E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSShahzad Akbar, an anti-drone lawyer in Islamabad, talks about his view of America and its policies.
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – When attorney Shahzad Akbar began filing lawsuits against the Pakistan government on behalf of drone strike victims in 2010, some of his close friends started calling him "Taliban lawyer."
"But now, two years later, they don't do that anymore," he said.
In many ways the effects of the nearly nine-year U.S. program of targeted drone missile strikes in Pakistan were largely hidden from the rest of the world for many years. The strikes have been conducted in Pakistan's rugged and remote tribal region bordering Afghanistan – an area nearly impossible for outsiders to visit and from which it is incredibly difficult to extract reliable and timely information.
But Akbar's work through his Foundation for Fundamental Rights has raised awareness of the strikes among the general Pakistani population – at the same time anti-American sentiment from a failing alliance with the U.S. is on the rise. He said his mission is to seek justice on behalf of innocent civilians killed in the drone attacks.
"The situation on the ground is not what the U.S. government says, that they're only targeting militants," said Akbar. "The situation on the ground is that a huge number of civilians are being killed."
Part of the problem, according to Akbar, is that until recently, most Pakistanis didn't know or didn't care about the drone strikes. But public political anger, denouncing the strikes as a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty, has helped draw attention to the issue over the last few years.
Today, drones have become a political touchstone, regularly decried as part of politician's campaign speeches, prominently featured in fiery protest rallies, and sitting squarely at the center of a diplomatic war of words between the U.S. and Pakistan.
Collateral damage
Akbar's legal challenges come as a recent poll shows considerable opposition in countries around the world to the U.S. drone campaign. The Pew Research Center study found that more than half of those polled in 17 of 20 countries disapprove of the use of drone strikes to target extremists. However, Americans see things very differently and largely support their use, with only 38 percent disapproving.
Though public perception may help him to gain traction, Akbar said his cases are based on the evidence he's gathering from strike locations in coordination with communities in North Waziristan, the tribal agency in which the overwhelming majority of strikes have occurred. That cache of evidence includes everything from family testimonies and images of the identifiable bodies and body parts recovered from the attack sites, to actual fragments of the Hellfire missiles fired from the remotely-piloted drones.
"I believe in very simple principles that were taught to us by the West," said Akbar. "That everyone is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. So anyone who is killed in drone strikes, unless and until his guilt is established in some independent forum – that person is innocent."
Noor Behram, a journalist in North Waziristan, Pakistan, describes his views of the United States.
According to the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a not-for-profit organization basing its study on reports from government officials, media reports, and academic sources, anywhere between 2,486 and 3,188 people have been killed in 332 U.S. drones strikes inside Pakistan since 2004. The fact that the report is based on wide-ranging and conflicting reports, speaks to the difficulty of establishing hard facts in this part of the world. Similarly, the same report also estimated that the number of civilians killed in those strikes ranges from 482 to 832.
According to another study done by the New America Foundation, a non-profit public policy institute in Washington, D.C., a total of 43 men identified as "militant leaders" were killed in those strikes.
A major point of controversy is who counts as a “civilian” versus a “combatant.” The Obama administration defines all military-age males in a strike zone as “combatants,” unless there is explicit posthumous evidence proving them innocent, according to a report in the New York Times.
Pakistanis who live in those strike zones dispute that definition, and claim innocent women and children are being killed as well. But the administration’s broad definition does help explain how they could reach a very low, civilian casualty count as a result of drone attacks.
U.S. officials, who – for the first time – publicly admitted using drones in April of this year, have said the strikes are "targeted...against specific al-Qaida terrorists" and are carried out "in full accordance with the law, and in order to prevent terrorist attacks on the United States and save American lives."
But Akbar argues that the identities of many killed are unknown, that nearby children are often killed by flying shrapnel, and that any "collateral damage" deaths are simply impossible to justify – even when a "high-value" terrorist is killed as a result.
"The problem is that no one cares if ‘nobody’ is killed, and by ‘nobody,’ I mean a person who is nobody. A person who is probably just living in that area, has no money, no education, no representation," said Akbar. "The point here is that if we are successful in killing one or two people who we really want to kill, and in order to do that we kill 40 people – who cares? And this is a sad kind of attitude we have from the American government and unfortunately from my own government."
‘Can’t help but be angry…’
In order to represent the families of civilian drone strikes victims in court, Akbar first had to win their trust, which has been an uphill battle in communities that see themselves are separate and distinct from the rest of country. Many in the targeted areas are under-represented and under-funded on the national level, and feel more kinship to their fellow ethnic tribesmen across the border in Afghanistan than with the Pakistani population east of their northwest territory.
"When we started working in Waziristan in 2010, that was the seventh year of the drone strikes," said Akbar. "People had no trust in their own countrymen. They said, ‘You have not looked after us, you haven't really cared what was happening here, so why would we now talk to you and give you evidence of what's really happening here?’"
NBC News speaks with citizens from around the globe, asking the question, 'What Does America Mean to You?'
So Akbar partnered with Noor Behram, a soft-spoken journalist and father of six, born and raised in North Waziristan, who had witnessed and documented multiple drone strikes in his own area, and was wondering why no one in the rest of the world seemed to care.
"When you live in an area where there is war, where there is suffering, where there are drone attacks, where there's not proper reporting about what's going on…. Even if you're a professional, you can't help but become angry at what you see,” said Behram. “You start to wonder how you can take the voices you hear and carry them to the rest of the world."
Behram established a notification system based on walkie-talkies and a trusted network of sources across the region where curfews and rough terrain can make it difficult to travel quickly from one area to another. When the attacks occur nearby, as many do to his home in Miramshah, he says he is often the first one with a camera at the site. Entire buildings are reduced to rubble heaps. Residual fires burn in nearby homes or businesses. Crowds gather to dig through the wreckage for survivors and gather body parts.
The frequency with which the strikes are carried out, Behram said, has his community on edge.
"People are very worried, very tense all the time," he said. "When the missile is fired from the plane, there is a loud explosion. When it hits the ground, it makes a terrifying noise. The people below, they just start running. Pieces of missile, they fly everywhere, very far, into other people's houses."
Despite experiencing strikes so close to his home that he and his family have been forced to flee in the middle of the night, Behram said he harbors no anger towards the American people – it's their policies, he says, that should be reviewed.
"I think, even if they said, 'we've killed 100 terrorists,' and just one child was also killed…If you, at that time, you see that child's body, you talk to his mother and father – I think, for me, this is a very serious thing,” he said. “That one child, sitting in his house, could be killed like this.”
Behram patiently documents what he sees, sometimes spending hours with reluctant family members to convince them to share their testimony for the lawsuits being filed.
"I tell them there are people who want to help you. If you want help, then I can talk to them for you," Behram said. "Because if you don't talk to them or let them help you, I don't know what will happen next."
‘I want to give them their rights’
Working together, Akbar and Behram have gathered evidence for 13 petitions filed in Islamabad and Peshawar courts, most of which are filed against the government of Pakistan. In total, the lawsuits represent 71 families who have lost 100 family members in U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan.
Despite the fact that he can only legally file suit within Pakistan, Akbar said three of the cases do involve criminal litigation against current and former U.S. officials, including an alleged former CIA station chief and a former CIA legal counsel. But taking on a U.S. administration loathe to even acknowledge the classified program, much less engage legally on the matter, means that those lawsuits are largely intended to send a message at this stage – that he, and the people he represents, hold both Pakistani and U.S. officials responsible for the deaths of their family members.
"I want justice for these people so they feel that they're part of the system," said Behram. "Because on the one side we ask them to behave and fall in line….and on the other side, we don't give them any rights. I want to give them their rights."
This story is part of a series by msnbc.com and NBC News "What the World Thinks of US". The series aims to check the pulse on current perceptions of America's global stature during the election year and ahead of our annual Independence Day. Share your thoughts about this story and our series on Twitter using #AmericaMeans
Special series: What the World Thinks of US
How I see America, from a former Gitmo prisoner
Bye, bye, GI: Deep impact for many Germans as US troops downsize
Post-revolution Egypt to US: Stay out
Iran's dentist to the stars offers views on US
For many Pakistanis, 'USA' means 'drones'
One man's mission: Promote Chinese patriotism in the face of Western onslaught
In South Africa: 'My head says China is number one, my heart says America'
Not all Thais are Gaga about America
Family moves from the Bronx to Jerusalem, but US remains land of 'liberty and freedom'
Palestinian: US supports 'an apartheid system that is suffocating us'
Afghans are 'no different from any American
Leave a Comment:
This, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of yellow journalism. Welcome to the banana republic of the United States.
Why are we so concerned about other country thinking about US, let them kills each other, US should not involve on those country that willing to kills their own people and then they turn around blem on US for not helping them. US Gornment should cut all aids to foreign countries and let them taking care of their own problems.
America= geo-political expandsionism utilizing our military.
Obama, Putin, China and Iran need to meet in Moscow and have a little talk about America practicing geo-political expandsionism using our military.
"He said his mission is to seek justice on behalf of innocent civilians killed in the drone attacks."
First, WE are trying to seek justice on behalf of ALL OUR INNOCENT VICTIMS that have been killed in terrorists attacks and those specifically in 9-11. We DIDN'T pick this fight, but we will finish it now that it has been brought to us!!!!
"The situation on the ground is not what the U.S. government says, that they're only targeting militants," said Akbar. "The situation on the ground is that a huge number of civilians are being killed."
Second, We aren't targeting civilians......Give me a break. What good does that do for our country and what justice does that serve. If you are concerned about the innocent victims being killed, remind them that they are not the targets and remind them to stay far away from known terrorists!! If you walk into the line of fire you may be shot. Don't walk into the line of fire. Seems simple.
Leave us alone and we'll leave you alone!!! Again, very simple!!! But you target us, and you better be ready for us to Show YOU Hell!!!
"If you are concerned about the innocent victims being killed, remind them that they are not the targets and remind them to stay far away from known terrorists!!"
The terrorists live among the "innocents". This is no different than the Hamas thugs living in Gaza. I don't know what you do to get rid of the terrorist and/or supporter and not in turn puts his OWN children and wife in danger by cowardly using them as a human shield.
How do we help the innocent people who have no choice but to live next to these terrorists?
Scott, we have been in that area since 9-11-01 (11yrs.) trying to kill all the "terrorists. There has logically been collateral damage (civilians killed). We have done a great job in protecting our homeland, but these "terrorists" have not gone away and Iraq, Afganastan and now Pakistan is a mess politically and socially. Cont. to use our military will only inspire more hatred from those people towards us (creating more "terroists). "Nation building" at gun-point does not work with that culture.
Tracy and Kelley, I understand your view, but I think you might feel differently if one your family had been killed in the WTC towers. Many of them, as am I, are still angry and trying to cope, and in our opinions this doesnt stop until the war has been won, even 11 years later. Different points of view, but I respect your opinions.
Scott, the only way we are going to win that military war is to pull off a Japan type conquer. We would need to utilize freguent and progressive mass genocide until whoever is left are on their knees begging to change their religion, ideology, and culture. Horrific but true.
The west has taught them "Innocent until proven guilty"? Since when does our Constitution protect the "rights" of non-Americans? If they did a better job of "taking out their garbage", we wouldn't have to do it for them. I for one am damn happy we don't have to waste American lives in the process.
JP, the problem is the "garbage" lives amoungst the innocent civilians and the garbage is spread throughout the ME. And the "terrorists" kill each other daily throughout the ME.
Whoa there.. back up. So we are ok with the rest of the world stereotyping the US and it's people... but shame on us if we do the same? Really? Sorry but I'm from the "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" generation. Now I try my hardest NOT to stereotype ANYONE, you know, the whole Don't judge lest ye be judged thing. But what I do get is that it seems the media WANTS the US to look bad, What the heck does the US media think will happen if the whole world turns on the US? Do they think they will still have a job? What happened to patriotism? How about we STOP worrying about who's feelings we hurt and start showing the TRUTH about these countries... God knows they spread lies about the US from scraps of truth piled into neat little bits of "truth".
Bravo - agree wholeheartedly.
MJ, we have done a great job in protecting ourselves since 9-11, But cont. conventional military practice in that area will only cause more hatred towards us thus prescipitating more "terrorists". That culture wants to be left alone now. We know how to protect ourselves from any attacks from them and how to do so without militarily action and geo-political expandsion
I don't give a Rat's Ass what Pakistan or any other Middle East ccountry thinks of America. For that matter any other snake hole in the world. Most of these people that complain about AMerica wouldn't even exisit if it hadn't been for America and if Ameerica falls toSocialism as Obama would like they may cease to exisit. Ther won't be anyone to buy their @!$%# anymore. The way I look at the middle east is as long as there is a Middle East there will be no Peace.
...until Pakistan stops harboring terrorists, too bad, cry me a river......may the drones keep flying, because not one American soldier's life is worth losing before the whole Pakistani nation......
amen to that!!
ny, you think Pakistan is the only ones harboring terrorists??? Terrorsts are spread out throughout the ME. There are a sh** load of people in the ME who hate us and will kill themselves to hurt America in anyway they can
I would have liked to see comments from other countries in the western hemisphere. It's equally important to me to know what citizens from El Salvador, Argentina, Canada etc... feel regarding the U.S.
That would not sell papers or this dribble.
MV, they think we are egomanics obsessed with geo-political expandsionism.
The older I get the more I am in favor of us (the USA) becoming more isolationist again. Yes. I know that the Taliban (whose bases are mainly in Afghanistan and Pakistan) attacked us first on September 11th, so we rightly struck back at them and initiated "The War on Terror." But when will "The War on Terror" be over? We've gotten Bin Laden...We have Khaled Sheikh Mohammed in custody? Why do we continue our presence in Afghanistan? Why can't we just leave and let Afghanistan and Pakistan do their own thing? And if they attack us again, we strike back again. It makes sense to me.
The Japanese attacked us on December 7, 1941...we defeated them in roughly four years...and now they are one of our closest allies.
I just don't know why our great country continues to be the "World Police" to so many other nations? Why can't we pull our troops out, bring our soldiers home and concentrate on fixing up our own country?
Let's look out for number one first.
We are the world cops because the Military Industrial Complex (aka MIC) has said so. JFK went against them, as he was going to pull Ike's advisors out of Viet Nam. We know what happen to JFK in Dallas, don't we.
Think any President is going to go against them. They learned a lesson from back then. But yes, I would love to see all of our troops come home, put them on the borders and coast lines to protect our country.
Quit giving foreign aid to other nations. Let the Arabs fight amongst themselves, be less for us to have to kill later when they attack us again. And if they attack us again, I hope we turn most, if not all of the mideast into a glass parking lot. Solve this f ing problem once and for all.
I am not a right winger by any stretch I do think Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld should be tried as war criminals as some point, especially Cheney and Rumsfeld, but the Pakistani government have been completely deceitful to the U.S. and can never be trusted again and the people whole think of "drones" should think of their ex-President.
when I think if Pakistan I think dirt roads, donkeys, dirty people and terriorists.
so i could give a rip what they think about Americans.
I think how cool it would be to be an AK-47 dealer over there.
I cannot help but believe had it not been for 9/11 being the catalyst (along with the greedy bankers) both US and Europe would not be in a recession. I reside in NYC and seeing firsthand how two simple high-density airbuses could cause so much damage and loss in lives it boils down to a ...."when in doubt...take them out!" atitude. We didn't cause this war against Islam but when you think of all the innocent lives lost at the twin towers the same innocent resident of their tribal regions must be made aware ....in war everyone suffers including innocent people. A few zealots started this and good God almighty we have no choice halting drone hits until the Pakistani's decide "no mas"
For "many" living in the USA,
USA="drones"
Corrections:
I am not a right winger by any stretch I do think Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld should be tried as war criminals as some point, especially Cheney and Rumsfeld, but the Pakistani government have been completely deceitful to the U.S. and can never be trusted again and the people there who think of "drones" when they think "U.S.A.", should think more about their ex-President.
Like so many Americans I'm embarrassed by our Gov. but I love my Country - U.S.A. has done more good for the world than any other Nation. We are right there when the poop hits the fan.
So the apology tour was a humiliating and embarrassing exercise.
I apologize for nothing other Countries and the President we stupidly voted in we are going to vote out. We are the the greatest ally to have (Used to be and will be again.) or your worst enemy. You decide that fate. Not us.
I just dont feel the least bit sorry for these people. If you lie down with dogs you get up with flees. They bear alot of the responsability themselves. Quit giving these peices of crap a place to stage their terrorist plots, food in their bellies and a roof over their heads.
From the Journal of Duh, vol.1, p. 236...Of course many Pakistanis view the US in the context of drones. Good news/Bad news...Good News: they hates us and fear our abilities. Bad News: they hate us. In the stark light of which is better for the US, the good news is there's lots of good news. Our national policy shouldn't be dictated by our popularity (or hatred), but by what is advantageous to us. I have no personal animus towards the Pakistanis, they pursue their national interest as we should pursue ours. As long as common ground can be found so be it. When our purposes diverge we should attempt to reconcile if possible until we realize that either we can agree or discover there's no reasonable resolution, at which point we pursue our best interest. We should always hold out for the possibility that we can come to terms, but regardless we can't lose sight of what's in the best interest of the United States.
For most Americans, Pakistan means terrorists.
For many in the US, Pakistan is Muslim and Muslim means:
Weekly Jihad Report -- Jun . 16 - Jun. 22
*Suicide Attacks
Pakistan means scumbags of the earth. USA means justice and to a scumbag muslim this is their only fear. And Obama is so twisted he gives these American killers billions to kill more Americans. Pakistan is the pits of hell and they are possessed by the devil. Obama, Osama What the difference?
Innocent my ass. They know who is living with them. They know they could be attacked at any moment and not just by the US. They have found another way to get the US Dollar and you better believe they want it. The US dollar buys weapons to wage jihad! How long do you think the families get to hang on to that money? The Taliban controls everything! They are the enemy and should be destroyed in their homes because that is what they want for us. Anyone above who disagrees should go live there. Then you could see first hand who we are fighting, not poor innocent sheep herders. We are fighting brainwashed backward ass old men who use all means to forward their cause , and yes this means little kids while they hide in caves and blow up anything they can get close too.
Our next president will have the media straightened out in short order. Hate,Guilt and shame is what they are preaching now. Lets focus on what's good about AMERICA
R U Sure that Obama won't be re elected? If he is, he will be the next President.
Our personal freedoms of choice and the free market will suffer greatly if Obama gets reelected!!!
So we hope he is not!
Yeah, Shawn, as if they didn't suffer greatly already with 8 years of Bush and Cheney at the helm...
It would be fantastic if there was a person we could vote for that isn't already in the back pocket of the super rich and more than willing to do their bidding. Sadly, that's a pipe dream. They are all to blame and neither side can put someone up that can be trusted. No matter who gets elected this time, we'll eventually suffer more problems with our economy and freedoms removed.
Dear Middle East;
If you do not like US drones killing terrorists, and the civilians they have either captured or employ I offer you this simple solution:
Kill them yourselves. The rest of the world is quite aware of how well you can kill your own people, using even such primitive items such as naturally occurring rocks.
Once you can demonstrate your nation is terrorist free the drone strikes will stop.
Thank You,
The United States