Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by admin in CHILDREN KILLED BY DRONE WAR on November 22nd, 2013
Mamana Bibi’s granddaughter. Mamana Bibi was killed in a US drone strike on 24 October 2012 in the village of Ghundi Kala, North Waziristan, Pakistan.
© Amnesty International
New evidence indicates that the USA has carried out unlawful killings in Pakistan through drone attacks, some of which could even amount to war crimes, Amnesty International said in a major new report released today.
The report, “’Will I be next?’ US drone strikes in Pakistan”, is one of the most comprehensive studies to date of the US drone program from a human rights perspective.
It documents recent killings in Pakistan’s northwestern tribal areas and the almost complete absence of transparency around the US drone program.
“Secrecy surrounding the drones program gives the US administration a license to kill beyond the reach of the courts or basic standards of international law. It’s time for the USA to come clean about the drones program and hold those responsible for these violations to account,” said Mustafa Qadri, Amnesty International’s Pakistan Researcher.
“What hope for redress can there be for victims of drone attacks and their families when the USA won’t even acknowledge its responsibility for particular strikes?”
The report was released in a joint news conference with Human Rights Watch, which issued its own report on drone and other air strikes in Yemen.
Amnesty International reviewed all 45 known drone strikes that took place in North Waziristan in northwestern Pakistan between January 2012 and August 2013. The region that has seen more strikes than any other part of the country.
The organization conducted detailed field research into nine of these strikes, with the report documenting killings, which raise serious questions about violations of international law that could amount to war crimes or extrajudicial executions.
In October 2012, 68-year-old grandmother Mamana Bibi was killed in a double strike, apparently by a Hellfire missile, as she picked vegetables in the family’s fields while surrounded by a handful of her grandchildren.
In July 2012, 18 laborers, including a 14-year-old boy, were killed in multiple strikes on a impoverished village close to the border with Afghanistan as they were about to enjoy an evening meal at the end of a long day of work.
Contrary to official claims that those killed were “terrorists”, Amnesty International’s research indicates that the victims of these attacks were not involved in fighting and posed no threat to life.
“We cannot find any justification for these killings. There are genuine threats to the USA and its allies in the region, and drone strikes may be lawful in some circumstances. But it is hard to believe that a group of labourers, or an elderly woman surrounded by her grandchildren, were endangering anyone at all, let alone posing an imminent threat to the United States,” said Qadri.
International law prohibits arbitrary killing and limits the lawful use of intentional lethal force to exceptional situations. In armed conflict, only combatants and people directly participating in hostilities may be directly targeted. Outside armed conflict, intentional lethal force is lawful only when strictly unavoidable to protect against an imminent threat to life . In some circumstances arbitrary killing can amount to a war crime or extrajudicial execution, which are crimes under international law.
Amnesty International also documented cases of so-called “rescuer attacks” in which those who ran to the aid of the victims of an initial drone strike were themselves targeted in a rapid follow-on attack. While there may have been a presumption that the rescuers were members of the group being targeted, it is difficult to see how such distinctions could be made in the immediate and chaotic aftermath of a missile strike.
The USA continues to rely on a “global war” doctrine to attempt to justify a borderless war with al-Qa’ida, the Taliban and those perceived to be their allies.
The USA’s promise to increase transparency around drone strikes, underscored by a major policy speech by President Barack Obama in May 2013, has yet to become a reality, and the USA still refuses to divulge even basic factual and legal information.
This secrecy has enabled the USA to act with impunity and block victims from receiving justice or compensation. As far as Amnesty International is aware, no US official has ever been held to account for unlawful killings by drones in Pakistan.
In addition to the threat of US drone strikes, people in North Waziristan are frequently caught between attacks by armed groups and Pakistan’s armed forces. The local population lives under constant fear of inescapable violence by all sides.
The US drone program has added to local suffering, with people in the region now also living in terror of death from US drones hovering in the skies day and night.
“The tragedy is that drone aircraft deployed by the USA over Pakistan now instill the same kind of fear in the people of the tribal areas that was once associated only with al-Qa’ida and the Taliban,” said Qadri.
As the report documents, local men and women have little control over the presence of groups like the Taliban and al-Qa’ida in their villages and districts.
Al-Qa’ida-linked groups have killed dozens of local villagers they accused of being spies for US drone strikes. Residents of Mir Ali told Amnesty International that bodies are routinely seen dumped by the side of streets with written messages warning that anyone accused of spying for the USA will meet the same fate.
Residents also told Amnesty International they could not report abuses by armed groups to local authorities for fear of retaliation. Many residents were also fearful of talking about drones strikes to Amnesty International. Some of those who did speak openly received threats afterwards.
While the Pakistan government maintains it opposes the US drone program, Amnesty International is concerned that some officials and institutions in Pakistan and in other countries including Australia, Germany and the UK may be assisting the USA to carry out drone strikes that constitute human rights violations.
“Pakistan must provide access to justice and other remedies for victims of drone strikes. The authorities of Pakistan, Australia, Germany and the UK must also investigate all officials and institutions suspected of involvement in US drone strikes or other abuses in the tribal areas that may constitute human rights violations,” said Qadri.
“The Pakistani authorities must disclose information on all US drone strikes they have documented and what measures they have taken or will take to assist victims of these strikes.”
The report also documents the failure of the Pakistan state to protect the human rights of people in North Waziristan. This ranges from deaths, injuries and displacement of residents due to bombardment by the military, to the absence of justice mechanisms and lack of adequate medical assistance.
The Pakistani authorities have a very poor record in bringing al-Qa’ida, Taliban and other perpetrators of human rights abuses from the region to justice in fair trials without recourse to the death penalty.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are jointly calling on the US Congress to fully investigate the cases the two organizations have documented and other potentially unlawful deaths, and to disclose any evidence of human rights violations to the public.
Amnesty International is calling on:
The US authorities to:
The Pakistani authorities to:
The international community to:
22 October 2013
Posted by admin in CHILDREN KILLED BY DRONE WAR on November 22nd, 2013
Youth Disrupted: Effects of U.S. Drone Strikes on Children in Targeted Areas
Since the George W. Bush administration’s first use of targeted assassinations via drone strikes, aimed at Al Qaeda and associated forces, in 2002, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) reports at least 178 innocent children (up to age 17) have died directly as a result of U.S. drone policy.[1]
Misleading claims by the U.S. Government
The minimum count of 178 child deaths is far beyond any acknowledged count of civilian deaths from U.S. drone strikes by the U.S. government. John Brennan, President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, has called civilian casualties as a result of the CIA’s secretive drone policy “exceedingly rare.”[3] Brennan said in August 2011, “Fortunately, for more than a year, due to our discretion and precision, the U.S. government has not found credible evidence of collateral deaths resulting from U.S. counterterrorism operations outside of Afghanistan or Iraq.”[4] Though from August 2010 through August 2011, TBIJ documented at least 101 civilians, including 13 children, were killed by drone strikes. Brennan also said from August 2010 through April 2012, the U.S. “had no information about a single civilian being killed.”[5] TBIJ found that at least 107 civilians, including at least 16 children, were killed by strikes in that time. Finally, in January 2012, President Obama — acknowledging the CIA’s drone program for the first time — said strikes do not cause large amounts of civilian casualties.[6] TBIJ finds that at the time of Obama’s statement, at least 284 civilians, and at least 62 children, had died from strikes since he came into office in January 2009. Similar statements downplaying the amount of civilian casualties have been made numerous times by unnamed government sources, according to Living Under Drones.[7]
Two recent reports — Living Under Drones, and The Civilian Impact of Drones: Unexamined Costs, Unanswered Questions,[8] by researchers at Columbia Law School’s Center for Civilians in Conflict — present seminal findings on how drone strikes affect civilian populations in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan. There is also valuable information contained in these reports on how drone strikes in particular impact children beyond the consequence of death.
Significant findings in Living Under Drones (direct passages):
– In North Waziristan, extended families often live together in compounds that contain several homes, often constructed with mud. Most compounds include a hujra, which is the main gathering room for men and the area in which male family members entertain visitors. The hujra is often in close proximity to buildings reserved exclusively for women and children. As a result, the shrapnel and resulting blast of a missile strike on a hujra can and has killed and injured women and children in these nearby structures. (p. 25)
– Drone strikes that kill civilians also exact a substantial toll on livelihoods by incapacitating the primary income earners of families. Because men are typically the primary income earners in their families, strikes often deprive victims’ families of “a key, and perhaps its only, source of income.” Families struggle to compensate for the lost income, often forcing children or other younger relatives to forgo school and enter the workforce at a young age. (p. 78)
Psychological Trauma
– One man described the reaction to the sound of the drones as “a wave of terror” coming over the community. “Children, grown-up people, women, they are terrified. . . . They scream in terror.” (p. 81)
– Interviewees also reported a loss of appetite as a result of the anxiety they feel when drones are overhead. Ajmal Bashir, an elderly man who has lost both relatives and friends to strikes, said that “every person—women, children, elders—they are all frightened and afraid of the drones . . . [W]hen [drones] are flying, they don’t like to eat anything . . . because they are too afraid of the drones.” Another man explained that, “We don’t eat properly on those days [when strikes occur] because we know an innocent Muslim was killed. We are all unhappy and afraid.” (p. 84)
– One man said of his young niece and nephew that “[t]hey really hate the drones when they are flying. It makes the children very angry.” Aftab Gul Ali, who looks after his grandson and three granddaughters, stated that children, even when far away from strikes, are “badly affected.” (p. 86)
– Hisham Abrar, who had to collect his cousin’s body after he was killed in a drone strike, stated:
When [children] hear the drones, they get really scared, and they can hear them all the time so they’re always fearful that the drone is going to attack them. . . [B]ecause of the noise, we’re psychologically disturbed—women, men, and children. . . Twenty-four hours, [a] person is in stress and there is pain in his head. (p. 86-87)
– Noor Behram, a Waziri journalist who investigates and photographs drone strike sites, noted the fear in children: “if you bang a door, they’ll scream and drop like something bad is going to happen.” A Pakistani mental health professional shared his worries about the long-term ramifications of such psychological trauma on children:
The biggest concern I have as a [mental health professional] is that when the children grow up, the kinds of images they will have with them, it is going to have a lot of consequences. You can imagine the impact it has on personality development. People who have experienced such things, they don’t trust people; they have anger, desire for revenge . . .So when you have these young boys and girls growing up with these impressions, it causes permanent scarring and damage. (p. 87)
Loss of Education Opportunities
– One father, after seeing the bodies of three dead children in the rubble of a strike, decided to pull his own children out of school. “I stopped [them] from getting an education,” he admitted. “I told them we will be finished one day, the same as other people who were going [to school] and were killed in the drone attacks.” He stated that this is not uncommon: “I know a lot of people, girls and boys, whose families have stopped them from getting [an] education because of drone attacks.” Another father stated that when his children go to school “they fear that they will all be killed, because they are congregating.” Ismail Hussain, noting similar trends among the young, said that “the children are crying and they don’t go to school. They fear that their schools will be targeted by the drones.” (p. 89)
– Children and teenagers who have stayed in school described how drones have affected their concentration and diminished their drive to study. Faheem Qureshi, the sole survivor of the first strike in North Waziristan carried out under President Obama, was one of the top four students in his class before the drone strike fractured his skull and nearly blinded him. Now, struggling with attention, cognitive, and emotional difficulties, he described how his studies have been affected:
Our minds have been diverted from studying. We cannot learn things because we are always in fear of the drones hovering over us, and it really scares the small kids who go to school. . . . At the time the drone struck, I had to take exams, but I couldn’t take exams after that because it weakened my brain. I couldn’t learn things, and it affected me emotionally. My [mind] was so badly affected . . . (p. 90-91)
– Waleed Shiraz, who was disabled in a January 2008 attack that killed his father, described how the strike altered his goals and devastated his family. A political science major in college, Waleed “dreamt of either leading some school in Peshawar as a principal or becoming a lawyer or even a politician representing Pakistan.” When the strike took place, he was home on his first holiday from the National University of Modern Languages in Islamabad, spending time with his family and studying for exams. At the time, he planned to study languages. Since the strike, those plans have radically changed:
I can’t dream of going back to college. I am unemployed. No one will give me admission into college and who is going to finance it? We are unemployed and our financial situation is extremely poor. Out of the ten kanals of land we owned[1 ¼ acres], we have sold five [5/8 acres] and the remaining five sit idle because my two younger brothers are too young. They can’t go to school, because I can’t afford supporting them, buying their books, and paying their fees. They are home most of the day and they are very conscious of the fact that drones are hovering over them. [The presence of drones] intimidates them. . . . My education is wasted. (p. 91)
– Mohsin Haq, 14, explained that some of his classmates have given up on school because “[t]hey are mentally disturbed. They can’t focus. They’re just too worried about their family. They’re not sure about anything, so school doesn’t make sense to them.” He also revealed his fears about the impacts on future generations, and his hopes for change:
[The children in my community] are very optimistic that someday, when these things do stop, they will continue with their life as they were before, start going to school again. They still dream about a bright future, about the aspiring people they want to be, the future administrators, the future principals of the schools, and teachers and future politicians. . . . Every family, everybody, they do want to think about their bright futures, their prosperous jobs, and their young kids. Butthey can’t think like that because of these drones, because of this uncertainty. (p. 92)
Breakdown of Community
– Sameer Rahman, whose family’s house was hit in a strike, confessed that “there are barely any guests who come anymore, because everyone’s scared.” He also stated that he does not allow his children to visit other people’s homes when they have guests over, because he believes having guests makes it more likely that the house will be attacked. (p. 96)
– Sadaullah Wazir, a teenager, told us that drones have “made life quite difficult [in that] more than two can’t sit together outside because they are scared they might be struck by drones. . . . We often discuss that too many people shouldn’t sit together outside because they are vulnerable then.” (p. 97)
Significant findings in The Civilian Impact of Drones (direct passages):
Psychological Trauma
– In locations such as northern Pakistan, where drones often buzz overhead 24 hours a day, people live in constant fear of being hit. Michael Kugelman of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars notes: “I have heard Pakistanis speak about children in the tribal areas who become hysterical when they hear the characteristic buzz of a drone. […] Imagine the effect this has on psyches, and particularly on young ones already scarred by war and displacement.” Unlike deaths and property loss, which may affect one or more families, the fear associated with covert drone strikes affects nearly everyone in a community. (p. 24)
– According to media reports, the threat or prevalence of drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan mean some parents are unwilling to send their children to school out of fear.
In Pakistan, there have been several reports of drone strikes that have damaged or destroyed local schools. Ten-year-old Nadia was at school when a drone strike hit her house, killing her mother and father. Having moved in with an aunt in a nearby town, Nadia told Center for Civilians in Conflict she had “no source of income with my parents gone… my aunt looks after me now and I help her in the house… but I want admission to school. I want an education.” (p. 25)
Intelligence Failures
– An Army investigation found that a February 2010 air strike mistakenly targeted vehicles carrying over 30 civilians in Uruzgan Province, noting there were critical failures related to the collection, analysis, and reporting of intelligence gathered by Predator drones. These included “inaccurate reporting from the crew of the unmanned Predator aircraft to the forces on the ground…that the vehicles contained only military aged males,” when in fact they contained children. (p. 32)
– “Data crush” may result in mistaken targeting of civilians, if analysts and decision-makers miss an important detail that is obscured by the flood of information. For example, a US investigation cited information overload as one reason for mistakes in a US military targeting operation against a convoy in Afghanistan, which left 23 civilians dead. Solid reports that children were present in the targeted convoy were lost amidst the vast swirl of data coming in from drones overhead. (p. 41)
Drone strike that resulted in most child deaths
A U.S. drone strike on a madrassa, or religious seminary, in Bajaur Agency of Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) in October 2006 resulted in what is most likely the highest child death count since U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan began, in 2004. Of the 80 to 83 civilians killed as a result of the strike, 69 were children ages 7 to 17, according to The News International.[9] The attack on the school, alleged[10] by Pakistani officials to have been a Taliban training camp harboring a militant leader[11], occurred at a time when militants were to meet with tribal elders to discuss a peace agreement.[12] A Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence official said the strike “effectively sabotaged the chances for an agreement” in the area.[13] The Pakistani military initially took responsibility for the strike but later indicated it was the fault of the U.S. government. An aide to then-President Pervez Musharraf said, “We thought it would be less damaging if we said we did it rather than the US. But there was a lot of collateral damage and we’ve requested the Americans not to do it again.”
Drone strikes and the destabilization of Pakistan
Many current and former Pakistani and American officials have spoken about drone strikes undermining Pakistani national sovereignty and the country’s democratic standing. High Commissioner of Pakistan to the United Kingdom Wajid Shamsul Hasan told TBIJ[14], “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.” Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, Sherry Rehman, has said drone strikes are a prime recruiting tool for militants.[15] Pakistan’s foreign minister has called U.S. drone strikes illegal and counterproductive.[16] Many members of Pakistan’s parliament have echoed these sentiments.[17] Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan is possibly the most notoriously outspoken Pakistani official critical of the U.S. drone policy there. He has opposed U.S. drone strikes for a host of reasons, most notably because he believes strikes will not lead to peace in Pakistan’s most violent areas.[18]
Names of children killed in U.S. drone strikes
(Information taken from The Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s database[19] of drone strikes and corresponding casualties.)
Name Age Date
Unknown 10 June 17, 2004
Unknown 16 June 17, 2004
Unknown(3 girls) unk November 5, 2005
Abdul Wasit 17 December 1, 2005
Noor Aziz 8 December 1, 2005
Unknown unk February 6, 2006
Unknown (5-6) unk February 13, 2006
Najibullah 13 October 30, 2006
Adnan 16 October 30, 2006
Inayatullah 15 October 30, 2006
Iftikhar 17 October 30, 2006
Wali-ur-Rahman 17 October 30, 2006
Rahman 13 October 30, 2006
Fazal Wahab 18 October 30, 2006
Jamroz Khan unk October 30, 2006
Talha 8 October 30, 2006
Sakirullah 16 October 30, 2006
Nimatullah 14 October 30, 2006
Shafiullah 16 October 30, 2006
Qari Sharifullah 17 October 30, 2006
Shabir 15 October 30, 2006
Shehzad Gul 11 October 30, 2006
Zabihullah 16 October 30, 2006
Wilayat Khan 11 October 30, 2006
Kitab Gul 12 October 30, 2006
Hizbullah 10 October 30, 2006
Naeemullah 17 October 30, 2006
Noor Mohammad 15 October 30, 2006
Ziaur Rhaman 13 October 30, 2006
Inayatur Rahman 17 October 30, 2006
Shaukat 14 October 30, 2006
Ameer Said 15 October 30, 2006
Darvesh 13 October 30, 2006
Abdul Waris 16 October 30, 2006
Saeedullah 17 October 30, 2006
Siraj 16 October 30, 2006
Abdus Samad 17 October 30, 2006
Rahmatullah 14 October 30, 2006
Qari Abdul Karim 19 October 30, 2006
Alam Nabi 11 October 30, 2006
Jamshed Khan 14 October 30, 2006
Qari Ishaq 19 October 30, 2006
Zaheeruddin 16 October 30, 2006
Taseel Khan 18 October 30, 2006
Ismail 12 October 30, 2006
Jannatullah 13 October 30, 2006
Salman 16 October 30, 2006
Luqman 12 October 30, 2006
Ihsanullah 16 October 30, 2006
Mashooq Khan 16 October 30, 2006
Numair 14 October 30, 2006
Bakht Muneer 14 October 30, 2006
Gul Sher Khan 15 October 30, 2006
Shahjehan 15 October 30, 2006
Mohammad Salim 11 October 30, 2006
Khan 21 October 30, 2006
Rahatullah 17 October 30, 2006
Yahya Khan 16 October 30, 2006
Inayatur Rhaman 16 October 30, 2006
Shahbuddin 15 October 30, 2006
Ikramullah 17 October 30, 2006
Abdullah 18 October 30, 2006
Ziaur Rahman 17 October 30, 2006
Ghulam Nabi 21 October 30, 2006
Qari Alamzeb 14 October 30, 2006
Mohammad Yaas Khan 16 October 30, 2006
Sultanat Khan 16 October 30, 2006
Nawab 17 October 30, 2006
Mashooq Jan 15 October 30, 2006
Razi Mohammad 16 October 30, 2006
Saifullah 9 October 30, 2006
Khalid 12 October 30, 2006
Noor Mohammad 8 October 30, 2006
Kalilullah 9 October 30, 2006
Shoaib 8 October 30, 2006
Asadullah 9 October 30, 2006
Sohail 7 October 30, 2006
Ilyas 13 October 30, 2006
Fazel Hakim 19 October 30, 2006
Mohammad Yunus 16 October 30, 2006
Ziauddin 16 October 30, 2006
Fazel Wahab 16 October 30, 2006
Azizul Wahab 15 October 30, 2006
Maulvi Khaleefa unk October 30, 2006
Mohammad Tahir 16 October 30, 2006
Possible children unk June 19, 2007
Unknown (3 children) unk February 29, 2008
Unknown (3 children) unk May 14, 2008
Unknown (3 children) unk July 28, 2008
Unknown unk August 30, 2008
Unknown (3-4 children) unk September 5, 2008
Unknown (8 children) unk September 8, 2008
Unknown unk October 3, 2008
Unknown (3 children) unk October 3, 2008
Unknown (1-4 children) 14.5 October 9, 2008
Possible students 12-18 October 23, 2008
0-3 children unk October 26, 2008
Unknown unk November 14, 2008
possible children unk November 29, 2008
Azaz-ur-Rehman 14 January 23, 2009
Maezol Khan 3 January 23, 2009
Noor Syed 8 February 14, 2009
Unknown (3 children) unk April 1, 2009
Unknown (3-4 children) unk April 4, 2009
Unknown (2 children) unk April, 19, 2009
Unknown (10 children) unk June 23, 2009
Ibad Ullah unk August 11, 2009
Mohammad Arif unk August 11, 2009
Abdul Qadeer unk August 11, 2009
Hazart Ali unk August 11, 2009
Syed Wali Shah 7 August 21, 2009
Unknown (5 children) unk August 21, 2009
Unknown (3 children) unk September 8, 2009
Sakeenullah 15 November 20, 2009
Zenullah Khan 17 December 31, 2009
Wajid Noor 9 January 3, 2010
Ayesha 3 January 8, 2010
Naila 10 February 24, 2010
Unknown 14 March 31, 2010
Fatima Khan unk May 21, 2010
Nisar Khan unk May 21, 2010
Naeem Khan unk May 21, 2010
Unknown unk May 21, 2010
Unknown unk August 14, 2010
Unknown (3 orphans) unk August 23, 2010
Unknown (4 children) unk September 8, 2010
Naeem Ullah 10 October 18, 2010
Unknown unk November 16, 2010
Ismael Mohammed unk March 17, 2011
Atif 12 April 22, 2011
Unknown (2 children) unk April 22, 2011
Unknown unk August 16, 2011
Unknown (2 children) unk August 22, 2011
Tariq Aziz 16 October 31, 2011
Waheed Khan 12 October 31, 2011
Unknown unk February 9, 2012
Osama Haqqani 13 August 21, 2012
[1] http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/
[2] http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Stanford-NYU-LIVING-UNDER-DRONES.pdf
[3] http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-efficacy-and-ethics-us-counterterrorism-strategy
[4] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/world/asia/12drones.html
[5] http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/04/brennan-drone-attacks.html
[6] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/world/middleeast/civilian-deaths-due-to-drones-are-few-obama-says.html
[7] Living Under Drones; Chapter 5: Strategic Considerations; Appendix C
[8] http://web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/human-rights-institute/files/The%20Civilian%20Impact%20of%20Drones.pdf
[9] http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=4043&Cat=13&dt=11/5/2006
[10] http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D03E7DB1F3FF933A25752C1A9609C8B63&pagewanted=all
[11] http://tribune.com.pk/story/229844/the-day-69-children-died/
[12] http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=3912&Cat=13&dt=10/29/2006
[13] http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/08/why-pakistani-military-demands-a-veto-on-drone-strikes/
[14] http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/08/03/us-drone-strikes-undermine-pakistani-democracy-says-top-diplomat/
[15] http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-123425-Drone-attacks-serving-to-recruit-new-militants-Sherry
[16] http://tribune.com.pk/story/441107/better-understanding-with-us-on-drones-says-hina-rabbani-khar/
[17] http://tribune.com.pk/story/54883/drone-attacks-hit-all-time-high/
[18] http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1210/12/ampr.01.html
[19] http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drone-data
Posted by admin in Zionist Enemy on November 21st, 2013
Fazlullah helps India in feeding terrorism in Pakistan
Asif Haroon Raja
Maulana Fazlullah is son-in-law of Maulana Sufi Muhammad who had founded Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-
He opposed anti-polio drive in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa saying that it was western conspiracy to make Muslims impotent. He barred women from taking part in education and imposed ban on female education in Swat district. Some 400 schools enrolling 4000 girls were shut down and 170 schools were blown up or burnt. He had also ordered death of Malala Yusafzai simply because she spoke in favor of education of girls. She was shot at from a point blank range on October 9, 2012 but she miraculously survived.
Once Fazlullah gained popularity and earned the nickname of ‘Mullah Radio’, he urged the people to donate money and help him in introducing Islamic system so that they could get speedy and cheap justice. Gullible women donated their jewelry. He also started collecting money through extortion and kidnapping for ransom to strengthen his financial position. From the ill-gotten wealth he collected, he constructed a Madrassa in Mingora worth Rs 25 crores, which became his base of operation and he used it for the purpose of training terrorists. He also opened training centres for preparing teenage boys as suicide bombers. Siege of Lal Masjid in Islamabad in July 2007 and its tragic ending propelled Fazlullah to forge an alliance with Baitullah Mehsud to consolidate his hold over Swat.
By mid 2007, Fazlullah was able to organize a 500 strong force to terrorize the people of Swat. He established a parallel government in 59 villages of Swat where Qazi courts functioned to enforce Shariah laws. He virtually made Swat into a State within a State. Police stations and Frontier Constabulary posts were frequently attacked. On November 3, 2007, 220 paramilitary soldiers and policemen deserted after a FC post and two police stations were overrun by Fazlullah’s militants. Worsening law and order situation impelled Musharraf government to order a military operation in Swat in November 2007 and restore order. Fazlullah hid himself and resurfaced after the Army withdrew. He once again restarted his anti-State activities and unleashed a reign of terror on the people of Swat and surrounding districts including Shangla, Upper Dir and Malakand. Indian and Afghan intelligence agencies kept pumping in weapons, ammunition, equipment and cash in huge quantity to enable Fazlullah to convert Swat into a formidable strong point.
During his black reign of terror from 2007 till April 2009, slaughter of captives, beheadings in public, floggings, kidnapping for ransom and suicide bombings became a norm. Green Square in Mingora earned the name of ‘Khooni Chowk’, where slaughtered or bullet ridden dead bodies were hung upside down almost every day. Fazlullah would demand from every family in Swat to hand over one young boy to join TNSM and one girl for marriage with a Taliban. He undertook barbaric acts to be able to impose his brand of hard-line Shariah on others.
After the second military operation in Swat in last quarter of 2008, peace deal was signed with Maulana Sufi and Fazlullah in February 2009. KP government agreed to introduce Nizam-e-Adal in Malakand District and the other side agreed to renounce violence. Hardly had the ink dried on the agreement when Fazllulah’s men opened new fronts in Buner and Lower Dir, which raised alarm bells that militants were working their way towards Islamabad. All political forces got together and passed a joint resolution to combat the militant threat with full force. It led to launching of military operation codenamed Rah-e-Rast on April 26, 2009.
By April 28, Lower Dir was retaken and Buner on May 5. By May 14, the attacking troops were 6 km south of Mingora. Battle of Mingora started on May 23 which ensued heavy fighting but by 27th 70% of the city was cleared and by 30th the whole of it. On 14 June, the entire Swat Valley was cleared of the presence of militants and the Army regained control over Swat. Well over 2000 militants were captured and handed over to the police for trials. It was unfortunate that none was convicted and punished. Released militants once again took to militancy. 1.7 million people displaced from Swat and nearby districts returned by August 22. OnJuly 10, BBC reported that Fazlullah was critically injured and was near death bed. In November 2009, he told BBC service that he had escaped to Kunar and vowed to continue fighting Pak Army.
Afghan National Directorate of Security and RAW helped Fazlullah and his men to settle down in Kunar and Nuristan and provided all sorts of facilities to enable him to launch cross border attacks. By April 2011, he started sending his militants into Pakistan who attacked targets in Bajaur, Mehmand and Dir in their bid to clear their way to re-enter Swat through Dir. Subsequently, targets in Chitral were also hit. Despite Pakistan’s strong protests, Afghanistan took no measure to bridle Fazlullah and other absconding militant leaders like Faqir Muhammad and Khalid Khurasani who had fled from Bajaur and Mehmand Agencies respectively. Perforce GHQ had to deploy regular troops in Bajaur, Mehmand and Chitral to counter the threat. NATO helicopters came to the rescue of Fazlullah’s men on the night of November 26, 2011 when the infiltrators were fired upon by military post at Salala. On June 22, 2013, his militants kidnapped 17 soldiers and beheaded them. Fazlullah proudly claimed that his men had killed Maj Gen Sanaullah Niazi and two others on September 2013 at a time when environments were getting ripe to begin peace talks.
Appointment of absconding Fazlullah as new Ameer and his deputy Khalid Haqqani from Swabi, both not in favor of peace has strengthened the group of hardliners in TTP, which is to the advantage of India, Afghanistan and USA. Fazlullah with a criminal background will help India in feeding terrorism in Pakistan. As long as Fazlullah remains at the helms of affairs of TTP, hope of peace talks is a pipedream.
The writer is a retired Brig and a defence analyst. [email protected]
Additional Reading:
Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is an alliance of militant groups in Pakistan formed in 2007 to unify groups fighting against the Pakistani military in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. TTP leaders also hope to impose a strict interpretation of Qur‘anic instruction throughout Pakistan and to expel Coalition troops from Afghanistan. TTP maintains close ties to senior al-Qa‘ida leaders, including al-Qa‘ida’s former head of operations in Pakistan.
Baitullah Mahsud, the first TTP leader, was killed in an explosion on 5 August 2009 and was succeeded by Hakimullah Mahsud, who vowed to deploy suicide operatives to the United States. The group has repeatedly threatened to attack the US homeland, and a TTP spokesman claimed responsibility for the failed vehicle bomb attack in Times Square in New York City on 1 May 2010. In June 2011, a spokesman vowed to attack the United States and Europe in revenge for the death of Usama Bin Ladin.
Islamabad has blamed TTP for most of the terrorist attacks in Pakistan since the group was founded, including the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in December 2007. TTP in 2011 claimed responsibility for a number of attacks in Pakistan in the aftermath of Bin Ladin’s death—including a bombing of a Frontier Constabulary training center, an assault on a Pakistani naval base in Karachi, a bombing of a Criminal Investigation division building in Peshawar, and a bombing of a police station. TTP claimed each attack was in retaliation for Bin Ladin’s death.
Posted by admin in India Destroys US Economy, INDIA EXPOSED, INDIA MACHINATIONS TO DESTROY CHINA, India Missile Technology Proliferator, India Pollution, India Promoting Subversion in Pakistan Via Afghanistan, INDIA REF-- -- USES TO DEAL, India Secessionist Movements, India Splitting, India Sponsored Taliban Terrorism in Pakistan, INDIA SPONSORED TERRORISM IN KARACHI, INDIA STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM IN PAKISTAN, Pakistan-A Nation of Hope on November 19th, 2013
Asif Haroon Raja
India being an imperialist power wants to become super power of South Asia and a world power. Mired in dozens of insurgencies it considers Pakistan as the lone stumbling block in the way of her imperialist ambitions. Indigenous freedom movement in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) has become a bleeding wound for India and a cause of embarrassment that despite deploying such a large force in a small Valley and using excessive force, rape and torture as tools to crush the movement for over 22 years, it has failed to extinguish the flame of liberty. Maintenance of 750,000 security forces since 1989 in IOK is a huge drain on India’s economy which is slowing down. So is the burden of 700,000 troops employed for fighting dozens of insurgencies and separatist movements in various parts of India.
Once India jumped out of the lap of former Soviet Union and slid into the warm lap of USA in 1991, it started working feverishly to create permanent wedge between USA and Pakistan – the two erstwhile allies – by coloring the perceptions of US leaders against Pakistan. India’s main propaganda plank was ‘cross border terrorism by Pakistan in IOK’. 9/11 gave a godsend opportunity to India to restore its lost influence in Afghanistan and to operationalize its plan of destabilizing, denuclearizing, encircling, isolating and balkanizing Pakistan through proxy war using Afghan soil. For the achievement of their common objectives, the Indo-US-Afghan nexus commenced covert war against Pakistan in 2002 with a view to cripple Pakistan economically, politically, socially and militarily.
Their sustained efforts have made FATA and Balochistan highly restive and Pakistan’s economy fragile. More the difficulties encountered by Pakistan on account of foreign sponsored insurgencies in the two turbulent regions and disorder in Karachi, more the closeness between the three strategic partners grew. So much so that Indo-Afghan and Afghan-US strategic partnership agreements were signed. At the same time, hostility of the trio against Pakistan also intensified. India was over the moon seeing Pakistan in dire strait and breathlessly waited to use its military instrument to axe it for good. Karzai regime didn’t lag behind in keeping Pakistan in the dock.
Not only the Indian political leaders have maintained an aggressive posture against Pakistan, Indian senior military officers also have been flexing muscles to overawe Pakistan, and have been looking for a 1971 like opportunity to strike Pakistan. Apart from offensive deployment of troops along Pakistan’s border in 2001-02 and 2008-09, former Indian Army chiefs Gen Kapoor and Gen V.K. Singh and even the current chief Gen Bikram Singh have been bragging about India’s much hyped Pakistan-specific Cold Start Doctrine, which in Indian military view has nullified Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence. Ex Army chief Gen V.K. Singh had set up a secret intelligence unit called Technical Services Division (TSD) without the knowledge of Ministry of Defence. Purpose was to carryout clandestine operations against officials of Ministry of Defence, IOK and Pakistan. He misused secret funds to destabilize Omar Abdullah’s government in Kashmir and spent Rs 1.19 crore for this purpose.
Gen V.K. Singh justified his act in Kashmir on the plea that use of secret funds has been in practice since 1947. He also admitted that the TSD had conducted eight successful missions inside Pakistan. He used his moles for phone tapping, eavesdropping officials of Ministry of Defence. V.K Singh had a tainted tenure and was accused of corruption. He submitted a petition to Ministry of Defence to adjust his date of birth so that he could serve for another ten months in office. When his petition was rejected by Supreme Court, he became a laughing stock. While in uniform he started hobnobbing with BJP leaders and soon after retirement he joined BJP. He attends Narendra Modi’s rallies and BJP is giving full support to him. Modi whose hands are soaked in the blood of Indian Muslims have been tipped as future Prime Minister of India by BJP. His sole forte is to raise the emotions of Hindus against Indian Muslims and Pakistan and make them hysteric.
Indian Army under Gen Bikram Singh who took over the reins of Indian Army on May 31, 2012 heated up the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir in January 2013 on a false pretext that Pak Army soldiers were involved in beheading of two Indian soldiers on January 8. It led to unprovoked firing by Indian military. After Manmohan Singh’s stern warning to Pakistan, Gen Bikram on January 14, asked his commanders in Kashmir to be aggressive and offensive against Pakistan. He said, “We reserve the right to retaliate at a time and place of our choosing”. In August 2013, yet another drama of killing of five Indian soldiers by Kashmiri Mujahideen backed by Pak Army was cooked up. The incident led to prolonged ceasefire violations in the form of firing and shelling. The guns had not silenced when another stage-managed terrorist attack on a police station and military base in Samba onSeptember 25 was enacted in which a dozen people were killed. This false flag operation was timed with Manmohan Singh’s address to the UN General Assembly Session in New York on 27th and his scheduled meeting with Nawaz Sharif on September 29. LoC was activated at the behest of BJP which wanted to scuttle Manmohan-Nawaz meeting and the peace process.
Unprovoked firing by Indian soldiers across the LoC and working boundary in Sialkot Sector in which scores of civilians as well as soldiers and cattle were killed became a daily routine from August to first week of November 2013 till Sartaj Aziz met Manmohan Singh and Indian Foreign Minister Salman in Colombo and both sides agreed to respect 2003 ceasefire agreement. Military coercion and jingoism spearheaded by Indian military-BJP combine are aimed at playing Pakistan card to win next elections in 2014. Indian military and BJP nexus aims at establishing Hindutva in India.
India’s dangerous plan conceived in 2001 to destroy Pakistan has run into difficulties because of NATO’s and ANA’s inability to defeat Afghan Taliban. From 2008 onwards, the wind started to blow against occupying forces because of Taliban’s resurgence. When nothing worked in favor of USA, a stage came when the US was forced by circumstances in 2010 to employ its political prong to induce the Taliban to hold peace dialogue. At the same time, Obama announced that the US-NATO troops would quit Afghanistan by December 2014. This unpalatable step was taken in spite of opposition from Pentagon and CIA as well as from India, Israel and Afghanistan. It dawned upon Obama’s Administration that all the strategic allies on whom the US had leaned heavily had no influence over the Taliban and were ineffectual. On the other hand, Pakistan which was all along seen as part of the problem was the sole country which could help in arranging talks and arriving at a political settlement.
Increasing intimacy between USA and Pakistan is happening at a time when Indo-Pakistan relations are sailing through murky waters. This change in the outlook of USA trying to remove the distrust accumulated over a period of time and to rebuild friendly ties with Pakistan is vexing India. Not knowing how to disrupt growth of Pak-US ties, India is continuing to play the terrorism card. During his meeting with Obama in New York in September last, Manmohan Singh had a single point agenda of bad mouthing Pakistan. Throughout the meeting he kept complaining like a village old woman that Pakistan was indulging in cross border terrorism in Kashmir and disturbing the peace. Even during his address to the UN he dubbed Pakistan as epicenter of terrorism. Indian officials are propagating that there is sharp increase in LoC-crossing attempts into IOK which has led to increase in ceasefire violations and resurgence of terrorist attacks against Indian forces in Kashmir. While craving to become a world power, Indian leaders have a bad habit of putting their sins in the basket of Pakistan and then moaning like a village woman that they are the victims of terrorism.
The writer is a retired Brig and a defence analyst. [email protected]
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
Musharraf the Honourable Option
Posted by admin in Commentary on November 22nd, 2013
Musharraf the Honourable Option
By
Inam Khawaja
It may be recalled that in October 2007 there was a case in the Sindh High Court regarding the legality of Musharraf fighting the election for President in uniform. There was a strong possibility of a verdict against Musharraf. It has been speculated that the Emergency was declared to basically put out of action about sixty Judges of the Superior Judiciary to ensure election in uniform. It may be noted that the ‘grave condition’ prevailing were put right with wave the baton in little over a month and the Emergency was lifted on December 15, 2007.
Musharraf’s spokesperson has stated that all the people involved in the November 3rd 2007 “Emergency” will be named by Musharraf. An Army Officer is expected to be a gentleman – a man of honour. The honourable thing to do is to stand upright and take full responsibility for one’s actions rather than putting blame on one’s colleagues. In fact an honourable person would actually absolve them from any blame. The Supreme Court in its July 31, 2009 Judgment declared that declaring emergency on November 3, 2007 and his subsequent orders (under the emergency) unconstitutional, ultra-vires of the Constitution consequently being illegal and of no legal value as a result. One wonders as to what defence can be put up. Since the act was reprehensible a gentleman and a man of honour would admit his mistake, apologise and seek forgiveness and mercy from the Tribunal, the Army and the people of Pakistan. This is the Honourable Option for Musharraf.
All members of the Armed Forces at the time of commissioning take the oath given in Article 44 of the Constitution which states; “I ———– , do solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to Pakistan and uphold the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan — “ Musharraf has broken this oath twice. As a Muslim he should repent, seek Allah’s forgiveness and pay the penalty prescribed for breaking one’s oath (refer Al-Maida 5-89).
If Musharraf exercises this option it is very difficult for the Tribunal and the Prime Minister not to forgive and be merciful.
November 20, 2013
Gen (R) Musharraf, Pervez Musharraf Criminal Charges
No Comments