Triumph of conscience

The US administration unilateral militarism ´ exemplified by the deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles commonly known as drones ´ received another international snub on Feb 17 when the European Parliament massively voted against the use of what US officials describe as the ‘weapon of the future.’

An overwhelming majority of Members of the European (MEPs) – 534 to 49 ´ supported a resolution that demanded European Union Member States not to ‘perpetrate unlawful targeted killings or facilitate such killings by other states’ and called on them to ‘oppose and ban practices of extra judicial targeted killings.’

‘Drone strikes by a State on the territory of another State without the consent of the latter constitute a violation of international law and of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of that country,’ the resolution said while pointing to the deaths of ‘thousands of civilians reportedly killed or seriously injured by drone strikes. It also admitted though that these figures are difficult to estimate, owing to lack of transparency and obstacles to effective investigation.[1]‘

The resolution added that ‘drone strike policies have been documented as causing considerable harm to the daily lives of ordinary civilians in the countries concerned, including deep anxiety and psychological trauma, disruption of economic and social activities and reduced access to education among affected communities.’

Chair of the Parliament sub-committee on human rights Barbara Lochbihler said that, ‘The European Parliament has today raised serious concerns with the use of military drones and the deaths of thousands of civilians resulting from drone strikes. MEPs have delivered a strong rebuke to the practice of targeted aerial killings outside a declared war zone, as well as the use of armed drones in war situations outside of the international legal framework.’

‘The EU needs to address the legal, ethical and security challenges posed by the increasing use of drones, including the urgent need to secure complete transparency and accountability. The resolution also stresses that EU member states should strictly refrain from participating in or facilitating extrajudicial targeted killings, for instance by sharing relevant information with countries such as the US,’ Barbara Lochbihler said.

Background

Rejection of drones with a thumping majority represents hard work and a relentless campaign by several human rights organizations as well as the United Nations rapporteur on human rights and countering extremism Ben Emmerson. It also stands out as the culmination of a long-drawn international campaign against the use of drones in Pakistan in particular.

Reprieve is one of those several non-government organisations working against the death penalty and drone strikes. Reprieve had in fact also lodged a complaint with the International Criminal Court regarding the involvement of Nato member states in facilitating drone campaign.

Kat Craig, the Reprieve Legal Director, welcomed the vote in the European Parliament:

‘Today vote represents a triumph of conscience by MEPs, who have issued a clear call to national European governments to come clean on their complicity with the CIA illegal drones programme, and bring it to an immediate halt ….this should be a wake-up call to countries like the UK and Germany; they need to clean up their act not only by ensuring that they stop cooperating with extrajudicial killings, but also by pressuring the US for greater transparency and accountability.’

Reprieve put out a press release on the landmark vote at the European Parliament and also quoted an anti-drone activist from Pakistan and one of the victims of the drone strikes Karim Khan said that, ‘As I prepare to return home, I will take with me this heartening news ´ that Europe is listening to those who have been harmed by America illegal drone war. Not just innocents like my brother and son, but all those who are terrorised daily by the drones circling overhead.’

Khan brother and son were killed in a drone strike in Waziristan in 2009.

‘Drone strikes are not the answer. Today, Europe has taken a first step to bringing a stop to these illegal, unaccountable killings; I hope that national governments will follow suit, so that one day I may finally get justice,’ Khan stated, speaking against the aerial attacks.

 

UN Enquiry Report

Earlier, on December 18, the 193-strong United Nations had also unanimously spoken out through a resolution against the controversial US drone campaign in foreign territories. The resolution to this effect underlines the culmination of an enquiry that Special Rapporteur Ben Emmerson had launched in Pakistan and Africa a year ago. Mr. Emmerson submitted his report on drones in October 2013.[2]

The comprehensive 28-paragraph resolution, entitled ‘Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism’ calls on the United States to comply with international law, and underscores the ‘urgent and imperative’ need for an agreement among member states on legal questions about drone operations.

The unanimous call for regulating the use of remotely piloted aircraft against suspected terrorists was also accompanied by the demand that the US ensure that any measures taken or means employed to counter-terrorism, including the use of remotely piloted aircraft, complied with international law. This includes Charter of the United Nations, human rights law and international humanitarian law.

The text also calls for taking into account relevant UN resolutions and decisions on human rights and giving due consideration to recommendations of special procedures and mechanisms of the Human Rights Council, and relevant comments and views of UN human rights treaty bodies.

Pakistani Perspective

Drone strikes in Pakistan are hugely contributing in bringing the right wing political and religious parties together, as the government draws flak from all around for its alleged duplicity i.e. protesting drones in public and accepting/appreciating them in private. The partial suspension of the US-NATO cargo via Pakistan also represents the right-wing, nationalist sentiment against drones. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Jamaat-e-Islami, lead partners in the coalition that rules the volatile northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province adjacent to the tribal regions between Pakistan and Afghanistan is also rooted in the opposition to the drone strikes. Both parties are demanding an end to the drone attacks. Even the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, the militant group behind the terror campaign inside the country, also uses drone strikes as a pretext for not responding to government talks offer.

As a whole,the alliance of the right also restricts the space for those moderate and liberal political quarters who are pleading for a more collaborative US-Pakistan anti-terror framework instead of the unilateral American pursuit of terrorists in the Pakistani border regions through drones. The deadly campaign is regarded as an unjust and disproportionate use of force by US in violation of Pakistan territorial sovereignty. At the same time it is also fueling anti-Americanism, which works to the detriment of not only the government of Pakistan but also undermines even well-intended economic aid that comes from the United States and its major NATO allies.

Pakistani Perspective: CRSS Contribution

The vote in the European Parliament and the UN anti-drone resolution in effect resonate the Pakistani perspective.

The country, where drones have generated heated political debate and added to simmering anti-US sentiment, has been a vocal opponent of the strikes conducted through unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in Pakistan tribal areas. Its permanent representative Masood Khan had pointed out during a UN General Assembly rights committee debate: ‘In Pakistan, all drone strikes are a chilling reminder that reprisal strikes by terrorists are around the corner. Civilians suffered ‘inhumane’ deaths and the strikes had ‘radicalised’ public opinion in Pakistan. We call for the immediate cessation of drone attacks inside the territorial borders of Pakistan,’ Khan had stated.

Part of Ben Emmerson report had come from a field investigation that the Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS) had conducted in the affected areas. CRSS had handed the UN envoy 24 cases of ‘innocent victims of drone strikes’ cases where innocent women, children and men became the unintended victims of the drone strikes.

Also, in its security report ‘The Deadly Drone Campaign: A Pakistani Perspective’ CRSS made observations similar to those expressed in the UN resolution. These were based on extensive field studies on the consequences of the drone campaign (For details see State in Turmoil2012 at)

The London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism in October, 2013 had put the total death toll since the campaign began in Pakistan in 2004 at between 2,525 and 3,613. The Bureau stated that between 407 and 926 of those killed were civilians ´ 16 to 25 percent of the total. Ben Emmerson said in his report that Pakistan had told him that 400 of the 2,200 victims of drone attacks over the past decade ´ 18 percent ´ were civilians

During the 2014 until late February, the CIA has not carried out a single drone strike on targets inside Pakistan. It suggests the Obama administration possibly took cognizance of the resentment that the drones have caused inside Pakistan.

The frequency of attacks in Pakistan has declined steadily since the peak in 2010 ´ but still there was on average a strike every two weeks in 2013.[3]

US officials told the Washington Post in early February that the CIA use of drones in Pakistan had been ¿sharply curtailed– at Islamabad request to allow peace talks to proceed ´ although officials noted that the agency would still pursue senior targets or carry out strikes if it felt an attack was imminent.

A White House official, the Post had claimed, denied the following day in an interview with NBC that the US had agreed to suspend strikes

The US government has agreed to greatly limit attacks by unmanned drones in Pakistan’s restless North Waziristan while the country’s politicians struggle to reach agreement on whether to send the army to clear out a region almost entirely controlled by militant groups. There have been no known drone strikes in Pakistan since 25 December, and January was the first full month in two years without any attacks at all, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which closely monitors media reports about drones[4].

Between 2004 and February 2013[5] the CIA carried out at least 381 fatal drone strikes, including 330 during the Obama administration, leaving between 2,412-3,701 killed.

 

Tags: European Parliament, Members of European Parliament, MEPs, Pakistan, Ben Emmerson on Drones, CIA-Drones, CRSS-Drones, drone attacks against militants, drone attacks in Pakistan, CIA-Drones, Drones, Report on Drone attacks/ US drone campaign, Terrorism, terrorists, UAV attacks, UN Chief on Drone Attacks, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moonon, UN Secretary General/ Drone Technology, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, UNSG Ban Ki-moon, USA-Pakistan Drones, Waziristan/Drones/ Al-Qaeda/Drones, Emmerson, Ben Emmerson, CRSS, Center for Research and Security Studies, Pakistan, CIA,