One out of every three killed by US drone in Pakistan is a civilian, says a report by the New America Foundation.
The Washington-based think-tank had issued a similar report in October last year, which showed these strikes were decimating the militants, killing their leaders as well as low-level activists.
But the latest report warns that civilian deaths in these strikes were alarming as 32 per cent of drone victims in Fata over the past six years have been civilians.
The report ‘The Year of the Drone’ compiles and analyses the results of 114 drone strikes that killed over 1,000 people.
“Our study shows that the 114 reported drone strikes in northwest Pakistan, including 18 in 2010, from 2004 to the present, have killed approximately between 834 and 1,216 individuals,” says the report.
“Of these, around 549 to 849 were described as militants in reliable press accounts, about two-thirds of the total on average. Thus, the true civilian fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 32 per cent.”
The report, however, insists that the drone strikes are an unpopular but necessary evil.
The US media, while reporting the New America Foundation’s findings, conceded that the percentage of civilian casualties in drone strikes was ‘mind-numbing’ and described the drones as ‘unmanned flying death squads’.
The Year of the Drone
Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann, who compiled the report, note that 2009 was the year of the drone, as there were 51 reported strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas, compared to a total of 45 during two terms under President George W. Bush. So far in 2010, between 80 and 140 reported militants have been killed in drone strikes.
Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud seems to have been a frequent target of the strikes, and was reportedly killed by one in mid-January.
None of the reported strikes has appeared to target America’s most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden. Nor has his top deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, been targeted since he narrowly escaped being killed in a drone strike four years ago.
Nor has the expanded drone programme stopped Al Qaeda and its allies from continuing to train western recruits. Between 100 and 150 westerners are believed to have travelled to Fata in 2009.
Key militant figures reportedly sleep outside under trees to avoid being targeted. Taliban regularly execute suspected ‘spies’ in Waziristan accused of providing information to the United States.
The report asserts that drone strikes might be on shaky legal ground, according to Columbia Law School professor Matthew Waxman:
“The principle of proportionality says that a military target may not be attacked if doing so is likely to cause incidental civilian casualties or damage that would be excessive in relation to the expected military advantage of the attack....But there is no consensus on how to calculate these values.… Nor is there consensus on what imbalance is ‘excessive.’”
The study relates that the drone strategy isn’t a strategy at all- but a tactic – and one that backfires.
The report, however, notes that the Americans insist on carrying out the strikes because they do not have too many alternatives for eliminating the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists hiding in Fata.
Pakistan has forbidden the US from employing ground forces within Fata and the Americans do not have other resources in the area to deploy against the militants.
The report speculates that the US is quite unlikely to use drone strikes in Balochistan to target Taliban reportedly hiding in and around Quetta. Balochistan is part and parcel of the Pakistani state, unlike the northwestern tribal areas, which have their own legal and social codes.
“Despite the controversy drone strikes are likely to remain a critical tool for the United States to disrupt Al Qaeda and Taliban operations and leadership structures,” the study concludes.
The Washington-based think-tank had issued a similar report in October last year, which showed these strikes were decimating the militants, killing their leaders as well as low-level activists.
But the latest report warns that civilian deaths in these strikes were alarming as 32 per cent of drone victims in Fata over the past six years have been civilians.
The report ‘The Year of the Drone’ compiles and analyses the results of 114 drone strikes that killed over 1,000 people.
“Our study shows that the 114 reported drone strikes in northwest Pakistan, including 18 in 2010, from 2004 to the present, have killed approximately between 834 and 1,216 individuals,” says the report.
“Of these, around 549 to 849 were described as militants in reliable press accounts, about two-thirds of the total on average. Thus, the true civilian fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 32 per cent.”
The report, however, insists that the drone strikes are an unpopular but necessary evil.
The US media, while reporting the New America Foundation’s findings, conceded that the percentage of civilian casualties in drone strikes was ‘mind-numbing’ and described the drones as ‘unmanned flying death squads’.
The Year of the Drone
Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann, who compiled the report, note that 2009 was the year of the drone, as there were 51 reported strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas, compared to a total of 45 during two terms under President George W. Bush. So far in 2010, between 80 and 140 reported militants have been killed in drone strikes.
Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud seems to have been a frequent target of the strikes, and was reportedly killed by one in mid-January.
None of the reported strikes has appeared to target America’s most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden. Nor has his top deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, been targeted since he narrowly escaped being killed in a drone strike four years ago.
Nor has the expanded drone programme stopped Al Qaeda and its allies from continuing to train western recruits. Between 100 and 150 westerners are believed to have travelled to Fata in 2009.
Key militant figures reportedly sleep outside under trees to avoid being targeted. Taliban regularly execute suspected ‘spies’ in Waziristan accused of providing information to the United States.
The report asserts that drone strikes might be on shaky legal ground, according to Columbia Law School professor Matthew Waxman:
“The principle of proportionality says that a military target may not be attacked if doing so is likely to cause incidental civilian casualties or damage that would be excessive in relation to the expected military advantage of the attack....But there is no consensus on how to calculate these values.… Nor is there consensus on what imbalance is ‘excessive.’”
The study relates that the drone strategy isn’t a strategy at all- but a tactic – and one that backfires.
The report, however, notes that the Americans insist on carrying out the strikes because they do not have too many alternatives for eliminating the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists hiding in Fata.
Pakistan has forbidden the US from employing ground forces within Fata and the Americans do not have other resources in the area to deploy against the militants.
The report speculates that the US is quite unlikely to use drone strikes in Balochistan to target Taliban reportedly hiding in and around Quetta. Balochistan is part and parcel of the Pakistani state, unlike the northwestern tribal areas, which have their own legal and social codes.
“Despite the controversy drone strikes are likely to remain a critical tool for the United States to disrupt Al Qaeda and Taliban operations and leadership structures,” the study concludes.
No comments:
Post a Comment