Re: PTI lawmaker wants Taseer’s assassin freed honourably
It is not just PTI but both centre-right parties (other being PML-N, it is just that they are not so vocal about anything in public) who have many TTP and Qadri sympathizers among them. Don’t forget that many of the lawyers who garlanded this criminal were pro-PML-N
I have never supported let alone understood PTI’s taliban stance. But we must not forget that the people who voted for PTI in KPK (the area worst hit by TTP violence and reaction to drones) in large numbers knew very well the party’s position on drones and TTP i.e. they are against military action. I am all for military action against TTP criminals yet not in favour of drones because of the collateral damage caused by them >> higher recruitment for militant groups >> more violence >> military action/drones. As you can see it is a vicious circle. The US and Pak military have been fighting this nuisance for more than a decade now but I would be very surprised if they have managed to kill even 5-10% of all TTP and Al-Qaeda terrorists during that long period. Nothing short of carpet bombing the whole area will rid us of each and every terrorist. Even then it is a big IF.
Read this:
Are Drone Strikes Killing Terrorists or Creating Them? - Hassan Abbas - The Atlantic
**"**In my assessment, the ground realities that must be kept in mind in this analysis include:
al-Qaida and its affiliates are on the run due to drone strikes – there is a near consensus on this point among all types of analysts.
Pakistan’s government (both military and civilian) was fully on board, except perhaps for the past year, which means the sovereignty issue was not relevant in many cases.
Mainstream and moderate Pukhtuns in Pakistan were by and large okay with drone strikes because they did what they and Pakistani security forces couldn’t – however, this is seldom expressed in public.
A significant number of drone victims (likely in the 50-60 percent range by local estimates) have been civilians (including women and children) and this in turn caused higher recruitment for militant groups.
The network of local spies who identify targets on ground have their own ethnic, tribal and political vendettas to settle as well, which causes “collateral damage.”
Anti-U.S. feelings in Pakistan increased substantially as a result of this strategy, weakening the U.S.-Pakistan counterterrorism cooperation.
Some of these facts may sound contradictory, and that is because they are. The truth is we don’t know whether U.S. drone strikes have killed more terrorists or produced more terrorists.
The truth is we don’t know whether U.S. drone strikes have killed more terrorists or produced more terrorists.
Regardless, killing terrorists is only a stopgap arrangement. A corresponding and parallel development strategy for bringing the tribal areas into mainstream Pakistan is in dire need in order to empower girls like Malala Yousafzai, who challenged the insufferable Taliban worldview by standing up for education. This inclusiveness has long been the missing component in U.S. policy, and tragically, it remains so. Dismantling the al-Qaida network is a worthwhile goal, but de-radicalization is equally important.
It is not that there has been no U.S. investment in education, but rather, the dilemma is lack of balance in use of hard and soft power. In some cases bureaucratic hurdles delayed implementation of well-intentioned development plans. Inter-agency disconnect is yet another challenge. Pakistan’s malfunctioning counterterrorism policy and entrenched regional rivalries only exacerbate the situation.**"
**I don’t know much about PK but the person you are referring to as molvi was educated at Aitchison College!