A nation broken subjectively will not be able to resist attacks, whether physical, psychological, economic or political.
All of us are familiar with the dull, continuous, low and monotonous humming sound of the mosquito that buzzes around our ears every time the mosquito wants to take a taste of our blood; ‘drone’ is the name of this sound. We remember how angry we get with the thought that this little creature has entered our rooms and is threatening to attack on us; yet, it is just a prick, the itching of which may last for only a few minutes. Imagine if something like that would drone over our houses, constantly humming the tune of death, threatening to take the life of a few each time it strikes, amputating some, leaving some without fathers and some without sons! Imagine how the invincibility of such a thing would have affected the minds of a human colony a few centuries back; it would surely be taken as ‘god’!
And, surely, today is a time when any fairly literate populace understands that the ‘killer drone’ is not a ‘god’, and that infiltration into one’s sovereign land is international terrorism; and today, humanity knows that human-sacrifice to please a ‘god’ is no longer a requirement. But perhaps those with the state-of-the-art Drone technology, the seemingly progressive human community with high rates of literacy, do not think the human race fit for such independent thinking; perhaps they have reverted to the ‘godly’ behavior of the olden times, when like in the Aztecs, a human sacrifice was made every day to aid the sun in rising.
What the Drones accomplish is as yet a question no one has been able to answer decisively. The US does claim the Drones to be a means of eliminating specific targets confirmed to it as terrorists; but the irony is that the one who confirms it as a terrorist is an informant, resident of that locality, probably with stronger ties and loyalties with the ones he lives among; and the one who confirms the death of that terrorist, is the same guy, or the terrorists themselves, no government body or organization from any side is present on the scene of action; how credible does that make this whole process? Or does it make this the nastiest game of horror and terror ever played on a human community in recent times, for whether the terrorist was eliminated or not always remains vague, but the terror present in the air of these people has become an ultimate reality, and the deaths and amputations of the civilians is a countable reality that remains, if one would care to count!
The government of Pakistan has categorically announced Indian involvement in the making and aiding of terror groups in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and these Indians have operated from inside the Afghanistan borders, not from inside India. This fact alone is enough to help one figure out that the Indian have been working under the auspice of the NATO army and the Karzai system, which both control Afghanistan. If the NATO machine does not provide such an umbrella, then why not drone the several Indian bases cum consulates stationed along the Pak/Afghan borders, from where the very blueprints of terror originate? Who can trust such an ally as the US, who would station our worst enemy between them and us, and ask for our unquestioning cooperation?
Or is it worse than that! is this not a bloody double game then, of creating a so-called foe and killing it in a so-called way, terrorizing a whole populace of a nation in the way? Are such the ethical values of nations that call themselves progressive and champions of humanity? Do they deem the lives and human right of these thousands worth the dust beneath one’s shoe? And is it ethical to kill civilians in war; to wage war and kill and maim in millions to extract a single-man-enemy; to come in the name of democracy and impose a small minority over the will and right of the majority?
One must notice another god-trait; a god thinks he is above accountability, he judges and nobody can judge him. A very recent example (Source) is the Security Council resolution drafted by Rawanda, asking the Hague, International Court of Justice to delay the prosecution of two African leaders – Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto, accused of orchestrating mass murder, post elections in 2007-8. The Hague-based tribunal has faced scorching criticism in the region following its pursuit of African leaders in Sudan, Libya, and Kenya. Rwanda, which drafted the Security Council resolution requesting at least a one-year delay in Kenyatta’s trial, has characterized the proceedings of the Hague as a modern form of Western imperialism.
“They have enslaved us, colonized us, beaten us, killed us, discriminated us, exploited us, and now they want to judge us?” Olivier Nduhungirehe, Rwanda’s deputy U.N. ambassador, said on twitter.
“One wonders whether the governments which pushed the resolution did so in a bid to ward off the possibility of their own officials being prosecuted for crimes in the future,” said Richard Dicker, an expert on the court at Human Rights Watch.
In such an international scenario, who is to judge which one of the victims of Drone-kill is a martyr (Shaheed) and which the terrorist? A recent report shows that the US has knowingly used Drones in eight countries – Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Mali, Yemen and Pakistan (Source). In each case there isn’t any mechanism to confirm if the information upon which the strike was conducted was accurate, and who and how many the dead were; nor is there any mechanism to provide rescue or treatment to the injured. All the places that have been droned lack any media presence; and at such dark points, the US likes to play its game of havoc.