The United States condemns correctly the terrorism practiced by outlaw groups such as al Qaeda, but then they turn around and practice terrorism against civilian populations. The president properly condemns the violence of assymmetrical warfare of Palestinians against university cafeteria and public bus travellers, while recommending for the Palestinians nonviolent resistance, but not noticing that such protesters are shot in cold blood by Israeli snipers.
The culture of secrecy of CIA operations who apparently control the drone attacks means in practical terms that they are deniable. Therefore they do not either contradict the principles of peace espoused or the mission to win militarily.
Gareth Porter, at Counter Punch, writes that:
Since early 2009, Barack Obama administration officials have been claiming that the predator attacks in Pakistan have killed nine of 20 top al Qaeda officials, but they have refused to disclose how many civilians have been killed in the strikes.
In April, The News, a newspaper in Lahore, Pakistan, published figures provided by Pakistani officials indicating that 687 civilians have been killed along with 14 al Qaeda leaders in some 60 drone strikes since January 2008 – just over 50 civilians killed for every al Qaeda leader.
So how was it that so many civilians were killed? Was it simply, as it seems to be true in some instances, of local people providing hospitality to visitors in accordance with custom to then be subject to a drone attack. That result would arise from surveillance, presumably by drones, and interpreted by people who do not have any idea of local customs.
But there is another cause, and it is very familiar. It is the same method by which people were collected for Guantanamo Bay and other places. People were paid for information. Here apparently is how it worked for the drones:
Press reports that the CIA is paying Pakistani agents for identifying al Qaeda targets by placing electronic chips at farmhouses supposedly inhabited by al Qaeda officials, so they can be bombed by predator planes, has raised new questions about whether the CIA and the Obama administration have simply redefined al Qaeda in order to cover up an abusive system and justify the programme.
The initial story on the CIA payments for placing the chips by Carol Grisanti and Mushtaq Yusufzai of NBC News Apr. 17 was based on a confession by a 19-year-old in North Waziristan on a video released by the Taliban. In his confession, the young man says, "I was given 122 dollars to drop chips wrapped in a cigarette paper at al Qaida and Taliban houses. If I was successful, I was told, I would be given thousands of dollars."
He goes on to say, "I thought this was a very easy job. The money was so good so I started throwing the chips all over. I knew people were dying because of what I was doing, but I needed the money."
The video shows the man being shot as a spy for the United States.
A U.S. official told NBC news that the video was "extremist propaganda," but a story in The Guardian May 31 said residents of Waziristan, including one student identified as Taj Muhammad Wazir, had confirmed that tribesman have been paid to lay the electronic devices to target drone strikes.
The knowledgeable Washington source told IPS the Guardian article is consistent with past CIA intelligence-gathering methods in Afghanistan and elsewhere. "We buy data," he said. "Everything is paid for."
The implication of the system of purchasing targeting information for drone strikes is that there is "no guarantee" that the people being targeted are officials of al Qaeda or allied organisations, he said.
Some of us my be familiar with the principle that violence begets violence, but did not suspect the equally universal principle that terrorism begets terrorism. It seems to be the case that if you practice terrorism, terrorism is created in response.
Such is the precarious state of the system of constitutional checks and balances in the United States, not abetted by the continuation of the perpetual war, we have to hope that the government and people of that country will choose democracy over dictatorship, and peace over murder. It is unexpected to find the Obama Administration as the perpetrator of the policy, and stranger yet that the dice determining the fate of American democracy are thrown so recklessly in the wilds of Afghanistan.
Why is that people in, for example, Somalia, or the Congo, or Afghanistan are not considered as full human beings deserving the dignity of human rights?
*
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment