Daily Times

“Please tell the people in Punjab, who have never been to Waziristan or lived under the militants’ rule, to stop protesting against the drone strikes, and leave us alone.” Four of my students at the Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, who belong to North Waziristan, were blunt on the issue of drones when I inquired from them on the topic.

Their statement reveals a certain mindset that exists in Waziristan that has been overshadowed by the massive propaganda in the Pakistani media and in the urban centres of Punjab and other provinces of Pakistan. It is largely because there is a huge disconnect between the people in the urban centres and rural areas, and between war-affected areas and non-war-affected areas of Pakistan. Surprisingly, people in the urban centres and non-war-affected areas are far more hostile towards the US and drones than the people who are actually living in the area where strikes are conducted. Hence you see the anti-drone rallies coming out in the urban city centres instead of the tribal areas. However, even the anti-drone rallies in the urban areas have not been able to garner more than 3,000-4,000 people, especially in cities like Lahore where a small accident can easily pile up 200-300 people, or where the T20 world cup can attract hundreds of people in front of a 20’ TV screen at any local shop.

The propaganda has also soared by the recent publication of research studies by foreign research think tanks and institutes blasting the US’s use of drones in Pakistan. One such study is a joint project by NYU-Stanford titled Living under the drones. This study is not only methodologically fallacious because it uses a sample of only 69 people — all of whom have been the victims of drone strikes — disregarding the rest of the population that lives under the drones, but the very intent of such studies is biased against drones — something that can be observed from the anti-war institutes that sponsor such studies.

The question then arises: if the public is so against the drone policy of the US, as the picture is presented in the media, why then is nobody storming the streets in a country like Pakistan where thousands can flood the streets to protest against the blasphemous video against Islam? The answer perhaps rests in understanding what it is exactly about the drones that people despise. The research I conducted recently suggests a different perspective on the anti-drone sentiment in Pakistan. While on the surface people complain about the issue of sovereignty and civilian casualties as the most important reasons why drone strikes are wrong, the truth is that it is neither of the two that makes people anti-drone. My recent lecture on exploring the issue in depth triggered a debate that revealed why exactly people are against the drone strikes.

The two major reasons the drone strikes are rejected by the public in Pakistan include the issue of sovereignty and secondly, civilian casualties, both of which stand without any legs. In the words of my Waziri students who complained, “Where were these Punjabis and other Pakistanis when Taliban seeped into our lands, and killed our tribal elders who opposed their tyrannical rule? Why did the Pakistani people not take out rallies on the question of sovereignty back in 2001 when all of this was going on then too? What about the thousands of innocent civilians killed at the hands of militants who brutalise us, take money from us, and kidnap our children for the sake of jihad. Why did nobody raise a voice for the civilians who died at the hands of militants?”

The fact that has been captured well in the statements by my students is that while Imran Khan and the other anti-drone lot have been completely agnostic about the Taliban and other offshoots invading Pakistan’s sovereignty and killing civilians, they have a problem with the Americans who are in pursuit of those who have killed civilians and sabotaged Pakistan’s sovereignty, and hence kill militants through drone strikes. By lashing out at the US on drone strikes, who is Khan or those in Pakistan against the drones supporting? Those who have killed the innocent Pakistani women, children, and thousands of soldiers and police officials? It is tragic to realise that people who oppose the drone strikes are unconsciously taking a stand for those militants who have killed far more Pakistani civilians than the Americans have done through their drone technology. At least the Americans have an intention to kill the militants, and use drones precisely to minimise civilian casualties, unlike the militants who are using civilians — women and children — as a cover to carry out their operations.

The reason why Pakistanis are against the drones, something that came out from my research study of the educated urban elite that makes the most anti drone noise, has nothing to do with the idea of sovereignty or civilian casualties. Having discussed it with more than 300 university students on how they feel about the drone strikes, there is no denying that the majority is anti-drones, but largely out of confusion and not because of inherent ideological issues. The same majority is overwhelmingly anti-Zardari, anti-army, anti-Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), and recently anti-Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI). This ‘anti-everything’ lot is against drones out of frustration at what they see in the media as the arrogance of the US towards the Pakistan government and military. It is about the continuation of drone strikes even after being requested by Pakistan not to continue to do so, not realising that the pleas by the Pakistani government have been ceremonial so that the opposition parties in Pakistan like the PML-N, PTI and Jamaat-e-Islami will not be able to politicise the issue and use it against the sitting government.

It is the duplicity on the drone policy and the idea of the Pakistan government playing the role of a victim that has enraged the people and backfired as the issue of drones has now become political and tainted with fallacies. There is an internal power struggle in Pakistan and lack of a cohesive foreign policy stance, which the government in Pakistan and the army are not ready to own, while realising fully the benefits of drone operations in turning the war against the militants. It is the lack of knowledge on the drone strikes, dual policy of the government of Pakistan on the issue, and media propaganda that is turning the public against drones. A drone is an essential weapon that has become political and an electoral winning card, which is now being played in the hands of Pakistani politicians who might put the security of Pakistan at stake for their vested political interests. With al Qaeda and other groups accepting the lethality of drone strikes for having killed their core operational group, Pakistan needs to come clean to the public on the issue of drones, and perhaps, own them. The more government is going to lie about the issue of drones, and the longer it takes to depoliticise and bring all political parties on board, the more severe the repercussions will be because the militants are not likely to drop their weapons if the US withdraws the use of drones. If anything, they are likely to step up their militant activities that have been severely restricted ever since the use of drones multiplied in Pakistan.

The writer is the Visiting Scholar of Asia Programme, Woodrow Wilson Centre