No Obama tears for children killed by drones in Pakistan

From the Newspaper | | 19th December, 2012
89
Send to Kindle

US President Barack Obama speaks at a memorial service for the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting on December 16, 2012 in Newtown, Connecticut. — Photo by AFP

“MERE words cannot match the depths of your sorrow, nor can they heal your wounded hearts … These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change.” Every parent can connect with what President Barack Obama said about the murder of 20 children in Newtown, Connecticut. There can scarcely be a person on earth with access to the media who is untouched by the grief of the people of that town.

It must follow that what applies to the children murdered there by a deranged young man also applies to the children murdered in Pakistan by a sombre American president. These children are just as important, just as real, just as deserving of the world’s concern.

Yet there are no presidential speeches or presidential tears for them, no pictures on the front pages of the world’s newspapers, no interviews with grieving relatives, no minute analysis of what happened and why.

If the victims of Mr Obama’s drone strikes are mentioned by the state at all, they are discussed in terms which suggest that they are less than human.

The people who operate the drones, Rolling Stone magazine reports, describe their casualties as “bug splats”, “since viewing the body through a grainy-green video image gives the sense of an insect being crushed”.

Or they are reduced to vegetation: justifying the drone war, Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser Bruce Riedel explained that “you’ve got to mow the lawn all the time. The minute you stop mowing, the grass is going to grow back”.

Like George Bush’s government in Iraq, Obama’s administration neither documents nor acknowledges the civilian casualties of the CIA’s drone strikes in Pakistan. But a report by the law schools at Stanford and New York universities suggests that during the first three years of his time in office, the 259 strikes for which he is ultimately responsible killed between 297 and 569 civilians, of whom at least 64 were children.

These are figures extracted from credible reports: there may be more which have not been fully documented.

The wider effects on the children of the region have been devastating. Many have been withdrawn from school because of fears that large gatherings of any kind are being targeted.

There have been several strikes on schools since former president George Bush launched the drone programme that Obama has expanded so enthusiastically: one of Bush’s blunders killed 69 children.

SCARRED MINDS: The study reports that children scream in terror when they hear the sound of a drone. A local psychologist says that their fear and the horrors they witness is causing permanent mental scarring. Children wounded in drone attacks told the researchers that they are too traumatised to go back to school and have abandoned hopes of the careers they might have had.

Their dreams as well as their bodies have been broken.Obama does not kill children deliberately. But their deaths are an inevitable outcome of the way his drones are deployed. We don’t know what emotional effect these deaths might have on him, as neither he nor his officials will discuss the matter: almost everything to do with the CIA’s extra-judicial killings in Pakistan is kept secret.

But you get the impression that no one in the administration is losing much sleep over it.

Two days before the murders in Newtown, Obama’s press secretary was asked about women and children being killed by drones in Yemen and Pakistan. He refused to answer, on the grounds that such matters are “classified”. Instead, he directed the journalist to a speech by John Brennan, Obama’s counter-terrorism assistant. Brennan insists that “Al Qaeda’s killing of innocents, mostly Muslim men, women and children, has badly tarnished its appeal and image in the eyes of Muslims”.

TISSUE AROUND TUMOUR: He appears unable to see that the drone war has done the same for the US. To Brennan the people of Pakistan are neither insects nor grass: his targets are a “cancerous tumour”, the rest of society “the tissue around it”. Beware of anyone who describes a human being as something other than a human being.

Yes, he conceded, there is occasionally a little “collateral damage”, but the US takes “extraordinary care [to] ensure precision and avoid the loss of innocent life”. It will act only if there’s “an actual ongoing threat” to American lives. This is cock and bull with bells on.

The “signature strike” doctrine developed under Obama, which has no discernible basis in law, merely looks for patterns. A pattern could consist of a party of unknown men carrying guns (which scarcely distinguishes them from the rest of the male population of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa), or a group of unknown people who look as if they might be plotting something.

This is how wedding and funeral parties get wiped out; this is why 40 elders discussing royalties from a chromite mine were blown up in March last year. It is one of the reasons why children continue to be killed.

Obama has scarcely mentioned the drone programme and has said nothing about its killing of children. The only statement I can find is a brief and vague response during a video conference last January. The killings have been left to others to justify. In October the Democratic cheerleader Joe Klein claimed on MSNBC that “the bottom line in the end is whose four-year-old gets killed? What we’re doing is limiting the possibility that four-year-olds here will get killed by indiscriminate acts of terror”.

As the estimable Glenn Greenwald has pointed out, killing four-year-olds is what terrorists do. It doesn’t prevent retaliatory murders, it encourages them, as grief and revenge are often accomplices.

Most of the world’s media, which has rightly commemorated the children of Newtown, either ignores Obama’s murders or accepts the official version that all those killed are “militants”. The children of north-west Pakistan, it seems, are not like our children. They have no names, no pictures, no memorials of candles and flowers and teddy bears. They belong to the other: to the non-human world of bugs and grass and tissue.

“Are we,” Obama asked on Sunday, “prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?” It’s a valid question. He should apply it to the violence he is visiting on the children of Pakistan.

By arrangement with the Guardian

COMMENTS

  1. Why do we expect Obama to have tears in his eyes, for drone killings there should be tears in the eyes of Zardari and the prime Minister of Pakistan, but they are too shameless to get tears in there eyes.

  2. The death of children at the hands of drones is because the establishment claims that they lack the ability to attack Taliban terrorists that kill Afghan men, women and children.


  3. It is the sole responsibility of Pakistani Army and Pakistani governemnt to protect its tax payers.Obama have no obligation to proctect Pakistani citizens or Pakistani tax payers.Why we are asking for mercy from others?

  4. Exactly my thoughts. Totally agree with the writer.

  5. President of Pakistan ,Zardari should be visiting their parents and shedding tears. He is responsible for what is happening in Pakistan.Drones are not the only object killing children, Taliban and other fanatics killing children and adults everyday. No one is taking any notice, culprits are never caught and human beings are trashed without any respect or sympathy!

  6. It should actually be no Zardari tears, no Nawaz Sharif tears, no Imran Khan tears for the children killed in Pakistan.

  7. Anwar Saadat(Karak,KPK)

    This categorically reveals the hypocrisy of American Govt. which cries for the killings in Syria, Egypt,etc,but ignores the innocent victims of its drones in Pakistan.

  8. When was the last time any Pakistani politician shed any tears for their own people let alone children? Look inward first.

  9. Wrong Reporting…It should be …”No Zardari tears for children killed by drones in Pakistan”

  10. Some of these comments are honestly embarrassing to read. Obviously Obama is not the Pakistani president, but the fact that he stood on a podium and cried over deaths that he couldn’t prevent whereas he ORDERS drone strikes in Pakistan that have maimed and killed dozens of Pakistani children isdisgusting. Our first job is to take care of our children right? Well, in the face of our Commander-In-Chief’s foreign policy Pakistani parents are stripped of the ability to do this.

  11. Instead of accepting our mistakes and taking corrective actions, we leave it to others to make amends. America should fix our problems cause they bomb. They bomb cause we don’t want to fix our problems. It’s simple.
    We are proud of our corrupt premiers and system. Have we cried for this country? Have we brought the nation to a halt in order to cleanse it of evil?
    “Stop being emotional. No one is my brother or sister. They are all nationals of this country and I will treat them by law, no matter who they are.” When we reach this stage, the world will cry with us should despair strike.

  12. Why in world Obama cry for children who die from drones ? How many Pakistani cried for those children or innocents who die from drones ? He is AMERICAN PRESIDENT NOT PAKISTANI PRESIDENT. This article heading should be “DID ZARDARI CRIED FOR CHILDREN OF PAKISTAN”.

  13. There is a difference between children in country with Pride and children in country without any Pride.

  14. We only have ourselves to blame. Only if we had made the right choices at the right time. We would have been in a far better position than we are today.