Drone On

Q&A: A former Pakistani diplomat says America's most useful weapon is hurting the cause in his country.

Getty Images

Death from above: robot planes save American lives, sometimes at the cost of civilian casualties.

By Anita Kirpalani | Newsweek Web Exclusive

Jul 8, 2009

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

SPONSORED BY

The Obama administration's much-heralded new strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan (AfPak, as the portfolio has been called) is to pour in piles of cash to develop the countries being rent by militias like the Taliban. But the plan is much more equivocal about the tactics for combating those groups. Under Gen. David McKiernan, the previous U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Predator drones were a primary tool for engagment, but since the man who replaced him, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has announced a mandate to limit civilian deaths, experts thought drone attacks would abate. Not so far, according to this week's news.

NEWSEEK's Anita Kirpalani sat down with Pakistan's former deputy representative at the United Nations, S. Azmat Hassan, to talk about the new strategy, drones, soft power, and India. Hassan, who worked on Afghanistan issues, also has 33 years experience in the Pakistani foreign service, including ambassadorial posts in Malaysia, Syria, and Morocco.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari qualified the new comprehensive strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan put forward by president Obama as a "positive change." What do you think about it?
It does mark quite a large departure from the almost classic counterterrorism policy followed by the Bush administration for eight years: to flush out extremists and to confront them militarily with force and to kill them or capture them. The attempt is now to rebuild both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Do you think the use of soft power is good?
Any injection of soft power can only help. In fact I think that the overreliance on hard power has been a major problem. This was a problem in Iraq, and this is a problem in Afghanistan. This strategy will stem of the flow of recruits to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke said he wanted to "treat Afghanistan and Pakistan as a single theater." Do you think it is a good strategy?
I have reservations about this, frankly. Because this again shows that not enough homework has been done about two totally different countries. It would have been like treating Cambodia and Vietnam together.

Analysts have compared the Predator drone attacks to the attacks on Cambodia during the Vietnam War. Do you think that the attacks might radicalize militants further?
No two insurgency situations are alike. The bombing of Cambodia was a secret event. But in Afghanistan and Pakistan the operations are overt. To me these drone attacks show some lack of coordination between the Pakistani security agencies, particularly the ISI, and the American authorities. Pakistan is supposed to be a frontline state. It is a major non-NATO ally and yet I think there is an element of mistrust. It would be much better if the Pakistani agencies were launching these counterterrorist operations as part of a wider operation to win hearts and minds.

Member Comments

- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/10/2009 11:14:29 AM

The biggest problem with the drones is that they are not dropping nuclear weapons, the second biggest problem is that they are not dropping nuclear weapons on the largest populated areas!
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: ventsyv @ 07/09/2009 1:41:01 PM

"It would be much better if the Pakistani agencies were launching these counterterrorist operations as part of a wider operation to win hearts and minds."
Yes, indeed. The problem however is that they are not launching any such operations because they sympathize with the Taliban and use them to their own ends.
One potential use of the Taliban and their supporters is against India. Another is to use them to destabilize Afghanistan and finally, they can be used to pressure the US government to give Pakistan military and civilian aid.
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: taniashaina @ 07/09/2009 12:56:35 PM

The moderate, democratic nation of Pakistan which is our ally has not invited American troops on her soil. Pakistan is under attack by radical Islamic aggressors, most visibly the Taliban, who are attempting to overthrow the government and impose an Islamic dictatorship. America's options are limitied. We can do nothing and permit the same terrorist gangs we are battling in Afghanistan to find safe haven in Pakistan. Or America can, with decent intelligence, fight these monsters from the air. We are not carpet bombing Dresden. We operate with great caution and skill to avoid civilian casualties as much as possible. We are fighting sadistic thugs who dismember their victims, who blow up schools, who explode bombs in markets to maximize casualties, who slaughter their captives, who use innocent men, women and children as human shields. Should we cut off their financial support from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab states? Should we cut off their drug dealing? Should we cut off their flow of arms much of which comes from places where we have influence. Yes, of course, we should do all of that. But America needs to keep the Islamo-fascists on the defensive and on the run. And in Pakistan we can do it from the air.