Though General Kayani’s approval of drone strikes were ‘wikileaked’ to the media, the political process of Pakistan has up to now been remarkably united in its outward antipathy to America’s “infringement of sovereignty” as played out daily through drone attacks
What do all of the leaders of the major political parties in Pakistan have in commonIJ
They all oppose the current US drone strikes in the country. Stating public opposition to US drone strikes has become a pre-requisite for Pakistani politicians hoping to succeed in the May 11 elections, reflecting public outrage over the strikes.
The leader of the incoming Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, has denounced the strikes and praised the efforts of Pakistan’s army to fight the Taliban. Of course, the PPP has thus far failed to prevent the US from continuing drone strikes in Pakistan during its time in power.
The largest opposition party’s leader, Nawaz Sharif, has forcefully expressed his opposition to the strike on a number of occasions, recently saying that “Drone attacks are against the national sovereignty and a challenge for the country’s autonomy and independence. Therefore, we won’t tolerate these attacks in our territorial jurisdictions.”
In April 2012, Sharif and his party, the Pakistani Muslim league-Nawaz (PMl-N), refused to approve the reopening of NATO supply routes until the United States agreed to end drone strikes. The PMl-N is considered a frontrunner in the upcoming general elections, leading to speculation that Sharif may become the next Prime Minister.
Perhaps none have been more outspoken against the drone policy than charismatic politician and former cricket star Imran Khan, who leads the Pakistan Tehreek-e Insaaf (PTI) party. Khan held a large rally against America’s drone policy in Pakistan in October 2012. In the following month, Khan was detained and questioned by U.S. immigration officials about his views on US drone policy when attempting to visit New York.
Even the controversial former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who recently returned to Pakistan to participate in the May elections, has stated his opposition to the drone strikes: “I’m against these drone wars. It’s also an infringement on our sovereignty. If the US wants to fight terrorists with drones, they should provide us with the corresponding technology so that we can carry out that fight.”
Pakistan’s politicians appear to reflect the prevailing attitude of the Pakistani populace towards US drone strikes. Among the members of the Pakistani populace who were aware of the strikes, 97 per cent characterized them as a “bad” or “very bad” thing in Spring 2012. The civilian deaths due to drone strikes appear to be largely responsible for their unpopularity, although politicians also cite the infringement on Pakistan’s sovereignty.
It seems that no matter which party prevails in the May elections, it will officially be against US drone strikes. However, it’s not clear that their opposition will affect US policy.
Since 2010, Pakistan’s foreign affairs ministry has regularly contacted the US embassy in Islamabad requesting an end to the drone strikes. Formal opposition has not translated into a particularly forceful or effective stance on the issue by the Pakistani government.
And of course, it’s been widely suspected that Pakistan’s government does have some level of complicity in the drone attacks. News outlets have previously reported on Wikileaks revelations of several instances of the Pakistani government colluding in the strikes. These instances include Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Kayani requesting additional US drone assistance and former Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani explicitly agreeing to allow but publicly disdain strikes.
The Wikileaks cables revealed that the US military’s drone strikes programme within Pakistan had more than just tacit acceptance of the country’s top military brass, despite public posturing to the contrary. The cables state that the country’s military was requesting the US for greater drone back-up for its own military operations as long ago as January 2008.
According to the cables , the US account of Kayani’s request for “Predator coverage” does not make clear if mere air surveillance were being requested or missile-armed drones were being sought.
According to the report of the meeting sent back to Washington by Patterson, Admiral Fallon “regretted that he did not have the assets to support this request” but offered trained US Marines (known as JTACs) to coordinate air strikes for Pakistani infantry forces on ground. General Kayani “demurred” on the offer, pointing out that having US soldiers on ground “would not be politically acceptable.”
As reported earlier in The Express Tribune, Wikileaks cables revealed that Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani allowed drone strikes in the tribal areas of Pakistan, saying they would protest the attacks in the National Assembly and then ignore them.
When Interior Minister Rehman Malik advised the US to hold off “alleged Predator attacks until after the Bajaur operation”, Gilani brushed off the remarks saying:
I don’t care if they do it as long as they get the right people. We’ll protest in the National Assembly and then ignore it.
While Pakistan’s politicians may have taken a publicly popular stance on drones, it would require a much stronger policy shift for them to end the strikes.
lindsay Funk | Columnist, Policymic.com