Time to Call Off the Predators?

No single issue that has fueled the flames of anti-Americanism in Pakistan more than the bombings of their country by our Predator drones. Since President Obama took office, there have been at least sixteen Predator strikes, which have killed about 160 people and led to widespread protests around the country. More serious than the wave of anti-Americanism is the instability that the continuing Predator strikes have brought to the fragile civilian government of President Zardari.

There is real evidence that the air strikes have done substantial damage to the leadership of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and they are consistent with the policy announced by President Obama during his campaign that he would take the fight to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, even if it meant violating the territorial sovereignty of Pakistan. However, the value of the strikes may be diminishing, especially in relation to the growing anger in Pakistan which itself pushes people toward the extremists.

Colonel David Kilcullen, formerly a senior adviser to General Petraeus, the US regional commander, in testimony to Congress, said "We need to call off the drones." He added that "The current path that we are on is leading us to loss of Pakistani government control over its own population." While a halt in the air assaults, even a temporary one, might give a reprieve to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, it may be a necessary step toward stabilizing the Pakistani government.

The high-level meetings this week between President Obama, President Zardari and Afghan President Karzai represent an important challenge to all three of the leaders, and the American airstrikes are central to that challenge. Zardari must convince both Obama and Karzai that he is serious about stemming the flow of extremism inside Pakistan, and that he will have the backing in that effort from both the Pakistani military and intelligence services. Karzai must sign on to a regional solution to the crisis, and agree to the greater oversight of the funding that has been pouring into his country.

Perhaps the greatest test will be for President Obama, who will have to demonstrate not only to those in the region, but also to the American people and the rest of the world, that he can be tough in taking the battle to extremist groups like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and at the same time provide the political, military and economic support to governments on the front line. Finally, he needs to show the flexibility to adjust his course in midstream -- in this case, by grounding the Predators as a gesture of goodwill to the nation of Pakistan. Even though it might slow the progress we have made in damaging the leadership of Al-Qaeda and Taliban, in the long run it will prove our respect for and commitment to the Pakistani people. Because, like it or not, we are in this struggle for the long run.

Comments

[WorkingClass]

"There is real evidence that the air strikes have done substantial damage to the leadership of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban"

Does that mean you killed a few high ranking Taliban? How long does it take to replace a Taliban commander? An hour? Half a day? Israel has been busy decapitating Hamas and Hisbollah for years and they (and the Taliban) just keep getting stronger. Obama should withdraw. Its too much to pay for a pipeline. If you really think something called AlQaeda is a threat to the US then pay the Taliban to kill them.

[jaysan]

It's only a matter of time before AlQaeda strike again, as they did in Madrid, in London, in Mumbai, and elsewhere. Rest assured that they intend to take more lives, and not settle down for an early and restful retirement. Pakistan is where AlQaeda are holed up, and the best thing for them to do is to allow the outside world to deploy troops on their AlQaeda-infested territory, since they refuse to rid their soil of AlQaeda themselves.

Why is Pakistan trying to have it both ways? They claim that no outside help is needed against AlQaeda, but then they don't act against them themselves. They simply want the outside world to funnel unlimited amounts of aid to them, like greedy bankers asking for unlimited bailout money because of their own subprime mistakes. They don't want to be held to any standards of accountability. They can't afford to stand on their own 2 feet, and yet they're spending plenty of money to expand their nuclear arsenal -- the same arsenal that AlQaeda and Taliban are looking to seize.

[Khirad]

They're trying to have it both ways because there are different power centers in the country. Don't worry about the nukes though. If there's ever even a chance of nukes falling into Jihadi hands, the sound of Indian MiGs and shouts of "Jai Hind!" from Indian Para Commandos will be deafening.

I think the Pakistani people might turn around on this one. A poll published March 5 of this year from The News International is interesting. I quote:

"Over two-thirds of the people viewed Al-Qaeda and the Taliban as enemy number one, and wanted the Pakistani army to clear the area of the militants. A little under two-thirds want the Americans to continue the drone attack because the Pakistani army is unable or unwilling to retake the territory from the Taliban."

Unfortunately someone else will have to verify the veracity of this poll or comment further on any trend lines, I haven't been keeping up with Pakistani newspapers for a while.

[Hoyt Hilsman - Huffpost Blogger]

Thank you for your comment, Khirad. I have also seen reports of these polls that indicate a shift in Pakistani public opinion. The key would be to have the government and military acknowledge this shift and begin to act on it -- there is some evidence that this is already happening. Another positive development would be more cooperation on the military and intelligence side between Pakistan and the US. If the Pakistani government were more involved in the decision to use Predators, it would probably go a long way toward easing public outrage. But there have been problems in the past with this, mostly from the American side. Hopefully, the meetings this past week in Washington will help break that logjam. Ultimately, though, I do believe that a cutback on unilateral American Predator attacks would be a gesture of goodwill that would improve relations and progress in this struggle.

[jaysan]

Regardless of the differing power centers, they're all pretty unanimous that they don't like fighting the Taliban, and regard this to be somebody else's war. Not one Pakistani center of power feels any responsibility or international obligation to keep the Taliban in check, especially since they were all complicit in creating the Taliban.

As for any notion that India might be able to waltz into Pakistan and confiscate their nuclear weapons, that's a fairytale. We can see how helpless India was in dealing with the Mumbai attackers who came over from Pakistan. How India would be able to just run in and grab away Pakistan's nukes is beyond me.

The world had better get seriously focused on how to prevent Pakistan from being taken over by Taliban rather than hoping India will take care of the problem, because if those nukes fall into terrorist hands, the world is in serious trouble.

[dennis181]

Smart, sober piece. Hilsman's right on the money when he advises Obama to show flexibility in our approach to Middle East dilemmas. (Something the Bush administration was incapable of to an almost unbelievable degree.) For locals in Pakistan, the predator bombings are seen solely as an extension of American might into the fabric of their daily lives...especially as these drones continue to kill innocent men, women and children.

[research]

How to lose "hearts and Minds".

[jhNY]

In answer to the headline's question: YES!!! Right away, before we kill more chuldren, their mothers, fathers, sisters brothers, aunts, uncles, cousins and nephews. Did I leave anybody out?

[jhNY]

Yep. Grandparents, friends and neighbors. And everybody else in harm's way under the threat of our drones.