Lack of Factual Balance in the NYT Article on Drone Strikes in Pakistan

The recent article by Mr. Zia ur Rehman in New York Times about drone attacks in Pakistan have noteworthy lapses of factual lopsidedness and narrative centric concern. Journalistic freedom is critical in any democratic environment, but it is accompanied by the duty to interpret facts in the terms that are contextually anchored and balanced. In the analysis of Pakistan in the fight against the drones. Rehman seems to overlook key realities on the ground. Such type of one sided reporting not only makes the article unreliable but also creates a wrong impression of Pakistan using force which was legitimate and necessary to deal with a hybrid and root level threat to its security.

Firstly, the article by Mr. Rehman does not distinguish enough the tactical deployment of drones by the security forces (SFs) of Pakistan and indiscriminate and brutal deployment of quadcopters by the terrorist organizations such as the TTP. The SFs of Pakistan have used drones with very great accuracy by targeting the known hideouts of militants and the targeting of the civilian areas has been evaded as far as possible. These are intelligence based operations that are carefully planned to get rid of the threat caused by highly integrated extremist networks. Quite on the contrary illegal organizations such as the TTP have resorted to the use of quadcopters accessible on the market in an uninhibited and quite irresponsible manner and they are inclined to attack not only military targets but civilians. This contrast is one of the few elements that are admitted even in the article, but the implications are investigated at a low level. As an illustration, the recent raid on the office of the Assistant Commissioner in Ladha is evidence to that end, it was done with a militant quadcopter and caused injuries to several innocent people and extensive damage to properties. The article does not bring about the number and kind of attacks that are carried out by these militants and therefore gives a lopsided account of the impending danger of non-state actors.

Furthermore Mr. Rehman misses out on a very important aspect of the drone incidence that occurred in Mir Ali where TTP drone attack resulted in martyrdom of innocent children. This happened to be an important event which the local media largely covered was not mentioned in the NYT article. Selective reporting does not only skew the views of people in society, but it is also on the border of journalistic negligence. Given that militants believe drones to be a relatively new but increasingly lethal trend and targeting civilians or simply using it as one of the methods needed as urgently and seriously as drone operations. The refusal to recognize such realities undermines the aspect of credibility of the journalist and is subsequently questioned on the purpose they are aiming at such omissions.

The other most obvious foot that Mr. Rehman leaves out in his account is the calculated strategy applied by militants whereby they take positions in close quarters to the civilian population thus utilizing innocent people as human shields. It is an already established move taken by different terrorist organizations such as the TTP as a discouragement against any security strike and killing of civilians as propaganda. Unless it is put into the context of the complexity of urban warfare and asymmetric fighting, reports of civilian casualties may be inaccurate. An adult and decent journalist should realize such high stake scenarios that some degree of collateral damage is nonetheless inevitable and yet inevitable happens because of the self position of the militants. The refusal to describe this dimension by Mr. Rehman is inaccurate and clouds the moral responsibility of terrorist groups which are harming the communities they are intended to save.

Politically the article too is guilty of over depending upon the stories promoted by fringe yet anarchist groups such as the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) whose agenda is to challenge the state bordering on anarchy and hostile attitude towards the state institutions. In as much as PTM makes out its discourse like it is a right based struggle. PTM has on many occasions spread unverified and exaggerated allegations against the state, especially during security operations. Therefore, these narratives often approach disinformation and indeed are used to justify anti state forces by casting them in the role of victim. Alas Mr. Rehman takes the rhetoric by PTM to the next level without putting in place the journalistic filters of verification and critical assessment. This not only affects the impartiality of the article but also changes the undue legitimacy of groups of questionable motives. The point is to understand the difference between actual fears that exist on the rarefied air of grievances and the politicization of security discourses.

It is also interesting that the TTP and the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) that are some of the deadliest anti-state groups in Pakistan have eternally admitted the fact that their members have been killed because of precision strikes by the drones. These confessions which are one of the most powerful pieces of evidence are not found in Mr. Rehman article. Such statements could be used by a responsible journalist not only to draw attention to the abilities of the Pakistani drone technology but also disprove false accusations of random killings. It is not a blind bombing it is a calculated step which is actionable intelligence on how to break the back of the menace that has cost thousands of Pakistani lives.