US DRONE strikes have continued relentlessly in the Fata region. Most recently, on June 6, a US drone strike killed at least nine suspected militants in the Shawal valley of North Waziristan. A few months ago, the US drone programme came under intense scrutiny. A drone strike conducted in January resulted in the deaths of two Westerners held hostage by militants. Outcry followed in the West, which prompted President Obama to issue a formal apology. In a welcome development, the US promised to provide compensation to the victims’ families. The US, however, refuses to mete out the same treatment to drone victims of Fata origin. No apologies are issued or compensation promised. At times loss of civilian life is simply denied. The events of the past few months confirm the observation that civilian life in Fata is less valuable and in turn elicits lower levels of grief compared to the loss of innocent life in conflict elsewhere. This blatant dehumanisation of Pakistani drone victims can be attributed to many external factors, but one cannot discount the role played by local actors. There exists very little connectivity between Fata and the sprawling urban and political centres of mainstream Pakistan. Because of this, there is very little empathy for and understanding of the plight of Fata residents. Many urban dwellers view Fata residents as primitive. This opinion further contributes to the devaluation of Fata life. This apathy in society allows the state to shed its responsibility towards Fata civilians. The Pakistani state is not held to account for failing to protect innocent Fata residents, to ameliorate their suffering by providing compensation, or to prevent their deaths by effectively working towards halting such attacks. The state is being let off the hook and this allows it to pass the buck. Let’s take the political establishment. Barring one major political party, and that too during an election campaign, no party has seriously taken any measures that could...

Raza Naeem, Assistant Professor at the School of Governance and Society in the University of Management and Technology, Lahore , speaking giving at CRSS on Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan's geo-political crisis; the problems, the opportunities and the road forward Raza Naeem gave a run-down of the events preceding the Saudi Arabian bombardment of the Houthis militia in Yemen. He said the only way out of the current crisis was to hold negotiations with the Houthis in Yemen itself. This would prevent the region from descending into a protracted war. He said the national  dialogue in Yemen failed because it had degenerated into a Saudi-American construct. The unrest in Yemen is the result of the socio-economic disparities that had historically existed between the north and the south, despite the south being an inclusive democracy. He said Saudis being a monarchy, always felt threatened by a democratic Yemen and thus felt uncomfortable when the Houthis reached Sanaa, the capital, without any resistance. Usama Butt, executive director of the London-based Institute for Islamic Strategic Affairs argued that the war in Yemen has for all practical reasons become a sectarian conflict with multiple competing interests playing out there. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia have their own geo-stratgic objectives and the Saudi invasion of Yemen in fact provided Iran with an indirect victory in the region, where Teheran has been expressly expanding its influence. He also advised Pakistan against isolating itself in the region. Pakistan being an important leaders should reach out to both Iran and Saudi Arabia and play a pro-active role rather than isolating itself, he said. Butt and other participants of the discussion agreed that military option provides no solution to similar situation. Nor should any party dream of talking from the position of strength, they said. This logic is flawed and has often failed. All parties must be open to careful and quiet talks rather than placing...

Raza Naeem, Assistant Professor at the School of Governance and Society in the University of Management and Technology, Lahore , speaking giving at CRSS on Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan's geo-political crisis; the problems, the opportunities and the road forward Raza Naeem gave a run-down of the events preceding the Saudi Arabian bombardment of the Houthis militia in Yemen. He said the only way out of the current crisis was to hold negotiations with the Houthis in Yemen itself. This would prevent the region from descending into a protracted war. He said the national  dialogue in Yemen failed because it had degenerated into a Saudi-American construct. The unrest in Yemen is the result of the socio-economic disparities that had historically existed between the north and the south, despite the south being an inclusive democracy. He said Saudis being a monarchy, always felt threatened by a democratic Yemen and thus felt uncomfortable when the Houthis reached Sanaa, the capital, without any resistance. Usama Butt, executive director of the London-based Institute for Islamic Strategic Affairs argued that the war in Yemen has for all practical reasons become a sectarian conflict with multiple competing interests playing out there. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia have their own geo-stratgic objectives and the Saudi invasion of Yemen in fact provided Iran with an indirect victory in the region, where Teheran has been expressly expanding its influence. He also advised Pakistan against isolating itself in the region. Pakistan being an important leaders should reach out to both Iran and Saudi Arabia and play a pro-active role rather than isolating itself, he said. Butt and other participants of the discussion agreed that military option provides no solution to similar situation. Nor should any party dream of talking from the position of strength, they said. This logic is flawed and has often failed. All parties must be open to careful and quiet talks rather than placing...

Raza Naeem, Assistant Professor at the School of Governance and Society in the University of Management and Technology, Lahore , speaking giving at CRSS on Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan's geo-political crisis; the problems, the opportunities and the road forward Raza Naeem gave a run-down of the events preceding the Saudi Arabian bombardment of the Houthis militia in Yemen. He said the only way out of the current crisis was to hold negotiations with the Houthis in Yemen itself. This would prevent the region from descending into a protracted war. He said the national  dialogue in Yemen failed because it had degenerated into a Saudi-American construct. The unrest in Yemen is the result of the socio-economic disparities that had historically existed between the north and the south, despite the south being an inclusive democracy. He said Saudis being a monarchy, always felt threatened by a democratic Yemen and thus felt uncomfortable when the Houthis reached Sanaa, the capital, without any resistance. Usama Butt, executive director of the London-based Institute for Islamic Strategic Affairs argued that the war in Yemen has for all practical reasons become a sectarian conflict with multiple competing interests playing out there. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia have their own geo-stratgic objectives and the Saudi invasion of Yemen in fact provided Iran with an indirect victory in the region, where Teheran has been expressly expanding its influence. He also advised Pakistan against isolating itself in the region. Pakistan being an important leaders should reach out to both Iran and Saudi Arabia and play a pro-active role rather than isolating itself, he said. Butt and other participants of the discussion agreed that military option provides no solution to similar situation. Nor should any party dream of talking from the position of strength, they said. This logic is flawed and has often failed. All parties must be open to careful and quiet talks rather than placing...

Traditionally ruled by military or quasi-military regimes, Pakistan is struggling to strengthen its democratic governance but the military remains in charge of country’s security policy. This period of incremental democratization corresponds to the unprecedented rise in terrorism and domestic insurgencies that have challenged state capacity and taken a toll on both the morale of the country and the economy. This report reviews Pakistan’s progress in devising and implementing counterterrorism policy frameworks in recent years. In highlighting key related strategic and operational issues, it offers Pakistani policymakers ways forward on how best to ensure internal stability and security, reminding us that a balance in civilian and military institutions is vital for effective policy outcomes. Summary Pakistan’s recently announced National Action Plan focuses on combatting both terrorism and militancy and addresses endemic insecurity and radicalization. The plan follows in the wake of the National Internal Security Policy, which has been in place for more than a year. These two policy frameworks underscore the commitment of the government to implement counterterrorism operations. Implementation of both, however, is affected by the civil-military divide that defines Pakistan’s power landscape and by the altered governance architecture since the onset of devolution reforms of 2010. Pakistan’s historically entrenched civil-military imbalance puts the military in the driver’s seat on all issues related to national security. The current civilian government has enabled the military to take the lead on internal security arrangements as well. Internal security challenges of Pakistan are directly related to its external security policy, especially with respect to India and Afghanistan. Centralized management of internal security policies, however, is fraught with difficulties. It is unclear whether the provincial governments “own” the National Internal Security Policy and how...

Abigail Fielding-Smith and Jack Serle of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reveal the latest drone strike data for May, 2015. A total of seven strikes in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen claimed 48-56 lives. Executive Summary 1. Key points: A Pew Research Center poll finds strong support in the US for drone strikes Three US strikes kill at least 34 in Afghanistan The US continues to bomb Yemen in the midst of a brutal civil war British drones flew 301 missions over Iraq from September to the end of March 2. The Bureau’s numbers: Recorded US drone strikes to date Pakistan (June 2004 to date) Yemen (Nov 2002 to date)* Somalia (Jan 2007 to date)* Afghanistan (Jan 2015 to date) US drone strikes 417 97-117 9-13 5 Total reported killed 2,456-3,962 453-673 23-105 49-55 Civilians reported killed 423-962 65-97 0-5 0 Children reported killed 172-207 8-9 0 0 Reported injured 1,148-1,727 88-217 2-7 1 Recorded US air and cruise missile strikes to date Pakistan (June 2004 to date)** Yemen (Nov 2002 to date)* Somalia (Jan 2007 to date)* Afghanistan (Jan 2015 to date) US air & cruise missile strikes N/A 15-72 8-11 4 Total reported killed N/A 156-365 40-141 29-36 Civilians reported killed N/A 68-99 7-47 0 Children reported killed N/A 26-28 0-2 0 People reported injured N/A 15-102 11-21 0 * The Bureau’s estimates are based predominantly on open sources information such as media reports. Sometimes it is not possible to reconcile details in different reports. This is why use ranges for our record of casualties and, in the case of Yemen and Somalia, our strike tallies. ** The US has only carried out drone strikes in Pakistan. iii. Bureau analysis for May 2015: A new poll this month shows the American drone campaign continues to enjoy popular support in the US as seven strikes reportedly kill 48-56 people in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen. According to the Pew Research Center poll, 58% of respondents approve of “US drone strikes to target extremists” with 35% who disapprove....