Category Archives: Human Rights Violations United Nations

The Untold Holocaust in Russia on Remembrance Day

Posted on by

The Forgotten Holocaust: The Films of Boris Maftsir

An Israeli filmmaker works to revive the neglected, terrible history of Shoah victims in the Soviet Union

Tablet: In a series of spellbinding documentaries, Boris Maftsir, an Israeli filmmaker, has been racing to prevent the last traces of the Holocaust in the USSR from vanishing for good. He went deep into the forests of Belarus to film the remnants of Tuvie Bielski’s partisans’ camp and document instances of Jewish resistance that have not been widely known until now. While it is hard to imagine anything remains to be said about the Shoah, that, says Maftsir, is because we keep retelling half the story—the story of the destruction of the Western European Jewry, from ghettos to gas chambers and everything those stand for: the merciless, mechanized, industrial-scale killing machine that organized the murder of millions into a precise, assembly-line-like operation.

While half of all the Shoah victims died in the Soviet Union, they died very different deaths. Here, people died in mass executions in ravines, forests, and village streets, at the hands of Germans or local collaborators. They perished right where they lived, in front of people who had been their neighbors.

Because the Nazis put Soviet Jews, whom they called Judeo-Bolsheviks, in a separate category and viewed them as particularly dangerous (and because they expected a quick victory here) with a few notable exceptions, they almost never bothered with organizing the Jews into long-term ghettos or transporting them to faraway places. Jews began dying the moment Germans invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941.

“By the end of 1941,” writes Timothy Snyder in Holocaust: The Ignored Reality, “the Germans (along with local auxiliaries and Romanian troops) had killed a million Jews in the Soviet Union and the Baltics. That is the equivalent of the total number of Jews killed at Auschwitz during the entire war. By the end of 1942, the Germans (again, with a great deal of local assistance) had shot another 700,000 Jews, and the Soviet Jewish populations under their control had ceased to exist. … By 1943 and 1944, when most of the killing of West European Jews took place, the Holocaust was in considerable measure complete.”

A different set of numbers throws this into even sharper relief. An estimated 25 to 27 percent of Amsterdam Jews who found themselves under occupation survived—the lowest rate in Western Europe. In France, 75 percent of Jews survived the Nazi occupation. By contrast, of the conservatively estimated 2.61 to 2.75 million Soviet Jews who found themselves living under Nazi occupation, an estimated 103,000 to 119,000 survived, for a survival rate of between 2.7 percent and 4 percent. (Estimates of victims include only those who died as a result of direct anti-Jewish actions by the Nazis; they do not include hundreds of thousands of Jews who fell in battle while serving in the Red Army or died during sieges of Leningrad and Odessa from bombings, hunger, illness, and other causes. These are estimated to constitute several hundred thousand.)

Maftsir doesn’t mince words when he talks about the near-erasure of the eastern half of the Holocaust. “The place of memory of the Holocaust is already taken up,” he says. “There is the Victim—Anne Frank. There is the Saint—Janusz Korczak. There is the Villain—Adolf Eichman. There is Hell, it’s Auschwitz. There is heroism—the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. And that’s it.”

***

I met Maftsir in September 2016 in Kyiv, where I was attending a series of events commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Babi Yar massacre. At one of the events, Maftsir showed the first film of his Holocaust in the USSR project, Guardians of Remembrance. It was the first time in my life that I, who grew up in the Soviet Union, saw people I could recognize and relate to—survivors from Belarus, Russia, Ukraine—speaking to me from the screen, in Russian, about the horrors of the Holocaust. They told the story of a Holocaust that happened in places where my family had lived.

Maftsir has been working on his project since 2013, but its roots go back to his time at Yad Vashem, Israel’s memorial to the victims of the Holocaust, where for seven years he headed up the effort to recover the names of the Soviet victims of the Shoah. When he took the job in 2006, he was shocked to discover how many were still missing.

“I knew that in Soviet times, for ideological and political reasons, there was neither documentation, nor memorialization, nor the study of the Holocaust,” he told me. “But I couldn’t imagine that out of the 1.5 million Jews we believe died in Ukraine, we had only 10 to 15 percent of the names.” This figure stood in contrast to the names of Western European Jews who died in the Holocaust, 90 percent of which were known at the time.

Maftsir spent the next several years traveling to some 160 Shoah sites in the former Soviet Union, a mind-boggling number that is nevertheless only a fraction of the total of 2,000 sites connected to the Holocaust. Today, these sites are spread out across several post-Soviet states. Step by step, he built a network of local volunteers who sought out Holocaust survivors, non-Jewish witnesses, and local memory activists—the so-called guardians of remembrance. “We did not work with archives,” Maftsir emphasized. “We were looking for living memory.”

His team collected hundreds of thousands of names. And at the end of his seventh year on the project, Maftsir realized that he needed to bring this story before a larger audience. As a professional filmmaker, he chose film as his medium. In 2012 he resigned from the project at Yad Vashem to make Guardians of Remembrance.

“What does it mean to shoot almost everyone or to destroy nearly 3 million people across a span of a given territory?” asks Maftsir. The question is only partly rhetorical. In the USSR, it meant there were virtually no survivors left to tell their stories. Those who had managed to evacuate before the German invasion or who had served in the Red Army came back to find empty homes and mass graves. Their grief was suppressed under the blanket Soviet policy of silence and denial of the specificity of the Jewish nature of the Holocaust.

The Soviets, of course, knew exactly what had happened to the Jews in their territory. Even before the war ended, a special state commission began investigating German crimes, including those against the Jews. A group of Soviet Jewish writers began collecting witness testimony and preparing it for publication in a work that became known as the Black Book of Soviet Jewry. Some of these materials became evidence in the Nuremberg trials.

But the findings of the commission were never published in the USSR. Many of those who worked on the Black Book were executed a few years later, charged with disloyalty, as the campaign against “rootless cosmopolitanism” unfolded. It would have been ideologically uncomfortable for Stalin to emphasize Jews as a particular target, for doing so could have detracted from the special status of the USSR as a whole as a target of Hitler’s aggression. It could also have given credence to Hitler’s propaganda about the Judeo-Commune and reinflamed anti-Semitic tendencies among the local populations that needed to be reintegrated—and reindoctrinated—after prolonged periods of living under the German occupation.

In the vast majority of cases, there were no monuments or other works commemorating the execution sites. In the few cases with some sort of memorial, the inscriptions referred to the victims as “peaceful Soviet citizens.” Relatives were not permitted to gather at the memorial sites. Those who did were often arrested. Western scholars were denied access to the archives to conduct research.

“What do deniers of the Holocaust say?” asks Maftsir. “They say: Look at the USSR. Show us the corpses. But everything there is burned down, everything is ground down, everything is destroyed. The forgetting by the Soviet power for 40-50 years has led to the fact that there is no direct connection anymore. And that is how memory goes away.”

***

As Dr. Inna Gerasimova, the founder of the Museum of Jewish History and Culture of Belarus, tells her story in one of the opening scenes of Guardians of Remembrance, the camera pans across a square garden in the center of Minsk, where she and Maftsir are discussing the events of November 1941.

“This is where the gallows stood,” she tells him, motioning with her hand. Around them is a street scene that is unremarkable in its normalcy. Passers-by are going about their business, some with the habitual urgency of a city-dweller, some just strolling. Most are oblivious to the cameras. It’s a gray, rainy afternoon in late November, and pedestrians are studiously avoiding the puddles. You can almost feel the chill in the air.

“It is precisely here that once in a while they hanged people,” Gerasimova continues, and the growing dissonance between her words and the humdrum, quotidian reality on the screen sets off a barely detectable alarm bell of internal discomfort in the viewer.

“The people began to panic from the very beginning. They felt frightened because right away they realized the most scary thing—the complete permissiveness that was indulged in by those who kept them here. They raped women, they raped girls, and they did it openly.” As she speaks, the camera cuts over to a well-dressed young woman with two school-age sons. The boys look back at the camera, giggling the way preteen boys anywhere might do. Gerasimova’s narrative of the horror that took place in these very streets clashes with the visual of the weirdly normal, peaceful scene playing out on-screen.

And suddenly it hits you. It was people just like these—regular, ordinary residents whom any one of us could identify with—who became swept up in the horrible events she is describing. Suddenly you can visualize and feel in your gut the shock and horror of seeing the gallows erected in the heart of your city. It could have been anyone who happened to be a Jew. It could have been you.

It is Maftsir’s ability to create this presence that makes his films so powerful. To achieve this, he films on location, at the same time of year when the events his informants describe took place. This means that he’s had to film in 1 degree F in Sukhari in Belarus, 104 degrees F in Zmievskaya Balka in the south of Russia, and in the pouring rain in Minsk. His films are based entirely on witness and survivor testimony, and he takes his witnesses to the places where they experienced the events. He asks them to tell their stories in the language they spoke in their childhood, whether it be Russian, Yiddish, Ukrainian, or Romanian.

This produces a lot of difficulties. “Physically, it’s very hard,” he told me. “You come to Berezhany in Western Ukraine with a witness. He is over 80, he is afraid of getting sick. And the rain starts, and he thinks, naturally—what will happen to me? And you have to work with people so they don’t cry, so they can tell the story.”

And they do tell their stories. They tell their stories all over the Holocaust country of the former Soviet Union, from Nalchik to Khatyn to Lubavichi, the birthplace of Chabad. The relentless narrative of Maftsir’s films, in which each episode of annihilation unfolds chronologically as one story builds on another, paints a picture of what he refers to as “the organized chaos” of the Holocaust in the USSR. In many ways, it can be said that it was here that the Nazis invented, practiced, and perfected techniques of mass executions; learned to manipulate and control crowds of future victims to prevent panic from setting in too early; learned what incentives worked to supply them with streams of local collaborators. It was out of the chaos of these early months of the Holocaust that the well-oiled extermination machine of later years arose.

To be sure, Germans had their orders to annihilate Soviet Jews, but, in Maftsir’s view, there wasn’t an organized plan.

“Take the example of the Romanians,” he says. “Why is it that in Zhmerinka you have an ‘exemplary’ ghetto, and in Bershad hundreds are dying each day? That one is run by Romanians and this one is run by Romanians. In Bogdanovka there are executions taking place locally, but in the northern part of Vinnytsa region people are basically told to live or die any way they wish.”

This lack of organization and preplanning, in his view and that of many historians, extended even to such massive events as Babi Yar.

“Babi Yar was a horrible tragedy,” says Maftsir. “But it wasn’t the first. And it wasn’t even unique in its scale.” He rattles off several notorious mass execution sites. Kamenets-Podolsk: two days, 23,600 people, a full month before Babi Yar. The Rumbula massacre in Riga: 25,000 Jews over two nonconsecutive days in late November and early December 1941. By then, he says, “they already knew how to do it.”

***

So far, Maftsir has completed four of the nine films he has planned. All four—Guardians of Remembrance, Holocaust: The Eastern Front, Beyond the Nistru (parts 1-3 and 4-5), and Until the Last Step—are available online. Of particular interest in Until the Last Step, which is shot in Belarus, are stories of little-known instances of Jewish resistance.

How reliable are the accounts he presents? Witness testimony is a contentious issue among historians. One problem is that people’s memories can be unreliable, especially many decades later. Bystander testimony can be particularly problematic, Dr. Kathleen Smith, a professor at Georgetown University focusing on issues of memory and historical politics, told me: “Bystanders are people who perhaps weren’t specifically targets of repression. They were there, and one might ask, well, what were you doing? Were you a collaborator or were you just someone who was scared? Were you someone who tried to help the victims? It’s much more messy when you try to pull information out of people who were bystanders.” In fact, it is well known that neighbors often benefited from the Jews’ misfortune.

When I put these questions to Maftsir, he is careful to emphasize that his witnesses were children or teenagers when the events took place. “Each of them talks about what they saw. And they do it sometimes very honestly,” he says. “It was a terrible time. It was occupation. I don’t know how people lived and how they survived. Even the righteous who saved people did not do it for free: they had to get food for the people. Those who saved themselves had to pay for it.”

Not a single historian who has viewed his films has ever raised objections about the veracity of testimonies, says Maftsir. “I don’t make things up and I don’t uncover anything new,” he stresses. “All the events that are described are well documented. I simply recreate these events. Each witness talks only about what she saw.”

In fact, a number of organizations in Israel use his films in their Holocaust education programs, including the Ghetto Fighters’ House museum.

“To what extent are these testimonies history? I don’t know,” he says. “It’s memory. And my entire project is about the restoration of memory about the Holocaust in the USSR. I collect imagery to convey the scale, the prevalence, the uniqueness, the systematic nature of what happened through personal stories.”

In a strange way, Maftsir’s films give one a sense of hope. After all, these are the stories of survival and resurrection of memory; stories that defied the intended triple annihilation of death, burial in mass graves, and forgetting.

One of the most emblematic scenes in the film is one of a Soviet World War II veteran, Emil Ziegel, who now lives in Israel, coming back to Mineralny Vody, Russia, with his Israeli grandson to show him where he came from and tell him the story of losing his family in the Shoah. “By the time you have children, I probably won’t be alive,” he says to him. “You bring them here, tell them what I told you today.”

***

To read J. Hoberman’s Tablet magazine review of a series of Holocaust movies made in Communist countries, click here.

DHS 2016 Report on Immigration Numbers, Staggering

Posted on by

This report is the year end 2016 of immigration statistics. While anything the Department of Homeland Security under Napolitano or Johnson ever published is suspect, using the numbers they provided is bad enough. It certainly spells out how ugly the world is country by country and the report tell us how bad it is, while one must consider other Western nations have similar reports. This report is over 100 pages and the pages are number by category by year. The reality is staggering.

 

Yearbook_Immigration_Statistics_2015

Statistical data on immigration have been published annually by the U S government since the 1860s Over the years, the federal agencies responsible for reporting on immigration have changed, as have the content, format, and title of the annual publication Currently, immigration data are published in the Yearbook of Immigration Statistics by the Office of Immigration Statistics in the Policy Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security.

The globe has lost all equilibrium and the professionals estimate for this condition to remain for the next ten years. We have yet to have a top down discussion on actually stabilizing countries one by one. And then there is the question of affordability. Can nations continue to finance war, nation building, and chasing terror indefinitely?

Meanwhile, President Trump has called for a ‘safe zone’ in Syria for Syrians seeking protection. He has called for this area to be protected by U.S. Marines. Hummm

*** President Trump envisions using the U.S. military, in conjunction with the State Department, to establish and protect refugee camps in Syria and neighboring countries, according to a draft executive order outlining several steps the new administration intends to take with hopes of preventing future terrorist attacks on American soil.

First obtained and published Wednesday by The Huffington Post, the document alludes to Trump’s controversial calls to prevent people fleeing the war-torn country from entering the United States, and it indicates he wants to see a plan by late April. The objective is to establish “safe zones” — both inside Syria and in neighboring countries — that will be used to “protect vulnerable Syrian populations” while they “await firm settlement” either elsewhere in Syria or in other countries.

Trump wants Defense Secretary James Mattis to coordinate the effort with his counterpart at the State Department, expected to be Rex Tillerson, who is pending Senate confirmation.

executive order terrorA draft executive order circulating on social media Wednesday indicates the U.S. military could be used to establish and secure refugee camps in Syria. (Via Twitter)
A Defense Department official was unable to verify the document’s authenticity. “And even if I were, they appear to be drafts,” said Eric Pahon, a spokesman at the Pentagon. “DoD does not comment on pre-decisional draft documents.” A State Department spokesman referred questions to the White House.

On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer did not directly address the document but said Trump would discuss the issue at length in the near future.

“The president has talked extensively about extreme vetting,” he said. “And you’ll see more action this week on keeping America safe. This has been something he talked about in the inaugural address. He talked about it in the campaign.

“Allowing people who are from a country that has a propensity to do us harm, [we need] to make sure that we take the necessary steps, to ensure that the people who come to this country, especially areas that have a higher degree of concern, that we take the appropriate steps to make sure that they’re coming to this country for all the right reasons.” More here.
*** Where did this concept come from?

BEIRUT (AP) — The Latest on the Syrian conflict (all times local):

12:20 p.m.

A Turkish official says his country has always supported the idea of safe zones in Syria but would need to review any U.S. plans before commenting.

U.S. President Donald Trump is directing the Pentagon and State Department to produce a plan for safe zones in Syria within 90 days, according to a draft executive order he is expected to sign this week.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Huseyin Muftuoglu told reporters that Turkey has “seen the reports on a request for a study on the safe zone,” adding that “what is important is to see the result of these studies.”

He pointed to the Syrian city of Jarablus, where thousands of Syrians have returned after Turkish-backed opposition forces drove out the Islamic State group, as a good example of what can be achieved.

___

11:15 a.m.

The Kremlin says a U.S. plan for safe zones in Syria should be thoroughly considered.

Asked to comment on a draft executive order that President Donald Trump is expected to sign this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, underlined the importance to “thoroughly calculate all possible consequences” of the measure. He noted Thursday that “it’s important not to exacerbate the situation with refugees.”

While suspending visas for Syrians and others, the order directs the Pentagon and the State Department to produce a plan for safe zones in Syria and the surrounding area within 90 days.

Safe zones, proposed by both Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton during the campaign, were considered by the Obama administration years ago and ruled out, in part because of Russia’s air campaign in Syria.

Cruz and Poe Introduce Legislation for States to Reject Refugees

Posted on by

There is some additional help coming from the Trump administration as President Trump is likely to issue and sign executive order on immigration that will impact visa holders from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. These are worn torn countries where hostilities continue with terror organizations. An issue that still remains however that Trump has not addressed is the asylum seekers.

S. 2363 (114th): State Refugee Security Act of 2015

A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit the Governor of a State to reject the resettlement of a refugee in that State unless there is adequate assurance that the alien does not present a security risk and for other purposes. The 2 page text is here.

New bill from Cruz, Poe would let states reject refugees

WT: Republicans in the House and Senate have introduced legislation that would give governors the power to reject federal efforts to resettle refugees in their states.

The bill from Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Ted Poe, both of Texas, is a reaction to years of growing GOP frustration with the Obama administration’s aggressive effort to take in refugees and resettle them across the country. Republicans continue to have doubts that refugees can be vetted to ensure they aren’t Islamic State terrorists.

The State Refugee Security Act would require the federal government to notify states at least 21 days before they seek to settle a refugee. Under the bill, if a state governor certifies that the federal government hasn’t offered enough assurances that the refugee does not pose a security risk, the state can block the resettlement effort.

Poe said the Obama administration’s “open door policy” has forced states to take on refugees without these guarantees, and said states need a way to opt out.

“Until the federal government can conduct thorough security screenings and confirm that there are no security risks, Congress should empower states to be able to protect their citizens by refusing to participate in this program,” he said.

Cruz said the first obligation of the president is to keep Americans safe, and said the bill would be a step in that direction.

“I am encouraged that, unlike the previous administration, one of President Trump‘s top priorities is to defeat radical Islamic terrorism,” he said. “To augment the efforts of the new administration, this legislation I have introduced will reinforce the authority of the states and governors to keep their citizens safe.”

****

The Trump White House also has not addressed the issue of criminal deportation of foreign nationals. Each foreign inmate is known to cost the taxpayer an estimated $21,000 per year. Enforcement and removal operations of those illegal foreign nationals now falls to the newly confirmed DHS Secretary Kelly.

FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals

In addition to its criminal investigative responsibilities, ICE shares responsibility for enforcing the nation’s civil immigration laws with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). ICE’s role in the immigration enforcement system is focused on two primary missions: (1) the identification and apprehension of criminal aliens and other removable individuals located in the United States; and (2) the detention and removal of those individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S., as well as those apprehended by CBP officers and agents patrolling our nation’s borders.

In executing these responsibilities, ICE has prioritized its limited resources on the identification and removal of criminal aliens and those apprehended at the border while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. This report provides an overview of ICE Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 civil immigration enforcement and removal operations. See FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals Statistics

Expectations of a quick solution and immediate movement to address the immigration matter are misplaced as this will be a long slog of an operation and will take the coordination of several agencies including the U.S. State Department which is presently operating without a Secretary until Rex Tillerson is confirmed and sworn in. The fallout will include a diplomatic challenge which is many cases does need to occur, however other nations such as China and Russia will step in to intrude on the process including those at the United Nations level, falling into the lap of the newly confirmed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

Fatah and Hamas to form unity government after Moscow deal

Posted on by

The timing is purposeful and Putin led the coordination. This is a real message to the West.

Fatah and Hamas agree to form unity Palestinian government to end election gridlock,” by Bethan McKernan, Independent, January 19, 2017:

The governing bodies of the West Bank and Gaza Strip have agreed to bury their differences to form a unity government in order to finally hold delayed elections.

The secular Fatah-led Palestinian Authority, based in Ramallah, and Islamist militant group Hamas, which seized control of Gaza in 2007, will form a new National Council including the Palestinian diaspora to hold elections.

“We have reached agreement under which, within 48 hours, we will call on [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas to launch consultations on the creation of a government,” Fatah spokesperson Azzam al-Ahmad told media after three days of reconciliation talks in the Russian capital of Moscow concluded on Tuesday.

“Today the conditions for [the idea] are better than ever,” Mr Ahmad added.

Relations between Fatah and Hamas have been tense since Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip a decade ago.

The first elections since 2007 were due to be held in 2016 but were delayed multiple times after legal complaints filed by various political actors and a high court ruling found elections could only be held in the West Bank.

The non-official Russian brokered talks also involved representatives from the Shia Islamic Jihad militant group, which has not been present at political talks in years.

While in Moscow, Palestinian representatives also met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, asking him to pressure US President-elect Donald Trump into reneging on a campaign promise to move the US Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem….

****

According to Al Jazeera, the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority has agreed to form a unity government with rival organisation Hamas.

The two organisations will form a new National Council. The plan is to include Palestinians in exile and then hold elections.

It should be noted that the Islamic Jihad group was also included in the negotiations.

The last time the Palestinians staged elections in which both Hamas and Fatah took part was in 2006.

The Palestinian representatives also met on Monday with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, asking him not persuade the US government not to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

This new Russian involvement in the Palestinian issues is an upgrade for Moscow and with the new foreign policy Donald Trump will follow, it might not be the last.

Meanwhile: From Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center

  • The electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip brought masses of protesters into the streets (one held in the Jabalia refugee camp had thousands of demonstrators). Qatar and Turkey promised aid (money and fuel) to help Hamas cope with the immediate problem, although it will not fundamentally solve the problem.
  • The crisis illustrates Hamas’ difficulty in coping with the challenges of governance in the Gaza Strip, and its inability to cooperate with the Palestinian Authority (PA), even over vital services for the population. However, Hamas’ security forces have proved themselves effective in controlling the situation and so far have managed to contain the protests.
  • Senior Palestinian figures have initiated a campaign threatening mainly the United States, in the wake of the possibility that America will relocate its embassy to Jerusalem.One of the Palestinians’ main claims was that such a move would “ignite the region” and “open the gates of hell in the Middle East and the world.” Mahmoud Abbas said it would make the United States ineligible to play a role in resolving the conflict, destroy the two-state solution and lead the PA to examine possible responses, including retracting Palestinian recognition of the State of Israel.
  • Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem
  • Detention of Palestinian Who Attempted Vehicular Attack
    • On January 11, 2017, during an IDF activity in the al-Fawwar refugee camp (south of Hebron), a Palestinian attempted a vehicular attack. There were no casualties. The Palestinian media reported the Israeli security forces had detained a Palestinian, claiming he had tried to run over a Border Policeman on the road between the town of Dura and the al-Fawwar refugee camp (Shasha News, January 11, 2017).
    Riots and Clashes
    • In the meantime, routine popular terrorism continued unabated (the throwing of stones and Molotov cocktails). The more prominent attacks were the following:
    • January 17, 2017 – Palestinians threw stones at Israeli vehicles on route 443 near the Ofer military camp. There were no casualties. The vehicles were damaged (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 17, 2017).
    • January 16, 2017 – Border Policemen operating in A-Tor detained a Palestinian bus passenger who looked suspicious. Initial investigation revealed that he lived in Judea and Samaria and did not have an entry permit for east Jerusalem. During his interrogation the police began to suspect he had come to east Jerusalem to carry out a stabbing attack targeting Israeli security forces near the Nablus Gate in the Old City of east Jerusalem (Jerusalem Police spokesperson’s unit, January 17, 2017).
    • January 16, 2017 – A Palestinian who clashed with IDF forces in a riot near Tekoa in Gush Etzion and threw stones at the soldiers was shot and killed. (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 16, 2017). The Palestinian media reported him as Qusay al-Amur, 17, a Fatah operative (Facebook page of the Fatah movement, January 16, 2017).
    • January 15, 2017 – Israeli security forces sealed a weapons workshop that was exposed in Hebron three weeks ago. It was discovered at the beginning of December 2016 in a large underground chamber in a residential house in Hebron’s southern industrial zone. The workshop produced hundreds of weapons (Ynet, January 15, 2017).

     

    • January 12, 2017 – Palestinians threw stones at a car and truck near Beit Hanina in east Jerusalem. One man was injured; the vehicles were damaged (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 12, 2017).
    • January 11, 2017 – Palestinians threw a pipe bomb at IDF forces on the Husan detour near Beitar (west of Bethlehem). There were no casualties (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 11, 2017).
    • January 11, 2017 – Israeli policemen stopped an Israeli truck at the Beqaot crossing which was driving in the direction of Nablus. It was found to contain 14 tons of fertilizer, which is also used to making explosives and not allowed into Judea and Samaria. The truck was confiscated and the driver detained for questioning (Civilian administration spokesperson’s unit, January 11, 2017).

     

    • On the night of January 15, 2017, in a joint Israeli security force operation, 13 Hamas operatives were detained near Ramallah. One of them was Ahmed Mubarak, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council. The forces confiscated money, vehicles and Hamas propaganda materials. The operation was carried out after the Israeli security forces exposed a Hamas network of about 120 operatives. The network operated in the region of Ramallah and in effect served as the local Hamas headquarters. Ahmed Bahar, deputy chairman of the Palestinian Legislative Council, condemned the detention of Ahmed Mubarak, claiming it was a clear violation of parliamentary immunity (Quds.press, January 16, 2017).
    • The objective of the network exposed in the Ramallah region was to strengthen Hamas in Judea and Samaria, and to achieve the goal it also engaged in the da’wah (Islamic indoctrination), providing economic support for prisoners and the families of terrorists, and supporting a Hamas student cell. The network also distributed Hamas propaganda and organized mass demonstrations. Its activities were financed by Hamas sources abroad and by Hamas in the Gaza Strip (Israel Security Agency media unit, January 16, 2017)
  • Israel’s South
  • Rocket Fire Attacking Israel
    • Palestinians opened fire at an IDF force maintaining the border security fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip in the southern Gaza Strip. There were no casualties. A military vehicle was damaged. In response an IDF tank fired at and destroyed a Hamas post near the source of the shots (Ynet, January 15, 2017).
  • Developments in the Gaza Strip
  • The Electricity Crisis
    • The electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip recently worsened, and Gazans currently have electricity for only about three hours a day. The crisis is apparently the result of several factors, including the increase in consumption due to the winter cold; a problem with the power lines from Egypt, which supply 11% of the Gaza Strip’s electricity; the completion of a number of infrastructure projects which require electricity; and a rise in the price of fuel, which made it more expensive to operate the power plant.
    • The situation resulted in mass protests throughout the Gaza Strip (one in Jabalia had thousands of demonstrators). Some of the demonstrations were harshly dispersed by Hamas’ security forces and their organizers detained. Hamas rejected the claims of civilians and claimed Mahmoud Abbas and the national consensus government were responsible for the crisis. Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum stressed the right of the public to protest, but said it could not create “anarchy in [the Gaza Strip’s] security” and disturb public order. Senior Hamas figure Fathi Hamad urged the demonstrators to move to Egypt or the West Bank if life in the Gaza Strip was unsatisfactory. He added that Hamas would use all its power to suppress the protests (Facebook page of Watan, January 14, 2017).
    • The crisis led Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to exchange mutual accusations. At its weekly meeting, the Palestinian national consensus government blamed Hamas for the ongoing shortages of electricity in the Gaza Strip. The PA claimed Hamas was determined to take control of the electric company and the Palestinian energy and natural resources authority, and did not allow them to perform their functions (Wafa, January 10, 2017).

    • The crisis raised claims that there was a connection between Hamas’ use of electricity the tunnels and its shortage in the public sector. In response Abu Obeida, spokesman for Hamas’ military wing, claimed the tunnels were one of the “greatest creations of the Palestinian resistance” in response to Israel’s military arsenal and the closure of the Gaza Strip. He claimed building the tunnels had caused the “resistance” many sacrifices, and strongly rejected any attempt to link the “resistance” to the lack of electricity (Twitter account of Abu Obeida, January 12, 2017).
    • To find an immediate arrangement for the electricity crisis, Ismail Haniyeh, deputy head of the Hamas political bureau, consulted with the emir of Qatar. The emir promised him that over the next three months Qatar would transfer $12 million to buy fuel for the power plant (Gaza al-A’an, January 15, 2017). In addition, Turkey promised to send 15 million liters (almost four million gallons) of fuel to the Gaza Strip. Both are supposed to arrive shortly (Safa, January 16, 2017). The aid from Qatar and Turkey may be able to provide Hamas with a short-term solution but it cannot fundamentally end the crisis.
    • In conclusion, the crisis illustrates the difficulties Hamas has in dealing with the challenges of governance in the Gaza Strip, one of which is the uninterrupted supply of electricity to the Gazans. It has also led the local residents to strongly protest against Hamas and again shows that Hamas and the PA are incapable of cooperating, even on issues that relate to the daily life of the population. However, as far as can be seen, the Hamas enforcement agencies still function effectively, and so far Hamas has successfully contained the protests and prevented them from spinning out of control.

     

  • The Palestinian Authority
  • Palestinian Reactions to the Paris Conference
    • On January 15, 2017, a peace conference organized by France was held in Paris. Seventy countries sent representatives, most of them foreign ministers. There were no representatives from either Israel or the PA. The conference’s final summation confirmed that a negotiated solution of two states, existing side by side, was the only way an enduring peace could be achieved. It stressed the importance of both sides’ commitment to a solution to the conflict and to taking immediate steps that would bring an end to continued acts of violence and ongoing settlement activity.[2] The announcement noted that the solutions would be in accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 2334, and with the principles formulated by John Kerry, the American secretary of state, on December 18, 2016 (Website of the French foreign ministry, January 15, 2017).
    • Responses from a number of senior Palestinian figures were the following:
    • Mahmoud Abbas, PA chairman, called on Israel to stop construction in the settlements. He said the PA was prepared to renew negotiations to revitalize the peace process within an international framework and with a defined time table. He called on all states around the globe that had not yet recognized the Palestinian state to do so, and to monitor the implementation of Security Council Resolution 2334 (Watan, January 15, 2017).
    • Nabil Abu Rudeina, spokesman for Mahmoud Abbas, said the Palestinians’ many recent achievements had proved the failure of Israel’s policies and the victory of the Palestinian cause. He said that was shown by the global consensus over resistance to construction in the settlements and support for the two-state solution (Wafa, January 16, 2017).
    • Riyad al-Maliki, foreign minister of the national consensus government, said the foreign ministry would monitor the implementation of the conference’s conclusions that Israel stop building in the settlements so that a Palestinian state could be established and officially join the UN (Watan, January 15, 2017).
    • Saeb Erekat, secretary of the PLO’s Executive Committee, stressed the need to end the “Israeli occupation” and the right of the Palestinian people to establish an independent state. He also noted the importance of the two-state solution, thanked all the countries that attended the conference and called on them to recognize the Palestinian state immediately (Watan24, January 15, 2017).
    • While senior PA figures tried to represent the results of the conference as an achievement, senior Hamas figures mocked the conference, its results and its final statement:
    • Senior Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Zahar said he found it hard to believe an international conference would bring any benefit to the Palestinian cause (Quds.net, January 15, 2017).
    • Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said Hamas viewed the conference as “a waste of time” that copied previous failed peace conferences. He called on the PA to focus on the internal Palestinian reconciliation instead (al-Anadolu News, January 15, 2017).
    • Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said the Paris conference was an attempt to renew the “absurd negotiations” that would give the “Zionist entity” the legitimacy to remain in the territories of Palestine. He said the Palestinian people had to stand fast by their principles and focus on the path of “resistance” to defend themselves (Hamas website, January 16, 2017).
    • Hamas spokesman Abd al-Latif al-Qanu’ said Hamas did not have much hope that an international conference held for the sake of the Palestinian cause because Israel did not honor its conclusions. He added that any negotiations with Israel were a “waste of time” (al-Aqsa, January 14, 2017).
    Responses to Possible Relocation of American Embassy to Jerusalem
    • Senior PA figures continue dealing with the possibility that the American embassy will be moved to Jerusalem. They said the following:
    • Mahmoud Abbas said he had appealed to the American president-elect not to relocate the American embassy in Jerusalem, because, he said, such a step would make the United States ineligible to play a role in resolving the conflict and destroy the two-state solution. He added that if the Americans did relocate their embassy, there were a number of possible responses which would be discussed with the Arab states, including the possibility of retracting Palestinian recognition of the State of Israel.
    • Rami Hamdallah, prime minister of the national consensus government, demanded that the institutions of the international community stand up to the threat of the new American administration to relocate its embassy. He warned that if the United States did relocate it, there would be a significant deterioration of regional security (Safa, January 11, 2017).
    • Saeb Erekat, secretary of the PLO’s Executive Committee, sent a communiqué to Russian President Putin asked Russia to intervene and prevent the American embassy from being relocated. Interviewed by the RT channel in Arabic, he said that moving the embassy to east Jerusalem meant annexing Jerusalem to Israel (YouTube, January 12, 2017).
    • Fatah spokesman Osama al-Qawasmeh issued an announcement threatening that it would “open the gates of hell in the Middle East and the world.” He also said that it would put a lid on any possibility for regional peace and stability, because east Jerusalem was the capital of the Palestinian state (Ma’an, January 14, 2017).
    • Muhammad Hussein, the mufti of Jerusalem and the PA, warned the incoming administration that relocating the embassy could “ignite the region” (alresala.net, January 12, 2017). In his Friday sermon in al-Aqsa mosque, he said relocating the embassy was “aggression against the entire Muslim world” and was liable to have consequences “that only Allah knew.” He said it was an attack on all the conventions and UN Security Council resolutions, and that Muslims would not silently accept it (YouTube, January 13, 2017).
    • The weekly riot in Kafar Qadoum was also exploited for a protest. Demonstrators held signs reading that relocating the embassy to Jerusalem was “a despicable crime” (Wafa, January 13, 2017). On January 16, 2017, Gazans demonstrated in the center of Gaza City. The held signs reading “Jerusalem is a red line” (Facebook page of QudsN, January 16, 2017).
    Palestinian Legation Opened in the Vatican
    • Mahmoud Abbas paid a visit to the Vatican and met with the Pope. He also participated in the ceremony opening the legation of Palestine in the Vatican City. He told newspaper correspondents that he called on all the nations of the world to follow the Vatican and recognize the sate of Palestine. He called on the states to participate in realizing peace (al-Wataniya, January 14, 2017).
    Memorial to the Hamas Terrorist Engineer Killed in Tunisia
    • In Deir Ghassaneh, a town northwest of Ramallah, a sign was hung naming a street for Muhammad al-Zoari, a Hamas terrorist engineer who was killed in Tunisia (Twitter account of Palinfo, January 15, 2017).[3] Hanging the sign might have been a local initiative.

 

Looking Back at Obama’s Covert Drone War

Posted on by

Obama had a targeted kill list of which the nominated names listed came from unknown sources. The most famed drone strike authorized by Barack Obama was that of Anwar al Awlaki. He was an American citizen that preached terror but he himself never killed anyone. Obama became his judge jury and executioner.

Meanwhile, under the Obama administration, the definition and conditions by which a person was classified a terrorist has been amended and the term ‘enemy combatant’ was never used by anyone during the Obama years.

It is accurate to say the genesis of using armed drones began under GW Bush, yet Obama made a fine art of the killing drone operations. The excuse was always, the first choice is to capture and interrogate, when that is not possible then a killing strike by drone is authorized. Exactly who did if any were captured and interrogated other than just one known as Ahmed Abu Khatallah, of Benghazi fame? None.

Meanwhile, Obama’s armed drone operation has killed innocents in high numbers, a scandal largely ignored by the White House and the media.

****

Obama’s covert drone war in numbers: ten times more strikes than Bush

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism: There were ten times more air strikes in the covert war on terror during President Barack Obama’s presidency than under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Obama embraced the US drone programme, overseeing more strikes in his first year than Bush carried out during his entire presidency. A total of 563 strikes, largely by drones, targeted Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during Obama’s two terms, compared to 57 strikes under Bush. At least 384 civilians were killed.

The use of drones aligned with Obama’s ambition to keep up the war against al Qaeda while extricating the US military from intractable, costly ground wars in the Middle East and Asia. But the targeted killing programme has drawn much criticism.

The Obama administration has insisted that drone strikes are so “exceptionally surgical and precise” that they pluck off terror suspects while not putting “innocent men, women and children in danger”. This claim has been contested by numerous human rights group. The Bureau’s figures on civilian casualties also demonstrates that this is often not the case.

The White House released long-awaited figures in July on the number of people killed in drone strikes between January 2009 and the end of 2015, which insiders said was a direct response to pressure from the Bureau and other organisations that collect data. However the US’s estimate of the number of civilians killed – between 64 and 116 – contrasted strongly with the number recorded by the Bureau, which at 380 to 801 was six times higher.

That figure does not include deaths in active battlefields including Afghanistan – where US air attacks have shot up since Obama withdrew the majority of his troops at the end of 2014. The country has since come under frequent US bombardment, in an unreported war that saw 1,337 weapons dropped last year alone – a 40% rise on 2015.

Afghan civilian casualties have been high, with the United Nations (UN) reporting at least 85 deaths in 2016. The Bureau recorded 65 to 105 civilian deaths during this period.

Pakistan was the hub of drone operations during Obama’s first term. The pace of attacks had accelerated in the second half of 2008 at the end of Bush’s term, after four years pocked by occasional strikes. However in the year after taking office, Obama ordered more drone strikes than Bush did during his entire presidency. The 54 strikes in 2009 all took place in Pakistan.

Strikes in the country peaked in 2010, with 128 CIA drone attacks and at least 89 civilians killed, at the same time US troop numbers surged in Afghanistan. Pakistan strikes have since fallen with just three conducted in the country last year.

Obama also began an air campaign targeting Yemen. His first strike was a catastrophe: commanders thought they were targeting al Qaeda but instead hit a tribe with cluster munitions, killing 55 people. Twenty-one were children – 10 of them under five. Twelve were women, five of them pregnant

Through 2010 and the first half of 2011 US strikes in Yemen continued sporadically. The air campaign then began in earnest, with the US using its drones and jets to help Yemeni ground forces oust al Qaeda forces who had taken advantage of the country’s Arab Spring to seize a swath of territory in the south of the country.

In Somalia, US Special Operations Forces and gunships had been fighting al Qaeda and its al Shabaab allies since January 2007. The US sent drones to Djibouti in 2010 to support American operations in Yemen, but did not start striking in Somalia in 2011.

The number of civilian casualties increased alongside the rise in strikes. However reported civilian casualties began to fall as Obama’s first term progressed, both in real terms and as a rate of civilians reported killed per strike.

In Yemen, where there has been a minimum of 65 civilian deaths since 2002, the Bureau recorded no instances of civilian casualties last year.  There were three non-combatants reportedly killed in 2016 in Somalia, where the US Air Force has been given broader authority to target al Shabaab – in previous years there were no confirmed civilian deaths.

Strikes in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia have always been dwarfed by the frequency of air attacks on battlefields such as Afghanistan.

December 2014 saw the end of Nato combat operations there, and the frequency of air attacks plummeted in 2015. Strikes are now increasing again, with a 40% rise in 2016, though numbers remain below the 2011 peak.

The number of countries being simultaneously bombed by the US increased to seven last year as a new front opened up in the fight against Islamic State (IS). The US has been leading a coalition of countries in the fight against IS in Iraq and Syria since August 2014, conducting a total of 13,501 strikes across both countries, according to monitoring group Airwars.

In August US warplanes started hitting the group hard in Libya. The US declared 495 strikes in the country between August 1 and December 5 as part of efforts to stop IS gaining more ground, Airwars data shows.

In the final days of Obama’s time in the White House, the Bureau has broken down his covert war on terror in numbers. Our annual 2016 report provides figures on the number of US strikes and related casualties last year, as well as collating the total across Obama’s eight years in power:

***

Total US drone and air strikes in 2016
Pakistan Yemen Somalia Afghanistan
Strikes 3 38 14 1071
Total people reported killed 11-12 147-203 204-292 1389-1597
Civilians reported killed 1 0 3-5 65-105

 

Notes on the data: The Bureau is not logging strikes in active battlefields except Afghanistan; strikes in Syria, Iraq and Libya are not included in this data. To see data for those countries, visit Airwars.org.

Somalia

Somalia: confirmed US strikes
December 2016 2016 2009 to 2016
US strikes 0 14 32-39
Total people reported killed 0 204-292 242-454
Civilians reported killed 0 3-5 3-12
Children reported killed 0 0 0-2
Total people reported injured 0 3-16 5-26

 

Notes on the data: in the final column, strikes carried out between Jan 1 and Jan 19 2009 are not included. The figure refers to the number of strikes that took place from Jan 20, 2009, onwards – the data Obama’s presidency began. This applies to all the tables in this report.

The US officially designated Somali militant group al Shabaab as an al Qaeda affiliate at the end of November amid a rising number of US strikes in the country last year.

One week after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Congress passed the Authorisation for Use of Military Force law allowing the president to go after those responsible and “associated forces”.

The US has used this law, which predates the formation of al Shabaab, to target individual members of the group deemed to have al Qaeda links. The military has also hit the group in defence of partner forces. The group is now deemed an “associated force”, meaning all members are legitimate terrorist targets.

The US has been aggressively pursuing al Shabaab. At least 204 people were killed in US strikes in Somalia last year – ten times higher than the number recorded for any other year. The vast majority of those killed were reported as belonging to al Shabaab.

An attack on an al Shabaab training camp in the Hiran region on March 5 accounts for 150 of these deaths. This is the highest death toll from a single US strike ever recorded by the Bureau, overtaking the previous highest of 81 people killed in Pakistan in 2006.

One of the more controversial of last year’s strikes occurred on September 28. Somali forces were disrupting a bomb-making network when they came under attack from a group of al Shabaab fighters. The US launched an air strike to “neutralize the threat”.

Local officials said 22 local soldiers and civilians were killed. In the city of Galkayo, where the strike took place, citizens protested in the streets.

 

US Africa Command told the Bureau the reports of non-combatant deaths were wrong. However the US Secretary of Defense Ash Carter announced the next day that the Pentagon would investigate the strike. The investigation found the strike had not killed members of al Shabaab. It instead killed ten members of a local militia reportedly allied with the Americans, US Africa Command concluded.

Afghanistan

Afghanistan: Bureau data on US drone strikes and other airstrikes
December 2016 2016 2015 to 2016
US strikes 8 1071 1306-1307
Total people reported killed 24-26 1389-1597 2371-3031
Civilians reported killed 0 65-105 125-182
Children reported killed 0 3-7 6-23
Total people reported injured 12 196-243 338-390

 

Notes on the data: The US Air Force has a variety of aircraft carrying out missions over Afghanistan, including jets, drones and AC-130 gunships. The UN reported in August 2015 that most US strikes were by unmanned aerial vehicles. This matches the Bureau’s records that show most US air attacks since January were by drones. However in the absence of US authorities revealing which type of aircraft carried out which attack, it remains unclear which of the attacks recorded were by manned or unmanned aircraft.

The Bureau’s data on strikes in Afghanistan is not exhaustive. The ongoing war creates barriers to reporting and the Bureau’s data is an accumulation of what publicly available information exists on specific strikes and casualties. The US government publishes monthly aggregates of air operations in Afghanistan, minus information on casualties.

US Air Force data: Afghanistan in 2016
Total Close Air Support (CAS) sorties with at least one weapon release 615
Total CAS sorties 5162
Total weapons released 1337

 

US warplanes dropped 1,337 weapons over the country last year, a 40% rise on 2015, according to data released by the US Air Force.

The increase follows President Barack Obama’s decision in June to give US commanders more leeway to target the Taliban, amid the Afghan army’s struggle to keep strategic cities from falling into the insurgents’ hands.

Strikes conducted under this authority, referred to by the military as “strategic effects” strikes, have increased in frequency since the new rules came into force.

 

The continuing rise in attacks against the Taliban demonstrates the battle against the insurgents is far from over, despite combat operations targeting the group officially ending almost two years ago. Since then, Taliban violence has increased and Afghanistan’s branch of Islamic State has been trying to carve out territory in the east of the country.

IS emerged in Afghanistan in late 2014, growing as a force through 2015. The US responded by allowing the military to specifically target the group in a bid to stop it gaining strength.

As strikes have risen, so have reports of civilian casualties, with some significant incidents taking place in the second half of 2016.

The UN’s biannual report on civilian casualties released in July detailed the deaths of 38 civilians in US strikes. Since then, the UN has highlighted two US strikes that took the lives of a further 47 civilians.

One of the more controversial strikes hit a house in Nangarhar province on September 28. While the US has maintained that members of Islamic State were killed in the attack, the UN, with uncharacteristic speed, released a report saying the victims were civilians. In subsequent reporting, the Bureau was able to confirm this and identify the victims.

 

This particular strike caused a rift between the UN and US. In an unusual step, the US commander in charge of the Afghanistan operations General Nicholson reportedly considered banning or restricting UN access to a military base in Kabul as a result of its assertion.

There could be more civilian casualties than the two incidents highlighted. These may be documented in the UN’s annual report due for release in February. The Bureau recorded the deaths of up to 105 civilians in Afghanistan as a result of US strikes in 2016.

Not included in these figures were instances of “friendly fire” attacks. The Bureau published an investigation into one of the three such incidents in 2016 when a US strike on a Taliban prison killed Afghan police officers being held captive.

Yemen

Yemen: confirmed US strikes
December 2016 2016 2009 to 2016
US strikes 1 38 158-178
Total people reported killed 2 147-203 777-1075
Civilians reported killed 0 0 124-161
Children reported killed 0 0 32-34
Total people reported injured 0 34-41 143-287

 

Last year American air operations in Yemen reached their second highest level since 2002, when the US conducted its first ever lethal drone strike in the country.

At least 38 US strikes hit the country in 2016, targeting operatives belonging to terrorist group al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) amid Yemen’s civil war.

The conflict ignited when the Houthi militant group stormed the capital of Sanaa in September 2014. Allied to former president Ali Abdullah Saleh, the rebels pushed the internationally-recognised government of Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi into exile.

On October 12, the military launched cruise missile strikes at three rebel targets in Houthi-controlled territory following failed missile attacks on a US Navy ship. This is the first and only time the US has directly targeted Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Last year, a Saudi-led coalition began airstrikes against the rebels, which has led to widescale destruction. One of these strikes hit a funeral ceremony, killing 140 people. The munition used was identified by Human Rights Watch as a US-manufactured air-dropped GBU-12 Paveway II laser-guided bomb.

The Obama administration faced pressure to put an end to arms sales to Saudi Arabia following the strike, leading to a December decision to block the transfer of precision munitions.

The UK is facing pressure to do the same – in June the High Court granted a judicial review of the government’s arms exports to Saudi Arabia following a case brought by London-based organisation Campaign Against Arms Trade.

Pakistan

Pakistan: confirmed US strikes
December 2016 2016 2009 to 2016
US strikes 0 3 373
Total people reported killed 0 11 2089-3406
Civilians reported killed 0 1 257-634
Children reported killed 0 0 66-78
Total people reported injured 0 3-6 986-1467

 

Drone strikes in Pakistan last year fell to their lowest level in a decade, with only three strikes conducted in the country.

The most recent attack targeted Mullah Akhtar Mansour, the leader of the Afghan Taliban. Mansour was killed on May 21 while being driven through Balochistan, a restive region home to a separatist movement as well as the Afghan Taliban’s leadership. His civilian taxi driver, Mohammed Azam, was also killed in the strike.

It was the first ever US strike to hit Balochistan and only the sixth to hit a location outside Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas. It was also the first to be carried out by the US military in Pakistan. The CIA has carried out strikes since the drone program began in Pakistan in 2004.

The Pakistan government summoned the US ambassador in protest following the strike. Sartaj Aziz, foreign affairs special adviser to Pakistani Prime Minister, also claimed that killing Mansour had dented efforts to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table.

US drone strikes in Pakistan peaked in 2010, during which at least 755 people were killed. It is unclear what has led to the steep drop in strikes since then. The Pakistani military conducted an 18-month ground offensive in the tribal regions flushing out many militants and pushing them into Afghanistan. It is possible that the US ran out of targets.

This does not mean that the drone programme in Pakistan has come to end. Strikes paused for a six-month period at the end of December 2013 while the Pakistani government unsuccessfully tried to negotiate a peace accord with the Taliban. It is possible attacks will resume with the change in presidency in January.