Pakistan Says U.S. Drone Strikes Violate Its Sovereignty

[The Straight Story]

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

We turn now to a primary target of U.S. drone strikes: Pakistan. Yesterday, missiles struck a compound in North Waziristan near the border with Afghanistan, killing three people. The strike occurred shortly after Pakistan's ambassador in Washington condemned the use of drones as a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty and international law.

Throughout Pakistan, popular reaction to U.S. drone strikes isn't just negative. It is vociferously negative. NPR's Jackie Northam joins us now from Islamabad. And, Jackie, what's been the reaction to this latest drone attack in North Waziristan?

JACKIE NORTHAM, BYLINE: Well, the English and Urdu press are certainly covering this latest strike. But, Robert, compared to other drone attacks, this one is quite small and, from all accounts, really, where no major players killed.

Drone strikes have become quite common here in Pakistan. There has been hundreds of strikes over the past few years. This is the first one this month, but there were six in January alone, which killed more than 40 people. And then, you know, with each hit, there's just an increasing anger here in Pakistan. And it's something that crops up in every conversation that you have whether you're talking about Afghanistan or foreign policy or the problem with militancy here. Even the weather, I think, you could probably work it in. So it's here, it's present. This whole issue of drones works its way into every part of society, you know?

http://www.npr.org/2013/02/07/171413259/pakistan-says-u-s-drone-strikes-violate-its-sovereignty

[AZ Progressive]

1. Drone strikes certainly will enforce support of anti-americanism in Pakistan

It shows just how much of a bully the United States is that it continually unabashedly tramples on the sovereign rights of other countries to get what it wants.

Obama might as well create the next Osama.

[bluestate10]

2. Having people in Pakistan freely planning to kill innocent americans violates our

sovereignty. Pakistan can fix the problem by arresting terrorists.

[AZ Progressive]

3. Who do you think they have more sympathy for, An "alien" culture like America, or...

Someone who was a muslim and purported to fight against America for violating Islam and being essentially an invader into the Arab and Islamic world.

Is it not true that we are in the Middle East for its Oil, and essentially controlling much of it for oil? Yes it is dirty, but there is no effect without a cause.

Please, have some sense of empathy and understanding of how different the cultures are and that you would be more likely to side with someone that is similar to your culture (and especially for supposedly defending your culture) more than someone who is essentially very foreign to your own culture. America's wanton disregard for respecting other nations only creates enemies. Imagine if someone was continually fondling and touching you, or continually damaging your property or disciplining your children without any right to, how would you feel? Wouldn't that person become your enemy? And lets take that step further, how about someone continually trying to kill members of your extended family? How would you feel?

[MadHound]

10. Hell, we have people in this country planning to kill innocent Americans,

In fact you have people in every country in the world doing the same. Is your answer to unleash the drones on every country, including ours?

Oh, and people in a foreign country planning death to Americans isn't a new phenomenon, my, how did we get by with illegal drone strikes for all that time

[Catherina]

4. Imagine, just imagine how angry we would be if someone was blowing us up with drones

attacking us on our own soil.

It's not just the deaths, which are horrible enough, but what the living have to go through.

Besides having to pick up the scattered pieces of loved ones, you've got a country where the children are absolutely terrified and survivors, even witnesses, of these drone attacks have mental diseases now.

It's pure terror.

All this why? It's unconscionable.

Thanks for posting this, let me go listen to it now.

[Buzz Clik]

6. Excellent point. However, ...

... if the drones were killing perceived enemies of the government/country, our protests would be soft and insincere.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. But, that someone would do like we do and tell us that it's for our own good.

And, that we should be grateful for their help.

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy." - Gandhi

[Catherina]

19. I saw that. It's quite astounding

When the day comes, those people will be nowhere to be seen. Instead they'll be screaming for everyone to rally around and defend them from the consequences of what they supported and pretending they never said such a thing, just like they were never for the war against Iraq and never believed the lies about WMDs.

[Buzz Clik]

5. We've been doing this for nearly a decade.

Pakistan once openly hosted the drones and allowed them to be based in Pakistan.

One has to figure that if Pakistan's government truly disliked these strikes, they would call on us to end them, and we would.

[AZ Progressive]

7. That's because we were propping up Musharraf

We do this all the time, prop up dictators to allow us to do whatever we want in their country.

[Buzz Clik]

9. Do you really believe that the Pakistani government sees no utility in the strikes on their soil?

The reality is that the groups we target are a far bigger threat to the Pakistanis than to us. We do the dirty work, they blame us for compromising their sovereignty, and we both get what we want.

(No, I do not support this policy. It is possible to debate an issue without taking a side)

[rhett o rick]

20. So you are saying you are pretty sure the Pakistani government doesnt mind

even thought they say they mind. You mean no doesnt mean no?

[Buzz Clik]

22. Absolutely. No question in my mind.

They'd have a total heart attack and make a huge, huge stink -- including behind doors -- until we quit.

[Luminous Animal]

24. The Pakistan parliament has asked for the drone strikes to end regularly sin ce 2008.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57424029/u.s-drone-strike-riles-pakistani-politicians/

Pakistan's Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying the strikes which killed three suspected militants in the North Waziristan tribal area Sunday "are in total contravention of international law and established norms of interstate relations."

"The government of Pakistan has consistently maintained that drone attacks are violative of its territorial integrity and sovereignty," it said.

Pakistan's parliament demanded an end to the strikes in mid-April when it approved new guidelines for the country's relationship with the U.S.

....

It's not the first time the U.S. has ignored Pakistan's parliament, which has called for the drone strikes to end since 2008.

Pakistani Ambassador to the U.S., Sherry Rehman says U.S. drone strikes cross a red line.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/05/pakistani-ambassador-us-drone-strikes-cross-a-red-line
"Operationally, it is counterproductive because it creates more potential terrorists on the ground instead of taking them out," she says, adding public perception in Pakistan turns the attacks into a recruiting tool for terrorist organizations. "We need to drain the swamp."

Rehman denies accusations that Pakistan outwardly condemns the strikes, but is privately complicit in their effectiveness.

"There is no question of quiet complicity. There is no question of 'wink and nod.' This is a parliamentary 'red line' that all our government institutions have internalized as policy," says Rehman, who has been in her current position since the end of 2011. "I also say this as not just a policy that we say. It is important to us."

She also states this:

"We see them as a direct violation of our sovereignty. We also see them as a violation of international law," the ambassador said at a meeting with reporters Tuesday. Rehman would not elaborate on the Pakistani reaction if the U.S. continues with its current actions.

[MadHound]

11. Yes, and not just in Pakistan, but Somolia and elsewhere,

Thus, we continue to violate international law with every strike.

[KharmaTrain]

12. This Needs To Be Determined In An International Forum...

Drone technology is spreading worldwide and its uses, especially across international borders, will need to be addressed and soon. Does chasing a "combantant" from a war zone into a "safe haven" in a third country constitute violation of sovereignty? What about missiles that are shot from a war zone that end up in a third country? How about an unarmed drone? As happens with war and technology, laws lag behind.

One major problem with Pakistan is the areas where we've been shooting drones is one the government in Islamabad has little control over. These tribal areas are as alien to the Pakistani government as they are to ours and in many cases offers a threat. Thus, the U.S. is doing the dirty work for that regime by turning the anger towards the U.S. rather than the Pakistani government or military.

[joshcryer]

13. Good, now they need to active attack the drones.

And go to the UN to stop the strikes.

I'll be surprised if they do that, however.

[bvar22]

14. That just can't be!

I have it from good authority on DU that we only use drones in countries that have asked us to do so!!!!

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

15. yep, & they're not gonna cry like little hypocrites when when those supposed unarmed drones

flying over America become armed and they start killing American children who're at the wrong place at the wrong time. We all know that if we keep bombing children over there, eventually they'll bring the fight here and collateral damage (killing innocent civilians using drones) while trying to get the nasty old terrorist means nothing. What's good enough for Pakistani children is good enough for ours.

After all, we have to think safety here.

[rhett o rick]

21. Here is a rule of thumb to make it easier for you. If we attack someone in a foreign country

then we have their permission by definition. And if they say otherwise, it's just for show. They really want it. And anyone other than the intended target that gets accidentally killed are guilty by association unless determined otherwise.

[Mojorabbit]

16. We would not let any country do this to us. I

can't see where this is acceptable for us to do to another country.

[msanthrope]

17. They should eschew our aid in protest. nt

[EastKYLiberal]

18. Pakistan asserting sovereignty... how cute.

[WinkyDink]

23. NS, S.