The latest US missile strike on militants in Pakistan has raised a major outcry, this time from Pakistan’s own army:

“The investigations show the attack was carried out by a US pilotless drone,” Gen Athar Abbas, spokesman for the Pakistan army, told the BBC. ”The US did not take permission or inform us before carrying out the strike.”

He added: “We have protested to the US authorities in the strongest possible manner.”

Earlier, Pakistani authorities had said they had no knowledge about Wednesday’s strike.

The comments from Gen Abbas come a day after Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani called the attacks “wrong and unfair”.

“Many innocent people have been killed and we condemn it,” he said in a TV interview.

As if angering the democratically elected government and the army in one fell swoop wasn’t bad enough, we’re continuing to undermine negotiations between the civilian government and militants.

The attack came on the same day as a prisoner exchange between the Pakistan army and pro-Taleban militants. The swap is part of a developing peace deal, which is causing concern in the US.

A Pentagon spokesman said on Thursday that any deal with the militants “should be worth more than the paper it is written on”.

But who exactly are we to attack people in other countries without their permission, and then condemn their governments’ projects? Does the war in Afghanistan mean that Pakistan becomes our fief?

The consequences of the missile strike began immediately:

In a sign of tensions such attacks can spark, Islamic militants killed a Pakistani paramilitary soldier in revenge for the attack.

Authorities found the bullet-riddled body of the soldier early Friday about 6 miles north of Damadola. Mawaz Khan, a local government official, said a letter found near the soldier’s body explained that militants killed him to avenge the strike.

Khan said the note included a warning for tribal elders that they would meet the same fate if they cooperate with Pakistani authorities.

The letter was issued in the name of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, a militant umbrella group whose deputy leader, Faqir Mohammed, has threatened to target Americans to avenge the strike. Mohammed is considered an associate of al-Zawahri.

However, a spokesman for the group has said it would continue with peace negotiations opened by the new Pakistani government.

Our strikes in Pakistan achieve just as much as they do in Somalia: nothing.

Moreover, who can blame the Pakistanis for wanting to talk with militants? It’s not like purely military solutions have brought about victory or resolution. And it’s not like NATO is doing any better in Afghanistan:

The aptly named Zamir Kabulov first arrived in Afghanistan as a young Soviet diplomat in 1977 and has lived through the last turbulent 30 years of this country’s misfortunes.

Now he is Russian ambassador in Kabul and his voice of experience will ring in the ears of today’s Nato- and US-led forces.

“There is no mistake made by the Soviet Union that was not repeated by the international community here in Afghanistan,” Mr Kabulov said, listing the problems.

“Underestimation of the Afghan nation, the belief that we have superiority over Afghans and that they are inferior and they cannot be trusted to run affairs in this country.”

His list goes on.

“A lack of knowledge of the social and ethnic structure of this country; a lack of sufficient understanding of traditions and religion.”

Not only that, but he says the country’s new patrons are making their own new mistakes as well.

“Nato soldiers and officers alienate themselves from Afghans - they are not in touch in an everyday manner. They communicate with them from the barrels of guns in their bullet-proof Humvees.”

Food for thought. 

WHAT'S NEXT?

Subscribe via RSS or Email  ::     ::  Leave a comment

Bookmark to: