US Led Drone Warfare in Pakistan. Strikes or Struck Out

The usage of drone technology by USA inside Pakistan is a hotly debated topic. Supporters of drone attacks cite the death of many Alqaeda and Taliban leaders and the reduction of terrorist attacks inside the Pakistani homeland as an example of the effectiveness of drone strikes. Detractors argue that the collateral damage is far too high for the drone strikes to be permissible and point to the moral dilemma that drone warfare faces.

Nobody denies that religious extremism and fundamentalism is an evil personified by the Taliban and the Alqaeda. Nobody argues that action should not be taken against the militants that are hell bent on the destruction of the fabric of society. Since September 2001, the fight against extremism has been raging on. Although there is no argument that many key terrorists have been killed but we also have to acknowledge that religious extremism has sharply increased rather than decline, which calls into question the USA led war on terror, which ( thanks to USA) has become our war too.

If this war has become ours. If TTP has become our enemy then, do we have to fight this war on the directives and with the assistance of USA, whose own withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan is a case study in strategic failure!

Surely, the enemy we are fighting is not a traditional enemy our operations against them might have reduced their military threat but they have not reduced their zeal to perpetuate terror. How drone strikes counter that shortcoming is anybody’s guess. But look at the bigger picture, there is a collateral damage in the drone strikes involved. That collateral then becomes fodder for the extremists who exploit the havoc wreaked by the drone attacks on civilians to recruit and BRAIN WASH more members and slowly this whole situation degenerates into a vicious circle whose only victim is the innocent civilian who’s killed regardless of a Hellfire Missile or a high velocity shrapnel emanating from the exploding jacket of a suicide bomber. Surely, if the solution to terrorism was a military one then the 11-year long war on terror might have made our world better today.

The drone attacks are one such mistake in a long line of mistakes that have been made when countering the disease of terrorism. To the satisfaction of its supporters, drone attacks produce quick results. Unfortunately, the short-term nature of the attacks is often confused with the rapid availability of results. Hence, important questions regarding the legality and future usage of drone technology has been consigned to the dustbin.  We should have the right to ask our governments that if drones are used a la’ American style, then what sort of precedent does it set up for the future of international military offensives. If USA can, with ease, violate the sovereignty of any country then, can other countries do the same? Can Iran target alleged Jundullah camps in Pakistan or MKO camps inside Iraq? Can India strike Hafiz Saeed in his home by using drones on the oft-used premise that the use of force is in self-defense or an imminent threat.

 Drones cause the local population to live in fear, the psychological toll of the constant fear of drones, the suddenness of a strike, the unseen attacker, may be more damaging to the psyche of the civilians than the battle hardened Taliban.  The argument that drone attacks reduce extremism are baseless because their proponents are sadly confused on the phraseology. Reductions in terrorist attacks do not constitute a reduction in an extremist mindset.

Hence, the question that must be asked is not Can Drones Reduce Terrorism. Rather Can Drones Reduce Terrorist Ideology? An ideology is not some bunker or hideout that could be destroyed by a Hell Fire Missile from the sky. Sadly, the proponents of North Waziristan Operation and drone attacks are similar in mindset to the Taliban who also claim that violence is the only solution. Hence, in my book both are the same. If drone strikes or military operations had been successful, then Malala would not have been attacked in the first place.

The fact that religion inspired terrorism is still alive in Pakistan is a testament to the joint failure of our military and political establishment to come up with a well-defined counter terrorism policy, the nation should be taken into confidence concerning that policy. If Pakistan were given the charge of drone strikes then the situation might have been different. Operations against TTP would have been more successful if it was followed up by commercial development but the rampant corruption, worsening economic situation and trampling of law is a major obstacle in the elimination of terrorism from Pakistan. In that case, drones can be effective against Taliban if they were part of the strategy, not the strategy.

Creating a Knowledge Sharing Environment in Pakistan

George Bernard Shaw once said:

“If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas”

Knowledge sharing is one of those concepts in action today that are changing the traditional structures of firms and organizations. Gone are the days when accumulating bundles of knowledge was enough to increase a person’s value in an organization. The world economy is now driven by increased communication and collaboration. The rapid rise of social media is an indicator of this global cultural shift. Knowledge Sharing and consequently the effective management of accumulated knowledge is now necessary in global companies.  The concept of a junior and a senior employee is now dependent on how much knowledge a person has and how “effectively” a person is communicating this knowledge. Also, the growth of this knowledge sharing culture has given rise to a new form of capital called Knowledge Capital. It is an intangible asset, which now carries more value than other commonly recognized tangible assets.

Pakistan is an interesting country with regards to knowledge management. Traditionally, we have not been a knowledge sharing culture. The teacher-disciple concept is still prevalent and new employees are generally discouraged from sharing knowledge and opinion. Although this does not imply that these traditional structures are not changing at all, but the need for change has to be highlighted. In a paper written by Peter Mikulecky and Mohammed Saeed Lodhi, the authors emphasized the need for our burgeoning private educational sector especially the universities to take a lead in promoting knowledge management in Pakistan since these universities are developing the managers and leaders of tomorrow therefore to instill knowledge management principles in them is vital to a productive and efficient Pakistani economy. Also the role of information technology in disseminating knowledge is an important one and Pakistan’s software industry is more than capable of meeting this challenge but unless knowledge sharing and its management  is not appreciated by our companies then we will consequently lag behind other developing nations.

Pakistan can take a leaf out of Japan’s economic concept which promotes the idea of strong corporate networks i.e. keiretsu. Companies can work together to achieve common goals. This concept apart from being applied in Japan also has been applied in west as well where AOL has been known to work very closely with SUN Micro. This effective concept can be applied in Pakistan too under the supervision of government; the industries can collaborate with each other and share knowledge through knowledge portals or other mechanisms but that requires the heads of our institutions to take the matter seriously. Nepotism, ineffective economic planning, an environment of distrust and resistance to change the traditional power structures has led to an inefficient Pakistani economy that is finding hard to catch up with the pace of other growing economies. This inefficient economy then leads to a brain drain in which its professionals leave the country for greener pastures.

The problem with Pakistan is that no one is serious in taking steps to improve our economy, an economy that is anything but built on collaboration and knowledge sharing. The problem lies not only with its institutional heads but it is intrinsic to our culture. Let us call spade a spade and accept the fact that there are aspects of our culture that are hampering our growth.  Educational institutions might have increased tenfold in number, the number of PhD’s might have mushroomed but has that resulted in an efficient economy?   In order to keep pace with the global changes we have to shed certain aspects of our culture. The repressive environment and colonial ethics must now be thrown out of the window. In that regards knowledge sharing can only thrive if the hanging swords of unemployment, demotion and ridicule are removed from an employee’s mind. Change has to happen and it should start from the top.