02 Nov

Pakistani civilian victims vent anger over US

2 November 2011 Last updated at 08:02 ET

By Orla Guerin BBC News, Islamabad

Saadullah, a victim of a drone strike
Saadullah was injured in a drone attack and says he lost three relatives

Continue reading the main story

When tribal elders from the remote
Pakistani region of North Waziristan travelled to Islamabad last week to protest
against CIA drone strikes, a teenager called Tariq Khan was among them.

A BBC team caught him on camera, sitting near the front of a tribal assembly,
or jirga, listening carefully.

Four days later he was dead – killed by one of the drones he was protesting

His family told us two missiles hit the 16-year-old on Monday near Miranshah,
the main town in North Waziristan. His 12-year-old cousin Wahid was killed
alongside him.

The boys were on their way to see a relative, according to Tariq’s uncle,
Noor Kalam, who we reached by phone.

He denied that Tariq had any link to militant groups. “We condemn this very
strongly,” he said. “He was just a normal boy who loved football.”

The CIA’s drone campaign is a covert war, conducted in remote terrain, where
the facts are often in dispute.

The tribal belt is off limits to foreign journalists. Militants often seal
off the locations where drone strikes take place. The truth can be buried with
the dead.

After the missile strike on Monday, Pakistani officials said four suspected
militants had been killed.

If the strike actually killed two young boys – as appears to be the case –
it’s unlikely anyone will ever be held to account.

There are no confirmed death tolls but several independent organisations
estimate that drones have killed more than 2,000 people since 2004. Most are
suspected to be militants.

Many senior commanders from the Taliban and al-Qaeda are among the dead. But
campaigners claim there have been hundreds of civilian victims, whose stories
are seldom told.

A drone aircraft of the kind used by the US military
The use of drone missiles has soared

A shy teenage boy called Saadullah is one of them. He survived a drone strike
that killed three of his relatives, but he lost both legs, one eye and his hope
for the future.

“I wanted to be a doctor,” he told me, “but I can’t walk to school anymore.
When I see others going, I wish I could join them.”

Like Tariq, Saadullah travelled to Islamabad for last week’s jirga. Seated
alongside him was Haji Zardullah, a white-bearded man who said he lost four
nephews in a separate attack.

“None of these were harmful people,” he said. “Two were still in school and
one was in college.”

Asghar Khan, a tribal elder in a cream turban, said three of his relatives
paid with their lives for visiting a sick neighbour.

“My brother, my nephew and another relative were killed by a drone in 2008,”
he said. “They were sitting with this sick man when the attack took place. There
were no Taliban.”

Legal challenges

Viewed from a drone, any adult male in the tribal areas can look like a
target, according to Mirza Shahzad Akbar, a Pakistani lawyer who is taking on
the CIA.

“A Taliban or non-Taliban would be dressed in the same way,” he said.
“Everyone has a beard, a turban and an AK-47 because every person carries a
weapon in that area, so anyone could be target.”

Clive Stafford Smith, director of the British legal charity Reprieve, holding the fragment of a missile
Campaigners like Clive Stafford Smith say drones are resulting in murder

Mr Akbar is suing the CIA for compensation in the Islamabad High Court, and
plans to file a Supreme Court action.

He claims the US is getting away with murder in North Waziristan. It’s a view
shared by the British legal charity Reprieve, whose director, Clive Stafford
Smith, has been meeting drone victims in Pakistan.

“What’s going on here, unfortunately, is murder,” he said.

“There’s a war going on in Afghanistan, but none here in Pakistan, so what
the CIA is doing here is illegal.”

The CIA would doubtless say otherwise, if it were prepared to discuss the
drone programme, but US officials are usually silent on the issue.

In a rare public comment two years ago, the then director of the CIA, Leon
Panetta, defended the use of drones.

“We have targeted those who are enemies of the United States,” he said. ”
When we use it, it is very precise and it limits collateral damage.”

But the damage is not limited enough, say opponents like Mr Stafford Smith,
who is gathering evidence about civilian deaths. From a shopping bag he produced
a jagged chunk of metal – a missile fragment – believed to have killed a child
in Waziristan in August of last year.

“I have a three-year-old son myself, and the idea that this thing killed
someone very much like my little Wilf really tugs at your heart strings,” he

Mr Stafford Smith says drones are changing the nature of modern warfare.

“If you are trying to surrender and you put your hands up to a drone, what
happens?” he asks.

“They just fire the missile, so there are all sorts of Geneva Conventions
issues which are not being discussed.”

Campaigners also warn that drone strikes are counter-productive, generating
more radicalism and more hatred of the West. They say the drone strikes are a
Taliban recruiting tool.

At Tariq Khan’s funeral, many mourners spoke out against the US, according to
his uncle Noor Kalam.

But Washington is unlikely to heed the anger here. Under President Barack
Obama, the use of drone missiles has soared – there’s an attack on average every
four days.

Increasingly, these remote-controlled killers are Washington’s weapon of


1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

© 2022 | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Global Positioning System Gazettewordpress logo