What's new

White House backpedals on Kerry’s pledge to end drone strikes in Pakistan

t-birds

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
323
Reaction score
0
White House backpedals on Kerry’s pledge to end drone strikes in Pakistan

The Obama administration was forced into damage control on Thursday as officials attempted to walk back Secretary of State John Kerry’s pledge to end armed drone operations in Pakistan.

During a diplomatic visit to Pakistan on Thursday, Kerry told Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that Washington plans to severely curtail and eventually end armed drone operations in the country.

The move was geared toward an overall effort by the Obama administration to forge “a real partnership” between the White House and Islamabad, Kerry told reporters after his meeting with Sharif.

“I think the [drone] program will end as we have eliminated most of the threat and continue to eliminate it,” Kerry said in an interview with Pakistani television.

“I think the president has a very real timeline and we hope it’s going to be very, very soon,” the former Massachusetts senator added.

The Obama administration reacted quickly to Kerry’s comments, saying his statements did not reflect a coming change in the use of armed drones against terrorist targets or overall U.S. counterterrorism policy.

“Clearly the goal of counter-terrorism operations, broadly speaking, is to get to a place where we don’t have to use them, because the threat goes away,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said Thursday.

However, she made clear that there was no plan to eliminate the drone program in the near future, or that the White House had a plan to phase out drone operations.

The Obama administration is “realistic about the fact that there is a threat that remains and that we have to keep up our vigilance to fight in this and other places around the world.”

“As we make … progress [against al Qaeda] the need to use these tools will, of course, be reduced,” she added.

U.S. drone strikes against suspected terrorist targets inside Pakistan has long been a source of contention in the often tense relations between Washington and Islamabad.

Pakistan claims the strikes, focused on the volatile provinces in the northwest part of the country that border Afghanistan, are a clear violation of the country’s sovereignty.

U.S. military and intelligence officials maintain the drone strikes have been an invaluable tool in decimating the core leadership of al Qaeda and other extremist groups based inside Pakistan.

Those tensions came to a head in May 2011, when a U.S. special operations team secretly entered Pakistan and killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

The infamous terrorist leader had been quietly living in the Pakistani city of Abottabad, only miles from Islamabad.

During a major national security speech in May, President Obama announced plans to transition control of armed drone strikes to the Pentagon.

Under the White House’s plan, the CIA will continue to supply targeting and other intelligence on possible targets, but operational control over the actual drone strikes would fall to the military.

Currently, the Pentagon and CIA coordinate and execute their own independent armed drone operations in various hot spots across the globe.

That shift was part of an overall effort by the White House to update U.S. counterterrorism strategy from the days directly after the 9/11 attacks.

But since Obama’s speech in May, efforts to shift control of armed drone operations to the Department of Defense have stalled at the Pentagon and at CIA headquarters in Langley.
 
. .
Surprises...anyone ?

Most of the Pakistanis here think that drone strikes are making the Taliban angry at Pakistan, so they all collectively blame it on the US.

Well, the Taliban may also say the same, but their history teaches us that their guns and bombs are any time more reliable than their words. They think Pakistan is on fire, but it is still not as bad as it would be when the drone strikes end.
 
.
“Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.”

Drones are here, US is here & they will do what they can till they can. It's not for US to withdraw drones.. but for Pakistan to make them withdraw. Two choices.. either stop US drones by force or DIY instead of drones, when it comes to taking out Taliban hideouts. Second one seems to be more feasible.
 
.
There is no back pedaling here, but rather a clarification to put to rest the claims being made by Pakistan foreign ministry. What Mr, Kerry said was this:

................
“I think the [drone] program will end as we have eliminated most of the threat and continue to eliminate it,” Kerry said in an interview with Pakistani television.

“I think the president has a very real timeline and we hope it’s going to be very, very soon,” the former Massachusetts senator added.

The Obama administration reacted quickly to Kerry’s comments, saying his statements did not reflect a coming change in the use of armed drones against terrorist targets or overall U.S. counterterrorism policy.

“Clearly the goal of counter-terrorism operations, broadly speaking, is to get to a place where we don’t have to use them, because the threat goes away,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said Thursday.

However, she made clear that there was no plan to eliminate the drone program in the near future, or that the White House had a plan to phase out drone operations.

The Obama administration is “realistic about the fact that there is a threat that remains and that we have to keep up our vigilance to fight in this and other places around the world.”

“As we make … progress [against al Qaeda] the need to use these tools will, of course, be reduced,” she added.

...............................


What Mr. Kerry clearly says is that drone program will end as the threat is eliminated, and he HOPED it was going to be soon. THe White House confirms that by saying the same thing actually, that the program will have no changes in the near future and will end only after the threat is eliminated.

Which is what USA has been saying all along.

Our foreign ministry made the same type of claims that a civilian nuclear power deal is back on the agenda. No, it is not. Or that the IP pipeline is not subject to US sanctions. It is.

BTW, the source for the story is:

White House backpedals on Kerry’s pledge to end drone strikes in Pakistan « Aletho News
 
.
All the news related to Kerry's visit to Pakistan; whether Drone Strikes or Nuclear Deal or the IP Gas Pipeline is just pointing towards some new moves in the old continuing TANGO.
And like any Tango; this one has all the elements of some surprise, some aggression and finally some jockeying for control and all the feelings of rivalry. None of that has changed.

The Tango has not changed into a Waltz. That harmony has not crept in yet.
 
.
All the news related to Kerry's visit to Pakistan; whether Drone Strikes or Nuclear Deal or the IP Gas Pipeline is just pointing towards some new moves in the old continuing TANGO.
And like any Tango; this one has all the elements of some surprise, some aggression and finally some jockeying for control and all the feelings of rivalry. None of that has changed.

The Tango has not changed into a Waltz. That harmony has not crept in yet.

Tango? Waltz? Harmony? What do you call when one partner is doing Hip-Hop and the other Bhangra?

The basic issue us that national interest on both sides are common in some areas but in direct conflict in other areas, and the mechanisms to deal with the issues raised as not working as well as they should. Given the asymmetry of the parties, it is not going to be easy to work these out.
 
. .
I have absolutely no problem with drone strikes as long as they are controlled from Pakistan under the presence of pakistans govt and military officials. Plus, the footage must be released and sent to PM and the chief of army staff to show that there was no colateral damage and the strike only killed the bad guys.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom