IF ever the Pak-US co-operative alliance against terrorism would crumble it will under the unbearable weight of drone attacks ordered by the CIA into the Pakistani territory. Invariably, these predators kill more innocent non-combatant civilians than suspected terrorists. It is not that the so-called terrorists use civilians as human shields; these pilotless machines have greater destructive capacity than the ability to differentiate between friends and foes. So there is this greater collateral damage. In some 22 drone attacks since last August the civilian losses have been overwhelming. But about losses the terrorists suffered reports are conflicting; however the very fact that despite Pakistan's serious objections the United States still needs them is an indication of their failure to make any significant change on the war-front.
In fact, just the opposite is happening. In the wake of mis-directed drone attacks which cause mostly civilian casualties the traditional comradeship called 'Pushtunwali' comes into play. A kind of severe resentment builds up against the 'coward enemy' which employs un-manly surreptitious means to kill old and young, men, women and children. Aptly correct then is Prime Minister Gilani's assertion at the World Economic Forum's special session on 'Pakistan and its neighbours' that drone attacks are counterproductive as they "unite them, the tribes and the militants". These attacks are counterproductive as they fuel militancy, he said and added: "We are separating militants from public but when there is a drone attack they get united". In case the Americans have credible and actionable intelligence they should share that with Pakistan and "we will take action", he said. Understandably, in the wake of drone strikes anti-Americanism is growing. There was the general feeling in Pakistan that with Barack Obama becoming the US president drone attacks would end - so much so that Prime Minister Gilani went on record to claim that with change of presidency in Washington drone attacks would be halted. This has not happened, causing not only embarrassment to the prime minister but a visible dent to the reputation of a person who has been catapulted to world's most powerful position on a promise of 'change'. Not only that; the Obama administration started off with bigger and deeper drone hits. Then came along Robert Gates, a follower of Bushism that President Obama has inherited, who claimed the attacks have the consent of Pakistani authorities. That is adding insult to injury. Practically at all levels, from the presidency to the foreign office Pakistan has denied having cut such a deal with the United States. The issues of collateral damage and counterproductive effect of drone attacks are no doubt contentious and deserve review in order to keep the anti-terrorism alliance on track. But more important and of greater concern to every Pakistani is violation of their country's airspace by the American drones. If our government has not permitted, which it insists it has not, the drone attacks then clearly fall in the category of blatant violations of Pakistan's sovereignty. If not today then tomorrow or the day after the government will be constrained to take up this issue at appropriate international fora. Before that happens the US government is expected to review its drone campaign to bring it in line with the anti-terrorism cooperation understanding. Not surprisingly, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Erdogan, who was a participant in that special session, endorsed Prime Minister Gilani's position by maintaining that such a move "just helps terrorists and does not serve any purpose".
