U.S.-led drone war is self-defeating
- Details
- Written by Ken Ballen, Peter Bergen and Patrick Doherty, Special to CNN Ken Ballen, Peter Bergen and Patrick Doherty, Special to CNN
- Published: 01 October 2010 01 October 2010
- Hits: 3498 3498
- New poll, first of its kind, shows widespread opposition to U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan
- Poll: Residents of tribal areas would accept Pakistan-led drone program
- Poll: They are not inherently anti-American, do not support al Qaeda presence
- Co-authors: Tribal regions have suffered from years of neglect, poor economy
Editor's note: CNN National Security analyst Peter Bergen and Patrick Doherty are members of the staff of the New America Foundation, a Washington-based think tank that looks for solutions across the political spectrum. Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism.
(CNN) -- For the United States there are few more strategically important places today than the tribal region of Pakistan, headquarters of al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban, and also home to a syndicate of other militant jihadist groups from across Asia.
It is where Faisal Shahzad, who tried to blow up a car bomb in Times Square in May, was trained. So was Najibullah Zazi, the Afghan-American who plotted to explode bombs on Manhattan's subways in 2009. It is also the source of a good deal of the violence that is wracking neighboring Afghanistan.
Yet this critical region is one of the most opaque places in the world; international journalists and aid organizations rarely venture there, there's little open dialogue because, until last year, most political parties were banned from operating there. As a result, the views of its inhabitants have largely been a mystery.
We recently conducted the first comprehensive public opinion survey covering sensitive political issues in the region, which is known as the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, or FATA. The poll found that nearly nine out of every 10 people oppose U.S. military operations in the region. This view is intensely held. While only one in 10 FATA residents think suicide attacks are justified against the Pakistani military and police, almost six in 10 believe these attacks are justified against the U.S. military.
The United Nations has found that many of the suicide attackers in Afghanistan hail from the Pakistani tribal regions.
Our poll finding that shows these suicide fighters enjoy widespread popular support inside FATA explains in large measure the success of their sanctuary inside the tribal areas -- a safe haven that has had devastating consequences for American soldiers inside Afghanistan.
Much of the antipathy to the United States stems from the anger against CIA-directed drone attacks on militants living in the area. More than three-quarters of FATA residents oppose the drone strikes. Only 16 percent think these strikes accurately target militants, while 48 percent think they largely kill civilians and another 33 percent feel they kill both civilians and militants. (In fact, according to media reports about the drone attacks examined by the New America Foundation, the civilian casualty rate has been dropping from around 30 percent several years ago to around 10 percent today.)
President Obama has dramatically ramped up the drone program, authorizing at least 122 strikes so far during his administration, more than double the number authorized by President George W. Bush during his entire eight years in office. This may help account for why Obama is viewed unfavorably by 83 percent of FATA residents.
Opposition to American policies in the region does not mean, however, that the people of FATA embrace either al Qaeda or the Taliban. Quite the opposite: fewer than 10 percent support the presence of al Qaeda and fewer than 20 percent the Pakistani Taliban. And if al Qaeda or the Pakistani Taliban were on the ballot in an election, not even 1 percent of FATA residents said they would vote for either group. Instead of supporting the militants, nearly seven out of every 10 FATA residents want the Pakistani military -- alone and without American help -- to pursue the militants living in their midst.
The antagonism to U.S. policies in the region does not spring from general anti-American feelings. Almost three-quarters of the people in the tribal area said that their opinion of the United States would improve -- most by a great deal -- if the United States increased humanitarian aid and visas to work or study in the States. While hating the American drones above them, the people of FATA would welcome the chance to have the ground of America beneath their feet.
The tribal regions have suffered from decades of neglect. Our poll found that only one in five residents have full-time work. As a result, FATA residents overwhelmingly cite lack of jobs, poor education, health care and access to water as important problems. Indeed, in a region that is religiously conservative, large majorities want public schools built for both boys and girls.
What our poll suggests is that if the premise of the American counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan is winning the support of the population, the United States is in danger of losing that support in the Taliban's rear bases inside Pakistan.
The Obama administration has some options. Our poll found that opposition to the drones dropped dramatically if they were operated by Pakistanis, so some control of the program could be handed over to them. The quid pro quo is that the Pakistani government has to take more public ownership of the drone program that they already provide a good deal of the intelligence for. The Pakistani military should also more aggressively pursue the Taliban and al Qaeda presence in the tribal regions, action that our poll found that FATA residents strongly favor.
Obama officials could also devise a more transparent program to assure locals that the drones are hitting their intended targets, for instance, by releasing videotapes of the strikes. Given that those officials privately claim that the civilian casualty rate from the drones is now close to zero, it would be helpful to have that claim proved publicly.
Some change is required. To just continue the current policy is not only to risk alienating the local people and the valuable intelligence they can provide, but it also may lead to more popular support, recruits and protected sanctuary for both the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Note: The FATA poll was conducted with the locally based Community Appraisal & Motivation Programme from June 30 to July 20, 2010, with face-to-face interviews of 1,000 residents and a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points. Funding for the poll was provided by the United States Institute of Peace, a congressionally funded think tank, which had no other role in the poll.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the authors.
 |
|
|
|
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/09/30/ballen.bergen.pakistan/index.html |
Yonatan and Itamar Shapira’s testimony as they returned home to their family
- Details
- Written by Yonatan and Itamar Shapira Yonatan and Itamar Shapira
- Published: 01 October 2010 01 October 2010
- Hits: 3558 3558
Yonatan and Itamar Shapira were two of the Israelis on-board the Jewish boat to Gaza, the Irene. They above all were subjected to violence from the Israeli forces who intercepted the boat.
These are their words an hour after they returned to their family in Israel:
At sunrise we stopped about 35 miles from shore and put up all the flags and banners from the organisation – the boat looked so, so pretty! We then turned south-east and headed towards the port in Gaza. Film maker Vish and journalist Eli took the dinghy and took stills and video of the boat. Everyone felt a sense of excitement as we stood on deck waving goodbye to the quiet journey we had been on. We knew that soon we would be intercepted, so we used the time for briefings. Holding each other’s hands, we talked about the principles of the boat and decided on strategies of how to deal with the Navy.
When we were approximately 20 miles outside of Gaza, a big Navy warship was spotted to the north of us. At that point it was still quite far away, so we held course.As the warship drew closer they hailed us and spoke to Glyn, the captain. The Navy said that we were entering a closed area by an oil rig, so the Irene altered course slightly in response. We then saw another smaller ship in front of them. As the warship approached and drew parallel to the Irene the smaller ship remained stationary. A number of smaller vessels were spotted coming from the east. The Navy again called us demanding to know our intention – we replied that we were headed for Gaza.
The Navy responded with the exact declaration they made before attacking the Mavi Marmara :
“You are entering an area which is under military blockade and is closed under international law.”
Itamar was in charge of communicating with the Navy, and responded by reading our own declaration in English and Hebrew:
“We are a boat of the European organisation Jews For Justice For Palestinians. We are unarmed and non-violent and determined to proceed to the port of Gaza. You are enforcing an illegal blockade and we do not recognise your right to do this. On this Jews For Justice for Palestinians boat are peace activists of all ages among us holocaust survivors, bereaved parents and Israelis who refuse to collaborate with the illegal occupation of Palestine.”
We waited for them to confirm that they had heard.
The Navy repeated their message in Hebrew – then the boats started coming from all sides. Eight army vessels surrounded us – three or four of the ships had cannons.
We called the soldiers to refuse their orders:
“We call on you IDF soldiers and officers to disobey the illegal orders of your superior officers. For your information, the occupation of Gaza and the Palestinian Territories are illegal under international law; therefore your risk being tried in the international courts. The blockade as well as the occupation is inhumane and contradicts universal and Jewish moral values. Use your conscience. Remember our own painful history. Refuse to enforce the blockade. Refuse to occupy Palestine.”
Itamar read this in Hebrew and English on radio a few times as the boats came towards us. Everyone was getting ready and holding hands on the Irene, getting ready for interception. Vish was in the front taking photos and filming the whole thing.
There were more than 100 soldiers on all the military boats around our boat. Two small boats with cannons drew up on both sides, shouting and threatening us with megaphones and constantly moving closer towards us. Glynn the captain stayed calm and behaved exactly to principles of boat, staying on course and challenging the Navy.
The military spoke to Itamar directly and stated that he was responsible for the harm that would come to us and the risk that we were taking by not changing course. We understood very quickly that we were about to be boarded at any moment. The small boats came right up close and then the north side jumped on board.
They attacked Itamar and took him to their boat. The other soldiers viciously pushed Glynn from the helm. The rest were holding hands singing “We Shall Overcome.” I think Reuven may have been playing his harmonica!
ITAMAR: At least 2 soldiers, to what I understood, were assigned to getting all recording devices. The Israeli Channel 10 reporter stood next to me and one of the soldiers just took his camera from his hand. I took the camera back without touching the soldier and put it behind my back and refused to give it to the soldiers. The soldier called another one and together tried to make me move with twisting arms and shouting and trying to reach for the camera. when they did not succeed they asked for a permission from their commander to arrest me. 4 of them dragged me to the military boat and forced me down to the boat’s floor in order to handcuff me. I did not give up until one of them pushed his fingers deep onto the artery in my neck, and then I heard Yonatan’s dreadful scream and saw him losing control of his body because of the electric shock he got. I shouted to Rami to throw the camera into the boat’s engine-room and Yonatan was brought to the military boat that I was on and we were both handcuffed and taken to a large ship.
Soldiers on boat approached me and Rami, they seemed to want to take me to a Navy boat. Me and Rami hugged each other – the strongest hug I have ever given to anyone!
The officer came towards us, pulling out his taser ordered us to stop holding on to each other. The soldier threatened if I did not let go they would hurt me, then tasered me on my right shoulder and shot twice – it was very painful – but not as painful as the next shot where he pulled aside my life jacket, put gun on my chest and fired.My whole body lost control and I convulsed like a fit, I let out a high pitched scream. Then they took me to one of their boats.
And that was the “non-violent” take over of the Jewish boat to Gaza. Of course if we were Palestinians or Muslims they would have shot with live ammo, but because we were Jews and Israelis and had world attention they did not want to do what they did to the Mavi Marmara. Of course later they took all evidence filmed by Eli and Vish and the only evidence which now exists is with the military and the military film itself. It would be amazing if somehow there was pressure for the army to release the media materials we shot – there’s no reason for them to keep it. It’s amazing footage of all 48 hours of the voyage and the messages we wrote on the masts and flags from everyone who had sent wishes. Probably the most powerful images are of the actual seconds when the Navy boarded the ship.
All our banners and flags were pulled down by the army and the boat was pulled with the rest of passengers on-board to Ashdod.
Itamar and I went to Ashdod in the big warship which took several hours. We saw the boat being towed to the port. We saw the protesters, friends, family and supporters waiting for us on the beach since the morning, and a boat of film makers with cameras that were trying to reach us but was intercepted and forced to turn back to the port.
Each one of us had an intimate body search – they touched me quite intimately but no internal search. Eventually we were taken to a police station in Ashdod and saw more demonstrators waiting for us outside.
The police station took several hours, they interrogated Rami, Itamar, Reuven, Eli and I and we were all accused of trying to enter an illegal closed zone, while Rami, Itamar and I were also accused of threatening, insulting and attacking the soldiers.We were all released around eight in the evening. It was shocking to be attacked so brutally whilst hugging and singing – the soldiers shouted at us, shook and pushed us. We were shocked to hear the army say the takeover was peaceful.
There was a big group of Israeli media and also people from Reuters and a few others waiting for us outside station. We answered their questions, then Reuven took out his harmonica and played a beautiful Jewish songs abut people who pursued peace. Everyone joined in around us, as we sang together some people who were passing by shouted things like “death to the Arabs”.
If we weren’t Jews and Israelis we would have much less chance to make it out alive. I send my love and thanks to everyone for all of their support, love and efforts to help us.”
NOTE:
Yonatan was not given or offered any medical attention at any point after he was shot with the taser.
They were released on 5000 N.I.S bail to return for additional interrogation or court discussion.
It is unclear as to whether they will be charged.
Collectively Addicted to Occupation and Apartheid? The Benefits of Avoiding Peace
- Details
- Written by Jonathon Cook via Jewish Peace News Jonathon Cook via Jewish Peace News
- Published: 30 September 2010 30 September 2010
- Hits: 3653 3653
Jonathan Cook presents a compact introduction to the intricate web of special interests that sustain Israel's occupation policies. The crux of his presentation is that large and influential sectors of Israeli society, not just that obvious political target known as 'the settlers', benefit from the occupation. In fact, the Israeli elite, which comprises many secular, Ashkenazi citizens, and is considered the most dovish sector of Israeli society, may be the champion of all profiteers: Israel's hi-tec industries, many of them focused on sophisticated "security" products, are an essential component of the country's successful endless-war/no-peace economy. No wonder that most voters belonging to this sector of society have easily found their way to the no-different-from-Likkud Kadima party, which does not even pretend to be a proponent of urgently needed progressive social reform or a real ending of the occupation, not to mention reconciliation with our neighbors (causes to which the
moribund Labour party has at least been paying lip service).
For a more elaborate presentation of the themes in Cook's article, please read chapter 21, "Losing the Peace Incentive: Israel as Warning", in Naomi Klein's book ”The Shock Doctrine":
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine/resources/part7/chapter21
For further information about that intricate web of profiteering, please see the Israeli database
"Who Profits from the Occupation?" http://whoprofits.org/
This information is highly relevant to the ongoing debate on the desirable scope of sanctions against Israeli policies. A coalition of diverse interest groups - not just the ideological settlers in Ofra and Kiryat Arba but also those secular CEO's of software companies in Tel-Aviv who regard the former as loonies and their places of residence as remote lunar colonies - now have a common interest: maintaining the status-quo! Many Israelis have become structurally dependent, albeit in an indirect manner, on severe, endemic human rights violations, for their high standards of living. This amounts to a form of collective addiction, and rehab has been long overdue. If this is the case, the comprehensive campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions, which targets much more than the so-called 'settlement industry', may be justified.
Ofer Neiman
Read more: Collectively Addicted to Occupation and Apartheid? The Benefits of Avoiding Peace
Our Man in Palestine
- Details
- Written by Nathan Thrall Nathan Thrall
- Published: 30 September 2010 30 September 2010
- Hits: 4021 4021
On August 31, the night before President Obama’s dinner inaugurating direct talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders, Hamas gunmen shot and killed four Jewish settlers in Hebron, the West Bank’s largest and most populous governorate. The attack—the deadliest against Israeli citizens in more than two years—was condemned by Palestinian and Israeli officials, who said that it was meant to thwart the upcoming negotiations. According to a Hamas spokesman, however, the shooting had a more specific purpose: to demonstrate the futility of the recent cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian security forces. This cooperation has reached unprecedented levels under the quiet direction of a three-star US Army general, Keith Dayton, who has been commanding a little-publicized American mission to build up Palestinian security forces in the West Bank.1
In January 2009, Mustafa Barghouti, who placed second in the 2005 presidential elections, stated, "It's shameful. The people cannot live with two occupations at once." Andrew Lee Butters, "Casualties of War: Palestinian Moderates," Time, January 10, 2009
Click on the link to read more . . .
Rosengarten, sole American on boat: It is Jew against Jew
- Details
- Written by Philip Weiss Philip Weiss
- Published: 29 September 2010 29 September 2010
- Hits: 4375 4375
We have received two accounts of the treatment of passengers and crew on the Jewish boat to Gaza.
The first is from the American passenger on the boat, Lillian
Rosengarten of New York (pictured at left among boat's passengers in
Cyprus earlier this week), a former refugee from Nazi Germany. The
second is from Nurit Peled-Elhanan, an Israeli married to Rami Elhanan
(second from right). Rosengarten:
I was deported and very conflicted about leaving Edith Lutz [of Germany, second from left above] behind. I felt assured when I spoke to the vice consul from the American Embassy in Tel Aviv who had brought our human rights lawyer, Smadar Ben-Natan, and another lawyer who will meet with Edith and help her as she decided to resist deportation as a very personal statement of resistance.
I was extremely happy to hear that Reuven [Moskowitz, in white shirt at center], Rami, Yonotan Shapira [right, in Crocs] and Itamar Shapira [3d from left] were allowed to go home. Such wonderful people, now cherished friends. Glyn Secker and Vish Vishvanath were also deported along with myself. For me the deportation process was humiliating. Jew against Jew is totally against the dreams of so long ago, what we imagined how our beloved Israel would evolve. That dream was for me a safe haven, a country of compassion. Tolerance for all, and a completely open society. I can imagine that Israel would have become a beacon of light for the world to follow. In this dream there would be tolerance for political difference. Now sadly, Jews have become divided against one another and it is no longer a safe haven. We from the Jewish boat were treated as traitors and people to get rid of. We were not "good Jews," but "bad Jews to deport without being allowed to enter Israel again." Only in Fascist regimes are people forced to think the same. I experienced humiliation when arrested. I was not physically mistreated but suffered emotionally. I suffered when the immigration person asked me if I was Jewish after I told him I was a refugee from the Nazis, the last generation to be able to tell the heinous story. He wanted me to prove that I was Jewish. How was I to do that and yes, how deeply humiliating. When I witness the Israel of today, I feel enormous pain. I was deported because of my human rights beliefs and non violent actions. In detention I no longer felt safe or cared about. I don't even think it mattered that I am Jewish. Now I will not be allowed to return to Israel as the cycle of hate and fear goes on and on. Those of us who dreamed of a different kind of Israel can only weep.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan is the wife of Rami Elhanan, who was on the Jewish boat to Gaza. Peled-Elhanan passes along the following report:
Coming out of the police investigation, Yonatan [Shapira] looked like someone coming out of prisoners' camp: Long pale distorted face. It was the same monstrous soldiers who attacked the Marmara. They were all after him. They beat him up, kicked him and used a taser on him. The other passengers said he was palpitating and screaming like a wounded animal but the monster wouldn't stop. When Rami asked him for his name he said Gepeto.
Now Rami is accused of threatening a soldier because he said he would find out his name and press charges against him. Yonatan and Itamar [Shapira, Yonatan's brother], who were handcuffed and dragged and then thrown violently to another boat, are charged with assaulting the soldiers and resisting arrest. There were dozens fully armed comandos who attacked them on the boat, 4 navy war boats.
A very senior general, Amidror, head of research unit of the IDF said on the radio 2 days ago that Yonatan Shapira, an ex-pilot in the Air force is psychopath and should be locked away. I reacted to that so they interviewed me the day after. I told them this is the Russians did to Sakharov and that Yonatan is Israel's best son and an example to Young people of what they should be as well etc.
However it seems the media are very eager to interview us along with their complete faith in what the IDF says. We were interviewed all day long, while waiting for them to come out of the investigation, by everybody, all the time, but it looks like they see us as a curiosity rather than reliable sources of information.
The whole world should support Yonatan and Itamar Shapira now because the security forces are surely after them and there are no limits to what these soldiers would do if ordered.