FO starts phasing out drones from its vocabulary
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar delivers her speech at the NAM ministerial meeting in Tehran on Wednesday. – Photo by INP
ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office has started phasing out “drones” from its diplomatic jargon and instead of denouncing the weapon system by name its diplomats now talk about hurtful consequences of “unilateral attacks” for Pakistan.
The purpose could be to restrict the matter to bilateral level.
The shift towards not directly taking up the issue of drones in dealing with countries other than US has been evident for some time now, particularly so after engagements with the Pentagon and CIA on finding a via media for one of the most contentious issues in bilateral relationship.
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar’s speech at the German Council on Foreign Relations on Tuesday reinforced this impression.
Speaking at the Council, shortly after reaching Berlin, she said: “Pakistan and its citizens often have to suffer from unilateral military actions.”
It was more than obvious that she was talking about the frequent use of drones by CIA to attack militant targets in tribal areas because other than the Osama bin Laden raid in Abbotabad there is only one known incident of the US putting boots on Pakistan soil in 2008.
Moreover, what Ms Khar said in the context of unilateral strikes echoed Pakistani position on drone attacks.
“These actions are inconsistent with international law and they complicate the situation on the ground,” she noted.
Ms Khar also advised the US against pursuing short-term goals.
“We cannot afford to keep our eyes on short-term goals. We must have a strategic long-term vision and devise our action plans accordingly.”
One of the criticism of drone war by Pakistani strategists is that it may be useful in achieving tactical goals, but is strategically disadvantageous.
And while the text of FM’s speech just mentioned “unilateral military actions” that violated international law, the press release on the event issued by the spokesman’s office said she condemned “unilateral drone strikes” for complicating the situation.
The seeming shift in Pakistan’s position becomes more understandable when seen in the light of a statement by Foreign Office spokesman Mr Moazzam Khan almost 10 days ago.
While replying to a question about Pakistan’s likely response to drone attacks, Mr Khan had said: “There are other options available but at the moment we are dealing with this issue bilaterally.”
Quite significantly, Ms Khar didn’t speak about drone attacks in her speech at the NAM conference in Tehran even though she talked about Afghanistan and used the forum to lash out at “major powers” for being “selective” in dealing with international crisis.
A Western diplomat (not from the US), speaking on background, said he too had noticed this change in his recent interactions with Pakistani diplomats.
Meanwhile, Pakistan did lodge a protest with the US against the drone attacks.
There was a sudden spike in drone attacks and in the last fortnight of August there were five attacks taking the total for 2012 to 35.
Pakistan has been lately engaging the US leadership at various levels on drones and was expecting to come up with a mutually acceptable solution.
Foreign Office spokesman Moazzam Khan wasn’t available to comment on the perception of controversy over drones being reduced to bilateral level.
In the past Pakistani leaders had forcefully taken up the matter during bilateral interactions with allies and at multilateral level.
As long as FO is run by a fuedal kid nothing will improve!
The term “unilateral military attacks” used by Mrs.Khar in place of drone attacks is not good.Inspite of changing her stance, Pakistan should highlight this issue very clearly on every international platform. US too respect the sovereignity and territorial integrity of Pakistan. Because drone attacks are spreading discontentment and extremism among youth.
I think Drones should be rename as “unmanned observation craft”, sound softer no? it’s like renaming hitler as a “patriotic german serving the army and the nation”
What else can one expect from a government which came into power as result of NRO on the behest of americans to serve their agenda. One can only feel the pain once one looses his own loved one in this so called War on Terror. May God help this country and all those who lost their kin
Receding on a legitimate stance is culmination of shameful cowardice. Where is this regime alongwith its shamelss allies taking Pakistan to?
Looks like Pakistani diplomacy has completely failed and country is isolated on the drone issue.
These are not necessarily unilateral attacks. A drone killed Ilyas Kashmiri. Another killed Baitullah Masood. These people did attack the US and the drone attacks were a response. However, the drones also kill innocent people – here they are unilateral attacks. They need a better term than unilateral attacks.
We need more drone attacks. Pakistan should be grateful to America for doing a job which we can’t do.
Pakistan has an strong air defence system. They can down a “unilateral” unmanned air craft. Cant they?
I am sure Pakistan defence forces are capable of taking out the drones but Pakistan is also a US ally and receives financial support. It is a trcky situation between the two allies that can only be addressed diplomaticaly.
“Pakistan has an strong air defence system. They can down a “unilateral” unmanned air craft. Cant they?”
No, they can’t even swat down a mosquito on their best day. Too much empty talk. PAF talks the talk but can’t walk the walk. Huffing and puffing…they can’t even keep their planes from falling apart, on the ground or in the air. Remember Sallah kills? Or the attack on PMA Abbotabad? Attacking civilian homes unopposed, yes they are good at that.
Now Iran: They can take complete command and control, land at their disposal the most advanced state of the art Stealth Drone there is…debrief, duplicate it, make and return a miniature copy, with compliments of its cyber-scientists, to the sender’s address…!
Why not remove all innocent people from the trouble area and take full fledged military action to neutralize the terrorists and armed militia.
Where will you put them? In your house? Beside if you were the residence of that area, will you accept uprooting and moving in some tent while someone bomb and potentially destroy your home and everything you have build there. Please think before you speak. Thanks
“Courage enlarges, cowardice diminishes resources. In desperate straits the fears of the timid aggravate the dangers that imperil the brave.”
Christian Nestell Bovee
35 strikes in one year . and the FO is just engaging them .. wow . By the speed of the action by FO it looks like by 180 strike they probably will be complaining and by 1000 they will officially be against it .
So my advice to FO ” Either you own it or leave it” . Targeting terrorist should be done but saving innocent people have greater priority.
indeed ,great conclusion u did
An excellent observation and analysis of the cowardice of the Pakistani FO.
From Drones to Unilateral attacks
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
One small step for Ms Khar and a giant step for Pakistan.