters would not have carried it out any way.
The prime reason militants fight and suicide bombers exist is the worldview of clash of civilisations, an ideological assertion of one’s faith over the other’s and the view that all military operations conducted by our forces are being conducted at the ‘behest of the US’, where they view death for their ‘greater cause’ as the ultimate achievement and where life itself remains just a step towards a better eternal life they imagine. They view the state’s involvement in the war on terror, including the operations in Wana, Tirah, Orakzai, Mohmand, Bajaur, South Waziristan, Operation Silence and Swat as only for ‘pleasing the US’ and as guided by infidels. The drone attacks are an additional factor but in no way the prime motivating factor. The toxic religious dogmas of declaring everybody not cooperating with you as kafir (infidel) and liable to death is a major factor, not drones.
The recent survey of public opinion in FATA by the New America Foundation sheds light on the issue. On the issue of drone strikes, overall one in six people think they kill only militants and one-third believe they kill both civilians and militants. However, among those with greater than 12 years of education, one in three think they kill only militants. The youngest age group thinks along the same lines as well. While 70 percent of the people polled strongly oppose drone strikes and only 1 in 10 lends his/her support to them, among those with greater than 12 years of education, one in four support drone strikes.
When it comes to views about targeting by US forces in Mohmand and North Waziristan, three in four people think the bombing by US military forces is justified. A small percentage (one in six) but far higher compared to other areas in South Waziristan thinks that targeting Pakistani civilians is justified as well. The people of Orakzai do not seem to think that targeting Pakistani security forces or civilians or American security forces is justified at all. When it comes to the war itself, the highest support for the US-led war on terror comes from Bajaur. In contrast, the Afghan Taliban have the highest support in Mohmand. Pakistani Taliban have the support of nearly half of the people polled from North Waziristan Agency. While some findings contradict that of the Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy survey, we do not feel that the Aryana survey was any more ethical or better in its sampling than this one.
It is time that we form a responsible opinion about drone strikes, formed by statistics and facts and not emotions. All efforts must be undertaken to minimise collateral damage, including better intelligence and careful use of deadly force. There is just a smokescreen of fake sovereignty that seems to be the main issue of concern to a lot of people. Based on the available facts, the ones not fabricated or distorted, militants have suffered heavily because of this remote targeting technology. Drone strikes are very precise, based on intelligence that both sides often share and carried out based on mutual agreement and trust. The recent Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC) report recounts tales of some of the victims of drone attacks, heart-wrenching stories of people caught in the line of fire in a war of massive proportions. While the drone victims’ stories have been recounted in newspapers and the report mentioned in the media, the tales of the people whose houses were demolished by the military when they razed entire villages or mistook the identity of the person have been avoided. Minimising collateral damage is necessary, but forming any opinion based on concocted facts that can lead to a pause in the war is self-defeating.
(Concluded)
The writers are interested in history and public policy. Shahid Saeed can be reached at shahid@live.com.pk and Awais Masood can be reached at awais.masood@gmail.com
