US drone strikes in Pakistan of limited value: report

[fatman17]

US drone strikes in Pakistan of limited value: report

Friday, 26 Feb, 2010

The US military has increasingly used drone strikes as an alternative to sending troops into Pakistan or relying on Pakistani forces who to target militants in their territory.

WASHINGTON: The US drone program in Pakistan has probably reached the “outer limits of its utility” and robs intelligence forces of valuable information while angering Pakistanis, a new report said Thursday.

The United States has ramped up its use of the unmanned weapons, with President Barack Obama ordering more strikes in 2009 than were authorised in the eight years prior.

But the report by Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann at the New America Foundation, a Washington think-tank, argues that the tactic is counterproductive.

“The drone program has probably reached the outer limit of its utility,” Bergen said in presenting the study.

The weapons have reportedly killed some high-level militants in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Area (Fata), including Baitullah Mehsud — the most wanted militant in Pakistan and one-time leader of the Pakistani Taliban.

But the report calculates that civilians account for 32 per cent of the people killed in drone strikes from 2004 to today.

The strikes also do not appear to have interrupted training programs in the tribal areas, where fighters are prepared for combat in Afghanistan or to launch attacks in the West.

The report cites the example of Najibullah Zazi, a naturalised American citizen who received explosives training in Pakistan's tribal area in preparation for a planned terror attack in the United States.

“He had picked up this technical knowledge in training camps in Pakistan's Fata during the fall of 2008 when the drone program was going into full swing,” the report said.

Meanwhile, suicide attacks in both Pakistan and Afghanistan have increased alongside the rise in drone strikes.

“If the drone attacks are so successful, why is it that in 2009 you had more suicide attacks, almost all conducted by groups that are based in Fata, in Pakistan than in any year previously?” Bergen said.

Assassinating militants also robs US and Pakistani forces of potentially invaluable information that could be obtained during interrogations and evidence in the form of documents, cell phones or other materials captured along with detainees, the report said.

The US military has increasingly used drone strikes as an alternative to sending troops into Pakistan or relying on Pakistani forces who have at times appeared reluctant to target militants in their territory.

But Bergen said recent arrests of senior Pakistani and Afghan Taliban members, including the capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Karachi, suggested a Pakistani change of heart.

“Pakistan's a big country and Fata's a tiny part of it, so the fact that they're now picking people up in Karachi or other parts of the country is a major change".

 

[Ahmad]

The weapons have reportedly killed some high-level militants in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Area (Fata), including Baitullah Mehsud — the most wanted militant in Pakistan and one-time leader of the Pakistani Taliban.

But the report calculates that civilians account for 32 per cent of the people killed in drone strikes from 2004 to today.

it has killed Baitullah and Hakeemullaha that pakistan had difficulty killing or arresting them. the drones have also forced the taliban fighters to get out of their hide outs and go else where. as per civilian casualty, which is the most painful side of this conflict we can say that the civilians have also been killed by the Pakistani Army as well, does it mean PA stop fighting against the Taliban?

 

[S-2]

"Assassinating militants also robs US and Pakistani forces of potentially invaluable information that could be obtained during interrogations and evidence in the form of documents, cell phones or other materials captured along with detainees, the report said."

That's assuming they could be captured and, if captured, we could interrogate them in a timely manner before their oft-perishable intelligence degenerated to only historical value.

"The US military has increasingly used drone strikes as an alternative to ... relying on Pakistani forces who have at times appeared reluctant to target militants in their territory."

Speaks for itself but, in addition, we'll retain our right to self-defense.

"But Bergen said recent arrests of senior Pakistani and Afghan Taliban members, including the capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Karachi, suggested a Pakistani change of heart."

Karachi also suggests these targets are finding their proximity to the Drone's range fans discomfiting. I've read others as adept as Bergen who suggest that taliban commanders in FATA feel highly impeded by the presence of drones over them and that drones restrict their ability to move freely while our SIGINT capabilities restrict their ability to freely communicate for fear of targeting through triangulation.

“Pakistan's a big country and Fata's a tiny part of it, so the fact that they're now picking people up in Karachi or other parts of the country is a major change".

Relocating to areas away from Drone operational belts anecdotally confirms their effectiveness in those areas. If drones deny this terrain to them while forcing them to 1.) surface, 2.) Move to relocate and 3.) re-surface in order to re-establish comms then they are vulnerable to other means of interdiction so long as local forces wish to do so.

I find this an odd article when it appears that drone activity seems dramatically more intense than in the fall of 2008 and far more effective. Just my perception based on the thread here that tracks these operations.

As to the casualties, they shall one day become a anecdote of history and impartially recorded at that. Claims from either side remain unverified to collateral damage and it'll remain that way for years IMHO.

Thanks.

 

[Spring Onion]

US drone kills top al-Qaeda operative in Pakistan


Peshawar, 26 February, (Asiantribune.com):
al-Qaeda operative Qari ZafarA top al-Qaeda operative Qari Zafar, suspected of being involved in the US consulate Karachi bombing was killed in a US drone strike in Dandi Darpakhel area of North Wasiristan Agency on Wednesday.

Official sources confirm that Qari Zafar who was carrying booty of 5 million dollars on his head has been killed along with two other important Taliban commanders Rana Afzal alias Noor Khan and Bahdar Mansoor.

Qari Zafar is wanted for questioning in connection with the March 2, 2002 bombing of the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan.

The attack killed three Pakistani citizens and David Foy, a U.S. diplomat.

Punjabi Taliban commander Rana Afzal who was also killed in the drone attack is said to be the master mind suicide bombing at FIA building in Lahore in March 2008 and also the attacks at the Lahore High Court.

Bahadar Masnoor is another key commander of Punjabi Taliban and has been a member of banned Sipah Sahaba Pakistan.

He is the founding head of Punjabi Taliban’s organisation of Bahadar Mansoor North Wasiristan.

The suspected drones targeted a compound and a vehicle of the militants in Dandi Darpakhle area of North Wasiristan Agency.

The number of deaths in Wednesday’s strike has increased up to 13 which also included four foreigners; four bodies have been reduced to pieces and could not be identified.

- Asian Tribune -

US drone kills top al-Qaeda operative in Pakistan | Asian Tribune

 

[S-2]

"...four bodies have been reduced to pieces and could not be identified."

"Then said Jesus (PBUH) unto him,

'Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.'"

Matthew 26:52

Thanks.

 

[pak-yes]

And Still after all this Utility and Arrests Pakistan has Made.US Still is reluctant in giving drones to Pakistan.And US officially says that Pakistan is a major Non-NATO ally.huh hypocrites.This is how you treat your so called ALLY.

 

[PAFAce]

The problem is not drone strikes, the problem is American drone strikes within Pakistani territory. No doubt drone strikes are relatively successful (no way to confirm this, but it seems to be the case), and there is little doubt the terrorists find them extremely disturbing. However, these strikes are carried out by foreign agencies for whom mishits are a mere calculated risk and 32% civilian dead is acceptable collateral damage. If the strikes were carried out by Pakistani forces, on the other hand, the strikes would be a lot more selective and, probably, just as useful in eliminating the top leadership.

Let's look at the problem in its entirety: American drone strikes in Pakistan, not drone strikes.

 

[S-2]

"the problem is American drone strikes within Pakistani territory."

We consider it self-defense against an ousted foreign government that's resided on your soil for eight years along with your own citizens like Hafez Gul Bahadar and Maulvi Nazir whom wage war against the U.N. stabilization effort, ISAF, and the afghan people. They, btw, have murdered hundreds doing so.

Pakistan, however, is stressed and otherwise engaged battling a prioritized list of enemies that's heretofore not included these men and might never judging by the interminable time passed thus far.

We'd all be dead before you bring such slaughter eminating from your lands to an end and nobody can afford such.

The drone attacks will unquestionably continue as our assurance that something might be done in our self-defense. Giving you drones won't assure such and would likely only be used as you see fit and only against those posing a threat to you-not us.

Thanks.

 

[Solomon2]

Link to the report

The NAF appears to have been following the drone situation closely and the latest report is one of an ongoing series.

 

[PAFAce]

We consider it self-defense against an ousted foreign government that's resided on your soil for eight years along with your own citizens like Hafez Gul Bahadar and Maulvi Nazir whom wage war against the U.N. stabilization effort, ISAF, and the afghan people. They, btw, have murdered hundreds doing so.

Self-defense 8000 miles from home? When was the last time Bahadur or Nazir were involved in an attack on the American soil?
Also, did you just equate the unofficial "occupiers" to the "Afghan people"? You're there waging a war, not on a humanitarian mission, and everybody, most of all the Afghan people, know that.

Self-defense is, however, fighting an enemy that presides on and just off your homeland, targetting civilians inside it. Sometimes, this type of self defense involves selectively targetting a portion of your enemies that poses the greatest threat to you and pacifying/buying out the rest, which is what Pakistan is clearly doing. It's also something increasingly popular amongst Western experts, and its certainly the way Mr. Obama thinks. When you give it, it's milk, when we give it, its water.

I see all the same old rhetoric when it comes to drone strikes, and I'm only interested in discussing how the negative affects can be minimized. Please try and discuss the situation as it is, with all the facts, rather than launcing into political speaches, as beautiful as they may be. If that's all I'll get, then I see little point in continuing to discuss the topic; American drone strikes on Pakistani soil.

 

[Slides]

"the problem is American drone strikes within Pakistani territory."

We consider it self-defense against an ousted foreign government that's resided on your soil for eight years along with your own citizens like Hafez Gul Bahadar and Maulvi Nazir whom wage war against the U.N. stabilization effort, ISAF, and the afghan people. They, btw, have murdered hundreds doing so.

Will it be self defense when Pakistan bombs TTP hiding in Kunar and Nuristan?

 

[S-2]

"Self-defense 8000 miles from home?"

Our troops are indeed that far. So?

"You're there waging a war, not on a humanitarian mission, and everybody, most of all the Afghan people, know that."

ISAF operates under a U.N. mandate to assist the stabilization of Afghanistan-

"ISAF, in support of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, conducts operations in Afghanistan to reduce the capability and will of the insurgency, support the growth in capacity and capability of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), and facilitate improvements in governance and socio-economic development, in order to provide a secure environment for sustainable stability that is observable to the population.

Security

In accordance with all the relevant Security Council Resolutions, ISAF’s main role is to assist the Afghan government in the establishment of a secure and stable environment. To this end, ISAF forces are conducting security and stability operations throughout the country together with the Afghan National Security Forces and are directly involved in the development of the Afghan National Army through mentoring, training and equipping.

Reconstruction and development

Through its Provincial Reconstruction Teams, ISAF is supporting reconstruction and development (R&D) in Afghanistan, securing areas in which reconstruction work is conducted by other national and international actors.

Where appropriate, and in close cooperation and coordination with GIROA and UNAMA representatives on the ground, ISAF is also providing practical support for R&D efforts, as well as support for humanitarian assistance efforts conducted by Afghan government organizations, international organizations, and NGOs.

Governance

ISAF, through its Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTS), is helping the Afghan Authorities strengthen the institutions required to fully establish good governance and rule of law and to promote human rights. PRTs’ principal mission in this respect consists of building capacity, supporting the growth of governance structures and promoting an environment within which governance can improve"

Regardless, we've always reserved the right to defend ourselves and our allies from attack. Argue with me all you want, PAFAce, but it won't stop us from using drones to do so. That's the essential fact of the matter.

"I'm only interested in discussing how the negative affects can be minimized."

I guess I disagree that's your intent.

Thanks.

 

[S-2]

"Will it be self defense when Pakistan bombs TTP hiding in Kunar and Nuristan?"

"when"? I'll be happy to discuss such with you then. Now you presume that the TTP hide in Kunar and Nuristan but most others don't. You also presume "when" where I prefer "if".

My preference, therefore, is to await your air force doing so and discuss the fact rather than indulge your speculation.

Thanks.