Top Pakistani official in UK criticizes drone attacks

      Wajid Hasan is Pakistan's High Commissioner to the UK government. He argues that the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal areas are weakening Pakistani democracy and create a risk that even more people will choose to join extremist groups. He also suggested that there are some in Washington who would prefer to work with one person rather than have to pass policies through parliament.
       Hasan said: ‘What has been the whole outcome of these drone attacks is, that you have rather directly or indirectly contributed to destabilizing or undermining the democratic government. Because people really make fun of the democratic government – when you pass a resolution against drone attacks in the parliament, and nothing happens. The Americans don’t listen to you, and they continue to violate your territory.’  ‘Please don’t embarrass us by violating our territory because people question why the hell we have such a huge standing army, where we spend so much on our national defence budget, when we can’t defend ourselves?’
  Although the Pakistani parliament passed several resolutions demanding the drone strikes stop and also made stopping strikes a condition for reopening NATO transit routes, the strikes did not stop. NATO transit routes have re-opened.
       Hasan realizes that Pakistan cannot really stop the drone strikes except he says through public opinion. If public opinion in Pakistan could have stopped the strikes they would have stopped long ago since over ninety percent of Pakistanis disapprove of the strikes.
  Sherry Rehman the Pakstaini Ambassador to the U.S. also continued the official Pakistani line:‘We will seek an end to drone strikes and there will be no compromise on that.’ The Pakistani armed forces heads as well as intelligence service officials are apparently trying to negotiate a deal that would allow Pakistani forces to carry out any strikes against terrorists. Such a deal is quite unlikely since the U.S. wants to attack some groups that may have links to Pakistani intelligence. The Pakistanis would not sanction attacks on them even by Pakistani armed forces.
 Hasan says that agreement is necessary because of the high anti-U.S. sentiment in Pakistan. However that sentiment has been present for ages and seems unlikely to have any effect on U.S. policy. It is U.S. domestic attitudes that count for U.S. policy makers and most Americans are concentrated on domestic issues. Pakistan is probably regarded as an unreliable ally and a recipient of undeserved aid if it is given any thought at all.
   Hasan noted that Pakistan is an ally in the fight against Islamic radicals and  that thousands of Pakistanis have died in terrorist attacks and many soldiers have been killed in trying to eliminate extremists.
Hasan claims drone attacks violate Pakistan's national sovereignty. However in the past it is clear that there has been implicit acceptance of the attacks by the government and armed forces. Perhaps this reality is changing although this not certain. If  it were the case Pakistan would hardly have re-opened NATO transit routes. For more see this article in Juan Cole's blog.

Pakistan and U.S. nowhere near a deal on drone attacks

    The Pakistani parliament has several times passed motions demanding that U.S. drone attacks cease. Cessation of drone strikes was also made a condition of reopening NATO transit routes  through Pakistan to Afghanistan. However after Hillary Clinton apologized for a border incident in which 24 Pakistani troops were killed Pakistan reopened thee routes. The drone attacks did not cease. A drone attack was launched shortly after the reopening.
      Since the attacks continued after the NATO routes were reopened it appeared that perhaps Pakistan had tacitly agreed to the attacks. Sherry Rehman the Pakistani ambassador has vehemently denied this and reaffirmed Pakistan's opposition drone attacks as a violation of its sovereignty.
    Negotiations between the U.S. and Pakistan on some type of compromise deal on drones have been ongoing. However a senior official said::. “Cessation of drones is still a high priority for us in the dialogue with the US, but I’m afraid we are nowhere near a deal on the issue,”  “But we’ll keep talking to them about it,” 
   The defense committed of the Pakistani cabinet said after a meeting on July 3 that Pakistan“will continue to engage the US on counter-terrorism co-operation and counter-terrorism tools that are in line with international law and practice”  There have been recent meetings between Pakistani foreign minister Hina Khar and U.S. Secretary of  State Hillary Clinton..
  Just days before the July 3rd deal to reopen transit routes Pakistan suggested that there were alternatives to using drone strikes in the tribal areas although officials did not disclose exactly what they were. Foreign Office spokesperson Mozzam Khan said:“Pakistan’s position on drone attacks is very clear, and very clearly stated. This is an issue and both countries want to resolve it in a mutually acceptable manner,”  The drone attacks are quite unpopular in Pakistan. In the past the government has criticized the attacks in public while tacitly agreeing to them behind the scenes.
     Since the U.S. is adamant that the attacks continue a deal seems unlikely. However it is possible that if Pakistan is given more control over targeting and attacks launched only with Pakistani agreement a deal could be reached. However the U.S. is not likely to be agreeable to cede that much power to Pakistan.

Pakistan: Ambassador to U.S. denies Pakistan endorses drone attacks

  One of the conditions for reopening the NATO transit routes through Pakistan was the cessation of drone attacks. However Pakistan reopened the routes after an apology by Hillary Clinton for the killing of 24 Pakistani troops last November in a border incident.
    Ambassador Sherry Rehman said: “The concerns over drones can’t just be brushed aside."  Those concerns have been brushed aside. The U.S. has said all along that they will not be stopped. The Pakistani parliament has passed several resolutions demanding the attacks stop but to no avail. The U.S. and drone strikes are very unpopular in Pakistan. As a result Pakistani politicians typically engage in anti-US rhetoric. Even opposition leaders however are anxious to receive U.S. aid and maintain good relations with the U.S. See this article
    The reopening of the border has been met with protests in Pakistan. Hardline Islamists organized a march from Lahore to Islamabad. The Jamaat-ud-Dawa party led by Saeed is at the forefront of the march.  The U.S. has offered a 10 million dollar bounty for his arrest or conviction but he operates freely in Pakistan. For more see this article.


.

Pakistan claims drone strikes violate their sovereignty

Excuse the pun but Pakistan drones on and on about this issue. Parliament has even passed a motion that the attacks must stop. However they haven't. There was a pause after the U.S. killed a couple of dozen Pakistani troops on the Afghan border but that was all. They have resumed.
It seems obvious that at least until the pause there was tacit agreement within the Pakistani government and military concering the drone attacks. In fact Pakistani intelligence probably helped with targeting.
However, the issue seems to be taken more seriously now after two drone strikes killed at least 15 people in South Waziristan. The Pakistani government was quick to deny that it was involved. The government says it was not consulted at all with respect to any recent strikes.
The Pakistani government claims that they warned the U.S. to stop carrying out the strikes. The Pakistani ambassador Sherry Rehman said they told the U.S. this on March 9 after strikes that killed 13 people.
Foreign Office spokesperson Abdul Basit that there was no question that the drone attacks violated Pakistan' sovereignty. He said:"Pakistan has been using all diplomatic channels to bring an end to the strikes that are damaging our efforts against militancy and terrorism. Voices are also being raised in the West against these illegal drone strike," But all that has happened is that drone attacks have resumed. Basit did not talk of shooting down the drones as an option.
By continuing the attacks the U.S. puts the Pakistan government in an almost impossible position. They must complain about them as a political necessity. However, they are dependent upon the U.S. for aid and have not shown any willingness to really confront the U.S. except by verbiage that makes them look more silly and ineffective by the day. They will pay come the next election. For more see this article.