SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Georgetown Professor: 'Drones Are Not Killing Innocent Civilians' in Pakistan
May 11, 2010
I'm not sure how many of you caught the segment last Friday on the
Dylan Ratigan show on MSNBC featuring Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, a 25 year
army veteran and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency's
Task Force STRATUS IVY and Georgetown University professor Christine
Fair of the Center for Peace and Security Studies (CPASS). The two were
discussing the alleged failed Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad and
potential connections to the Taliban in Pakistan. In the discussion,
Lt. Col. Shaffer raised the issue of US drone strikes against Pakistan,
which Shahzad reportedly has said were part of his motivation for the
attempted bombing. "The Taliban are more motivated than ever to come at
us," said Shaffer, saying that "the Predator program is having the same
effect in Afghanistan two years ago in killing innocents" that it is
now having in Pakistan.
Professor Fair, who has also worked for the RAND Corporation and as
a political officer to the United Nations Assistance Mission to
Afghanistan in Kabul, acted dumbfounded at the idea that the US drone
strikes kill any civilians. "I take extreme exception top the way my
colleague characterized the drones," Fair said. "Actually the drones
are not killing innocent civilians. Many of those reports are coming
from deeply unreliable and dubious Pakistani press reports, which no
one takes credibly on any other issue except for some reason on this
issue. There've actually been a number of surveys on the ground, in
FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas]. The residents of FATA
generally welcome the drone strikes because they know actually who's
being killed. They're very much aware and who's being killed and who's
not."
Here is video of the segment:
Some estimates, most of which are indeed Pakistani sources, suggest
that the vast majority of Pakistanis killed are civilians. In an Op-Ed [1] for The New York Times
last year, David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum, called for a moratorium on
the strikes, saying they had "killed some 700 civilians. This is 50
civilians for every militant killed, a hit rate of 2 percent." They
relied on "Pakistani sources," which are apparently offensive to
Professor Fair. But Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann of the New
America Foundation recently did a meticulous review [2] of the strikes, citing the following methodology:
"Our analysis of the drone campaign is based only on
accounts from reliable media organizations with substantial reporting
capabilities in Pakistan. We restricted our analysis to reports in the
New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal, accounts by
major news services and networks--the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence
France-Presse, CNN, and the BBC--and reports in the leading
English-language newspapers in Pakistan--The Daily Times, Dawn, and The
News--as well as those from Geo TV, the largest independent Pakistani
television network."
Bergen and Tiedemann concluded that "the real total of civilian
deaths since 2006 appears to be in the range of 250 to 320, or between
31 and 33 percent." They concluded that under President Obama Under
President Obama, who has used the drones with much greater frequency
than Bush, "about a quarter [of drone-inflicted deaths] appear to have
been civilians."
I expect that Professor Fair, if confronted on this, will have to
retract her definitive statement "the drones are not killing innocent
civilians." It just simply is false.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 The Nation
Jeremy Scahill
Jeremy Scahill is an investigative reporter, war correspondent, co-founder of The Intercept, and author of the international bestselling books "Dirty Wars: The World Is A Battlefield"(2014) and "Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army" (2008). He has reported from Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Nigeria, the former Yugoslavia, and elsewhere across the globe. Scahill has served as the national security correspondent for The Nation and Democracy Now!, and in 2014 co-founded The Intercept with fellow journalists Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and investor Pierre Omidyar.
I'm not sure how many of you caught the segment last Friday on the
Dylan Ratigan show on MSNBC featuring Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, a 25 year
army veteran and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency's
Task Force STRATUS IVY and Georgetown University professor Christine
Fair of the Center for Peace and Security Studies (CPASS). The two were
discussing the alleged failed Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad and
potential connections to the Taliban in Pakistan. In the discussion,
Lt. Col. Shaffer raised the issue of US drone strikes against Pakistan,
which Shahzad reportedly has said were part of his motivation for the
attempted bombing. "The Taliban are more motivated than ever to come at
us," said Shaffer, saying that "the Predator program is having the same
effect in Afghanistan two years ago in killing innocents" that it is
now having in Pakistan.
Professor Fair, who has also worked for the RAND Corporation and as
a political officer to the United Nations Assistance Mission to
Afghanistan in Kabul, acted dumbfounded at the idea that the US drone
strikes kill any civilians. "I take extreme exception top the way my
colleague characterized the drones," Fair said. "Actually the drones
are not killing innocent civilians. Many of those reports are coming
from deeply unreliable and dubious Pakistani press reports, which no
one takes credibly on any other issue except for some reason on this
issue. There've actually been a number of surveys on the ground, in
FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas]. The residents of FATA
generally welcome the drone strikes because they know actually who's
being killed. They're very much aware and who's being killed and who's
not."
Here is video of the segment:
Some estimates, most of which are indeed Pakistani sources, suggest
that the vast majority of Pakistanis killed are civilians. In an Op-Ed [1] for The New York Times
last year, David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum, called for a moratorium on
the strikes, saying they had "killed some 700 civilians. This is 50
civilians for every militant killed, a hit rate of 2 percent." They
relied on "Pakistani sources," which are apparently offensive to
Professor Fair. But Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann of the New
America Foundation recently did a meticulous review [2] of the strikes, citing the following methodology:
"Our analysis of the drone campaign is based only on
accounts from reliable media organizations with substantial reporting
capabilities in Pakistan. We restricted our analysis to reports in the
New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal, accounts by
major news services and networks--the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence
France-Presse, CNN, and the BBC--and reports in the leading
English-language newspapers in Pakistan--The Daily Times, Dawn, and The
News--as well as those from Geo TV, the largest independent Pakistani
television network."
Bergen and Tiedemann concluded that "the real total of civilian
deaths since 2006 appears to be in the range of 250 to 320, or between
31 and 33 percent." They concluded that under President Obama Under
President Obama, who has used the drones with much greater frequency
than Bush, "about a quarter [of drone-inflicted deaths] appear to have
been civilians."
I expect that Professor Fair, if confronted on this, will have to
retract her definitive statement "the drones are not killing innocent
civilians." It just simply is false.
Jeremy Scahill
Jeremy Scahill is an investigative reporter, war correspondent, co-founder of The Intercept, and author of the international bestselling books "Dirty Wars: The World Is A Battlefield"(2014) and "Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army" (2008). He has reported from Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Nigeria, the former Yugoslavia, and elsewhere across the globe. Scahill has served as the national security correspondent for The Nation and Democracy Now!, and in 2014 co-founded The Intercept with fellow journalists Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and investor Pierre Omidyar.
I'm not sure how many of you caught the segment last Friday on the
Dylan Ratigan show on MSNBC featuring Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, a 25 year
army veteran and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency's
Task Force STRATUS IVY and Georgetown University professor Christine
Fair of the Center for Peace and Security Studies (CPASS). The two were
discussing the alleged failed Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad and
potential connections to the Taliban in Pakistan. In the discussion,
Lt. Col. Shaffer raised the issue of US drone strikes against Pakistan,
which Shahzad reportedly has said were part of his motivation for the
attempted bombing. "The Taliban are more motivated than ever to come at
us," said Shaffer, saying that "the Predator program is having the same
effect in Afghanistan two years ago in killing innocents" that it is
now having in Pakistan.
Professor Fair, who has also worked for the RAND Corporation and as
a political officer to the United Nations Assistance Mission to
Afghanistan in Kabul, acted dumbfounded at the idea that the US drone
strikes kill any civilians. "I take extreme exception top the way my
colleague characterized the drones," Fair said. "Actually the drones
are not killing innocent civilians. Many of those reports are coming
from deeply unreliable and dubious Pakistani press reports, which no
one takes credibly on any other issue except for some reason on this
issue. There've actually been a number of surveys on the ground, in
FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas]. The residents of FATA
generally welcome the drone strikes because they know actually who's
being killed. They're very much aware and who's being killed and who's
not."
Here is video of the segment:
Some estimates, most of which are indeed Pakistani sources, suggest
that the vast majority of Pakistanis killed are civilians. In an Op-Ed [1] for The New York Times
last year, David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum, called for a moratorium on
the strikes, saying they had "killed some 700 civilians. This is 50
civilians for every militant killed, a hit rate of 2 percent." They
relied on "Pakistani sources," which are apparently offensive to
Professor Fair. But Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann of the New
America Foundation recently did a meticulous review [2] of the strikes, citing the following methodology:
"Our analysis of the drone campaign is based only on
accounts from reliable media organizations with substantial reporting
capabilities in Pakistan. We restricted our analysis to reports in the
New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal, accounts by
major news services and networks--the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence
France-Presse, CNN, and the BBC--and reports in the leading
English-language newspapers in Pakistan--The Daily Times, Dawn, and The
News--as well as those from Geo TV, the largest independent Pakistani
television network."
Bergen and Tiedemann concluded that "the real total of civilian
deaths since 2006 appears to be in the range of 250 to 320, or between
31 and 33 percent." They concluded that under President Obama Under
President Obama, who has used the drones with much greater frequency
than Bush, "about a quarter [of drone-inflicted deaths] appear to have
been civilians."
I expect that Professor Fair, if confronted on this, will have to
retract her definitive statement "the drones are not killing innocent
civilians." It just simply is false.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.