High Commissioner to the UK Mr Wajid Shamsul Hasan (Photo: Chris Woods)
One of Islamabad’s most senior diplomats has told the Bureau of Investigative Journalism that ongoing CIA drone strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas are weakening democracy, and risk pushing people towards extremist groups.
He also claims that some factions of the US government still prefer to work with ‘just one man’ rather than a democratically-elected government, and accuses the US of ‘talking in miles’ when it comes to democracy but of ‘moving in inches.’
As High Commissioner to London, Wajid Shamsul Hasan is one of Pakistan’s top ambassadors. Now four years into his second stint in the post, he is no stranger to controversy. In an extended interview with the Bureau, Ambassador Hasan argues that US drone strikes risk significantly weakening Pakistan’s democratic institutions:
‘What has been the whole outcome of these drone attacks is, that you have rather directly or indirectly contributed to destabilizing or undermining the democratic government. Because people really make fun of the democratic government – when you pass a resolution against drone attacks in the parliament, and nothing happens. The Americans don’t listen to you, and they continue to violate your territory.’
The army too risks being seen as impotent, he warns the United States.
‘Please don’t embarrass us by violating our territory because people question why the hell we have such a huge standing army, where we spend so much on our national defence budget, when we can’t defend ourselves?’
But he accepts that Pakistan has little power to stop the strikes other than through public opinion: ‘We cannot take on the only superpower, which is all-powerful in the world at the moment. You can’t take them on. We are a small country, we are ill-equipped.’
‘I would have killed bin Laden myself’
The High Commissioner’s comments appear part of a major public relations offensive by a Pakistani government keen to see an end to the unpopular drone strikes.
On Friday Sherry Rehman, Islamabad’s ambassador to the United States, said that ‘We will seek an end to drone strikes and there will be no compromise on that.’ The heads of Pakistan’s army and ISI spy service are also lobbying Washington to allow Pakistani forces to carry out any actual strikes against terrorists based on US intelligence.
The reason, according to Ambassador Hasan, is that anti-US sentiment is reaching dangerously high levels in Pakistan because of the drones:
‘Even those who were supporting us in the border areas have now become our enemies. They say that we are partners in these crimes against the people. So they hate us as well. They hate the Americans more. If you look at the Pakistan-US relationship, we have received a lot of money from the Americans, and yet they’re the most hated country in Pakistan among the people. By and large you will hardly find anybody who will say a word in support for the United States, because of these drone attacks.’
We cannot take on the only superpower, which is all-powerful in the world at the moment. You can’t take them on. We are a small country, we are ill-equipped.’
The High Commissioner insists that his country remains committed to the war against al Qaeda and extremism, noting the thousands of Pakistani civilians and soldiers who have died in terrorist attacks since 9/11.
‘We’re not opposed to eliminating these al Qaeda chaps. We were not opposed to eliminating Osama bin Laden, because he was declared an international terrorist. If I were there I would have killed him myself.’
The issue, he insists, is the continued violation of Pakistan’s national sovereignty by US drones: ‘This is a violation of the UN Charter, it is a clear violation of our territorial sovereignty and national integrity. These drone violations have been taking place since 2004. And the attacks have killed 2,500 to 3,000 people.’
Those numbers chime with the Bureau’s own published findings, although the High Commissioner believes that a low count of at least 482 civilians killed by the CIA is likely a conservative figure. And he rejects US claims that it has killed few civilians at all in recent years:
‘What if my neighbour got killed in a drone attack, who had nothing to do with the Taliban or al Qaeda? You can imagine how angry I must be. Because it could be me next time. So that’s the sort of reaction we have. We have got everybody, irrespective of who they are – whether liberal, progressive, secular or religious extremists or radical people – they feel like this when civilians are killed.’
‘They talk in miles but move in inches’
Mr Hasan was also scathing about what he sees as the US’s weak commitment towards democracy in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He also implies there are those in the US government who would still prefer to be dealing with a dictator:
The drones are a violation of the UN Charter, a clear violation of our territorial sovereignty and national integrity.’
‘They talk in miles in support of democracy, but they move in inches. They say, “We are fully for democracy, we want democracy, we support the Arab Spring, we are opposed to military interference in Egypt.” All of these things are very good. They are music to my ears. But when it comes to real politics they are different. [US Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton has really supported democracy. But she is one person. There are so many pillars of power in the United States, and they act differently. ‘
‘The United States if you look at Pakistan’s 65 year history has always preferred to deal with one man rather than with institutions. They would never like a matter to go to the parliament, to be debated there, for issues to be accountable to the parliament and the people, they don’t want that, they want one man. ‘
The High Commissioner also questioned what America has achieved in ten years of war in Afghanistan – and what it might leave behind in 2014.
‘How long have NATO troops been there in Afghanistan? Nine, ten years? And they’ve spent trillions of dollars there, but have they succeeded to clear one particular area of Taliban or al Qaeda operatives? Not a single case.’
And he added: ‘Ten years down the road you have not even allowed democratic parties to be active, you are not allowing political parties to exist in Afghanistan. How can you have democracy if you don’t have political parties?
‘Drone strikes won’t end the violence’
The High Commissioner argues that Pakistan can still play a key role in negotiating peace with the Taliban – but that the US has shown little interest in offers of aid:
How long have NATO troops been there in Afghanistan? Nine, ten years? And they’ve spent trillions of dollars there, but have they succeeded to clear one particular area of Taliban or al Qaeda operatives? Not a single case.’
‘When we have been telling them that you must have a dialogue with the Taliban, good or bad, they never listen to us. Now they have started back-door diplomacy and all these backtracks through the Saudis and others. But again they’re forgetting one thing.
‘Pakistan has been one of the major players in the region, ever since the Soviets occupied Afghanistan. We have had the best relationship with those Afghans, the Taliban or whatever in the past. Couldn’t we be a better option for them to deal with those people? No – they never bothered.‘
With the US and NATO intending to withdraw from Afghanistan by 2014, Ambassador Hasan insists that Pakistan will continue the fight against Al Qaeda – but that it cannot accept US drone strikes.
‘Bush’s State Department said a fortnight before 9/11 that they were opposed to targeted killing [in Israel] because they don’t end the violence. And drone strikes won’t end the violence, they won’t end extremism, they won’t end the Taliban and won’t end al Qaeda. How do you fight a faceless enemy?
‘What you have to do is win the hearts and minds of the people, to solve the local problem there in Afghanistan, to stop the drone attacks in Pakistan so the people can see that yes, they have been stopped. Now let’s build a relationship, yes let’s try to resolve this terrible issue. Let’s fight terrorism. And we are a very resilient people, we can fight it.’
A shorter version of this interview appeared in The Guardian on Friday August 3 2012.
Follow @chrisjwoods on Twitter
Sign up for email alerts from the Bureau here.
August 3rd, 2012 at 12:44 pm (#)
What Pakastani democracy? The laast time there was a legally elected President she was killed by the same pople crying about their style of Pakastani democracy. Let us not forget that following WW2 Pakastan and India were created as a consequence of total different political philosophies and of course religion. US Presidens campaigning for wealthy contributors wanting to maintain their factories in Pakistan. The solution to rediculous pseudo journalists is simple just send our troops home. With an inconsistent foreign policy builing up the civil infrastructure of our literal enemies, like Pakistan, while the infrastructure of the United States is rusting away says more than anything read by Mr. Obama on a teleprompter. It is time to bring the troops home and to use the covert activities to protect our allies like India and Israel, and to return Turkey with consistency in action. Pete Seger has a great song “Bring em’ home.” Civilian casalties in a military action? DUH!
August 6th, 2012 at 1:07 pm (#)
Thank you for this stoy.
This is a revealing story.
You print it just after on 31 July when Lt. Gen. Zahir ul-Islam, the head of Pakistan’s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence directorate met officials in Washington including the head of CIA and in Islamabad Ambassador of Iran to Pakistan Ali Reza Haghighian met Interior Minister Rehman Malik and discussed matters relating to mutual ties.
Showing how Pakistan’s diplomatic role is increasing.
I track the news under the name ‘snipfeeds’ I’m not a journalist but are continually surprised how main-stream media run data that is supported with more in-depth stories from yourself and other not-for profit organizations.
Thank you again for this story.
August 7th, 2012 at 12:05 am (#)
DRONES
While the international community keeps debating the future of the drones slaughter in the Middle East & Africa countries that are not even at war with the US, the threat of human survival is intensified by the reality of more terror, wars and displacement. Billions of dollars are spent in the production of these Drones, while billions of people suffer from famine, and eleven million children die every year from preventable diseases. The United States is the biggest in military spending with 41% of the global military expenditures. The truth is the Middle East is hanging by a thread; Drones are used at any given moment that could precipitate more terror for the US and its citizens. There is no doubt that international security is threatened by the existence of these weapons and before more and more countries get their hands on them, a complete elimination would be a matter of survival for humanity.
August 8th, 2012 at 2:45 am (#)
Moral Predators
The US ability to continue to rule is dependent on imposing upon the weak, the very rules they routinely break to maintain their position. Launching a preemptive war without the threat of an imminent attack stretches the meaning of preemption beyond reasonable bounds, and sets a dangerous precedent which other countries may feel to follow. Drones slaughter produces the highest civilian casualty ratio than other methods of attacking militants overseas. The past and present administration use this formula for counting the number of militants killed, which is deceptive to serious scholars and public opinion in the field of military ethics. What it feels like to live with the terror of the constant buzzing of drones, never knowing when one of its precision missiles might hit houses or cars, just because it contains men with beards along with children and the elderly, in the intellectual world makes due process irrelevant. The requirements of following international laws are crucial in preventing even greater hostilities when the potential for future conflict appearing on the horizon. It’s a powerful moral constraint that will impact other countries, including the use of new technologies to kill people in foreign lands, who haven’t done anything to harm others. Washington’s democracy of domination and its use of drone to slaughter militant protecting their own land, must comport with international law, or it will set a dangerous precedent that could be used in the future by nations with less respect for the right to life in particular, and human rights in general.
August 14th, 2012 at 10:57 am (#)
The out-of-touch elite may think one thing, but the population at large is clearly opposed to the use of deadly force by drone strikes. One authoritative poll highlights overwhelming approval for drone attacks is only found in the US. In all other nations polls show most people disapprove of it.
Unfortunately it seems that Obama is not losing any political capital in the US by continuing with drone attacks or, more importantly, by increasing the frequency of attacks from his predecessor. With every ‘success’ in taking out someone from Al-Qaeda, no matter how many innocent people die, he does his re-election campaign a lot of good. Human rights come a very distant second.
http://abdelxyz.wordpress.com/2012/06/30/nobel-peace-drones/
August 14th, 2012 at 3:52 pm (#)
Washington response to innocent mass murder and drone slaughter as they package it as (terrorism) overseas is the predictable result, they celebrate a willingness in fighting terror as heroism, by teaching soldiers it’s honorable to take human life with no regard to life, justification or cause, just largely an imagined threat putting all other nations are at risk including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia countries without financial resources the rest of the world teaches that morality is determined within ones geographical space, Congress isn’t remotely close to doing anything beyond issuing a resolution condemning the violent act, they act surprised what can only be called transparent dishonesty when mass murder keeps happening, even when stressful soldiers get back home.