Revealed: CIA’s Deadly Drone War in Pakistan Began With Shady Blood-Soaked Deal

By Alex Kane

The U.S. assassinated a Pakistani tribal leader in exchange for airspace to conduct strikes on America’s own targets.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com

The exact specifics of how America’s global drone war began has long been shrouded in secrecy. But a New York Times article published over the weekend revealing how the Central Intelligence Agency gained Pakistan’s assent to drone strikes begins to chip away at that lack of transparency.

The New York Times’ Mark Mazzetti reveals that the U.S. carried out an assassination of a Pakistani tribal leader in exchange for the use of airspace to conduct strikes on America’s own targets. The article was excerpted by Mazzetti’s forthcoming book titledThe Way of the Knife: The C.I.A., a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth.

The drone killing, which took place in 2004, targeted Nek Muhammed, a key player in an armed fight by his tribe against Pakistan’s government. While Muhammed was thought to be more Pakistan’s problem, the U.S. killed him by drone anyway, opening the way for a nine-year campaign of drone strikes throughout Pakistan’s ungoverned tribal areas.

The strike on Muhammed also killed two boys–an early indication of the civilian cost America’s drone assassination program would impose on Pakistan. But the Pakistani government took responsibility for the strike. And the C.I.A., under no obligation to disclose its activities, was just fine with that lie.

The killing of Muhammed paved the way for the expansion of the C.I.A.’s unaccountable drone war on Pakistan. Mazzetti describes the details of the deal: “Pakistani intelligence officials insisted that they be allowed to approve each drone strike, giving them tight control over the list of targets. And they insisted that drones fly only in narrow parts of the tribal areas — ensuring that they would not venture where Islamabad did not want the Americans going.”

This specific assassination was the immediate catalyst for the C.I.A.’s drone campaign. But a more long-term reason fueling the rise of drones was unease about the C.I.A.’s torture program. In the years following the September 11 attacks, the agency embarked on a global program of capturing and torturing alleged terrorist suspects. A report authored by a C.I.A. official concluded that the agency was violating international law and that officers might face criminal prosecution. The report signaled an alarm that resulted in a reduction of the amount of suspects who were detained by the agency. So the intelligence agency switched to targeted killings rather than capturing people–a hallmark of the Obama era.

The switch to drone warfare was carried out by an agency previously “ambivalent” to those new tools of war, according to Mazzetti. But the C.I.A. has now made the shift, transforming an agency “that began as a cold war espionage service into a paramilitary organization.”

 Alex Kane is AlterNet’s New York-based World editor, and an assistant editor forMondoweiss.
Advertisements
Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • Tahir Sher Mohammad  On April 20, 2013 at 8:44 am

    Dear All,

    if I was in Musharraf’s PIA Flight as a civilian in an Airbus would I not charge the PM Nawaz Shareef of crimes. We are a “sick nation” on legalities. Look at the information available for free.

    The present Chechen PM has blamed US Police for Boston Bombing. What a grand US foreign policy…..is that how “love and freedom for the US is promoted?”…….of course as Pakistanis we too do not have a clue for our future.

    Although I not necessarily a Mush. fan, in a legal system “worldwide” once a petition is filed and someone is summoned in a court, then there are lawyers appointed on both sides, besides an entire panel of reviewers. Legally things move forward in a process. The judgement is only made after thorough court examination. Depending on charges, investigation (with evidence), each one are separately deliberated. Only then after a trial with judgement then made after comprehensive legal review. Our “Islamabad” Court…….anything to do with “Islam”…..or is only “Abad”……perhaps I have an issue on our history, geography and even religion.

    A Confused Pakistani

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: