From a very good Los Angeles Times story about Pakistan’s wariness about invading north Waziristan:
“These drone attacks are disadvantageous for the U.S.,” said Fakhrul Islam, a tribal areas expert at Peshawar University. “The Pakistani population isn’t happy with these attacks, and they give the Taliban a chance to talk about the killing of innocent people as a result of drone strikes.”
Perhaps we truly have no choice but to conduct airstrikes in Yemen. I don’t know enough about Yemen to say, but I’ll consider the proposition. But even so: this exact same critique and objection applies. If we truly are concerned about al-Qaeda’s growing presence there, then it’s asinine not to think that lobbing missiles at the place will make the population less sympathetic to al-Qaeda. And yet that — and worse — is what our very serious politicians propose we do.
I keep going back to this demand-side security point. It’s never sufficient just to observe that a terrorist group has a presence in Country X. We have to ask ourselves: what are the conditions that allowed for said terrorist group to take root. If we don’t, we simply can’t devise an effective strategy against the terrorist group; and we come close to guaranteeing that we’ll flail and make the situation worse.




Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed