Carol Anne Grayson (Radical Sister) blog

“Brand Malala”:  Western exploitation of a schoolgirl

As Malala Yousafzai has told the media, that second when she was shot by the Taliban in Pakistan changed her life, (it is also changing the lives of others too), Malala has become a very marketable western commodity. My issue is not with Malala, I support and respect her wish of education for all, however (and it shames me to say this being British) I doubt she fully realizes the extent to which she is being exploited by her new “mentors” in the UK.

There is an element of risk to all now living in Pakistan since the US led War on Terror brought internal conflict to the region but there is only special treatment for some of those affected. Why not fly out every child harmed by US drones to the west for the most up to date medical care, there are plenty for wellwishers to assist.

Despite some victims trying to speak out on drones, for the most part we don’t even know their names, let alone details of injuries inflicted upon them. There are double standards on how terrorism is reported. Taliban terrorism is used to propel the “good west versus bad east” narrative in the media whilst US state terrorism is served up as “collateral damage” and is more likely to get buried along with its victims. All violence must be condemned.

Drone victims, Pakistan

Since the shooting of Malala, western politicians and media alike have seized upon a very profitable “alliance” with the young Pakistani schoolgirl. She fits comfortably into the well- worn narrative of “rescuing” women from the east. Let’s face it an entire war was waged according to some to “save” Afghanistan’s females from the Taliban. (Let’s hope Malala’s story will not be used to keep occupation going a little longer). What press usually fail to mention however is how Britain and its allies are failing miserably on “gender justice” back home.

Exploitation of women whether emotionally, physically, financially is so ingrained in our society and institutions that I am not even sure whether some men realize their actions. The old saying comes to mind… “in the valley of the blind, the one eyed ‘man’ is king”! Former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, Malala’s avid supporter, fits that description. He is known as a misogynist by his former work colleagues and to human rights campaigners for his refusal to address the plight of widows whose husbands were unlawfully killed by the state see my earlier story https://activist1.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/malala-becomes-poster-girl-of-western-government-double-standards-on-gender-justice/

Malala (UN)

How many men do you see studying gender to work with women for greater equality though it would benefit society for more males to do so. Division of labour need not be problematic if given the same value for both sexes. The one man on my gender course at university was a young Pashtun man who was determined in his aim to improve the situation of women in the Tribal Areas of Pakistan whilst at the same time respecting the culture.

The special treatment of Malala is highlighting divisions in many ways. Week in week out, when I peruse the British press, we are subjected to articles about asylum seekers “ripping off” the UK. These stories show scant regard for torture victims coming to Britain that often end up being held in detention centres or virtually penniless in the community living on vouchers with limited access to health care. Yet one young lady is flown in to the UK and provided with the best possible care at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham appearing to bypass the hurdles faced by many. It would seem that there is something of a two tier system of care going on here and it is understandable that this will raise questions as to how we define a “deserving” case. I have met many juvenile survivors of torture, outspoken activists on human rights so what makes one person more deserving than another?

The commodification of Malala appears to have started at the time her father volunteered his daughter to the BBC to document life at school under the Taliban (this was before she was shot on a bus). She is seen on film at a younger age going to school and participating in lessons with her peers.

Media stories report that her father Ziauddin owns “for profit” schools which just happen to be high on the agenda of Gordon Brown, global envoy for education at the UN (again documented in my earlier article. One wonders why then, given that both Ziauddin and the BBC are so quick to warn of the dangers of the Taliban, they would put a child in the line of fire (albeit her identity thinly disguised) to write her diary for public consumption.

With regard to the question of another agenda, artist Jonathan Rao who painted the portrait of Malala that hangs in the National Gallery admits to his concerns in the Independent newspaper and states:-

 “I guess I was worried that she was probably a pawn in a bigger game and was being unduly influenced by the people around her.”

The Independent points out that:-

Those people include Edelman, the global PR firm that manages Malala alongside its work for clients that include Microsoft and Starbucks. Jamie Lundie, an impeccably connected senior executive for the firm and former speechwriter for Paddy Ashdown when he was the Lib Dem leader, leads a team of five who work with Malala on a pro bono basis.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/the-making-of-malala-yousafzai-shot-by-the-taliban-for-going-to-school-and-now-in-the-frame-for-nobel-peace-prize-8862588.html

Portrait, by Jonathan Rao

During a BBC documentary this week, Malala’s former friends are shown in Swat valley, Pakistan continuing their education. However there is fear among children in the region. Fox news reports the following words from school principle Selma Naz:-

“We have had threats, there are so many problems. It is much more dangerous for us after Malala’s shooting and all the attention that she is getting,” said Naz. “The Taliban are very dangerous. They have gone from Swat, but still they have a presence here. It is hidden, but it is here. We all have fear in our hearts.”

What is disturbing also is that we are told in the film which area of Birmingham Malala now goes to school, careless words given threats to target her once again repeated from Taliban. Can we assume she will not be targeted in UK?

Safety is pushed aside for “brand Malala”. There is Malala the book, Malala the film, Malala the award nominee, Malala the portrait, with the schoolgirl being skilfully marketed by Edelman, the world’s biggest PR company. Wavering a fee will no doubt be compensated by the value of the publicity she will bring to the company. I wonder, how many people can name the other girls injured when Malala was shot? What quality of care and support did they receive? Are they represented by PR companies?

All this stage management behind the scenes strikes me as far removed from the image portrayed on our screens of a simple, very bright girl, with a love for school standing up for her rights. We are now into the dangerous cult of celebrity. To ease the entry into western homes via multimedia, we are told Malala likes pop star Justin Bieber, is championed by actor and UN ambassador Angelina Jolie and what transition would be complete without the obligatory photo with a smiling David Beckham. With the “A” listers behind her, Malala’s future looks rosy. How different to the many women that have been harmed in Britain and received no such support.

Meeting David Beckham and book with Christina Lamb

It is fascinating to see the establishment prizes Malala is collecting including “Pride of Britain”. Will we see her projected from Quilliam next, sat beside former English Defence League (EDL) leader Tommy Robinson. Even to Tommy, she must surely be the acceptable face of Islam. Then of course we are gearing up for the Nobel Peace Prize with Malala a firm favourite to take the award. Putin’s heart must be sinking with Malala predicted to follow in the footsteps of champion of drones, supporter of targeted killings, President Barack Obama.

I can’t help but think of another Nobel nominee two decades ago, one Rigoberta Menchu. Like Malala she was thrust into the limelight, pressurised by others. She also wrote a book and appears to have been so eager to fit the expected narrative that she is alleged to have altered facts to project her cause, that of Quiche people in Guatemala. Ten years after the Nobel she was mired in controversy, though allowed to keep her prize. I quote a newspaper story in the New York Times  December 15th 1998:-

Rigoberta Menchu

In the autobiography ”I, Rigoberta Menchu,” first published in Spanish in 1983 at the height of Guatemala’s brutal civil war, Ms. Menchu, now 39, tells a wrenching tale of violence, destruction, misery and exploitation as moving and disturbing as a Victor Hugo novel. So powerful was the book’s impact that it immediately transformed her into a celebrated and much-sought-after human rights campaigner and paved the way for her being awarded the Nobel Prize.

Key details of that story, though, are untrue, according to a new book written by an American anthropologist, ”Rigoberta Menchu and the Story of All Poor Guatemalans.” Based on nearly a decade of interviews with more than 120 people and archival research, the anthropologist, David Stoll, concludes that Ms. Menchu’s book ”cannot be the eyewitness account it purports to be” because the Nobel laureate repeatedly describes ”experiences she never had herself.”

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/15/world/tarnished-laureate-a-special-report-nobel-winner-finds-her-story-challenged.html?scp=7&sq=rigoberta%20menchu&st=cse&pagewanted=1

Malala is a bright, articulate young woman. She comes across as caring and committed and has great potential to make a difference in this world finding her own route. She is not in the UK to boost careers or further the bank balance of those in the media. Those who claim to support gender justice should ask themselves why it is that some cases are projected into the media whilst thousands of other cases are suppressed by government including by one of the same politicians so supportive to Malala.

I recall one campaigner harmed by the state writing to Gordon Brown on his deathbed requesting a meeting in a last ditch attempt to obtain gender justice for widows left behind. The BBC spoke highly of this activist, noted how he “died a disappointed man” ignored by Gordon Brown. Such requests were repeated by others many times.

The support people receive after trauma makes a significant difference to how they recover and move forward in life. Malala has been surrounded by care, offered opportunities and her story given immense media coverage. That does not happen for most women. Many go unheard no matter how vocal they may be or what risks they take, they simply don’t fit in to a popular narrative, especially if victims of the state.

Malala should not be used as a diversion to distract away from other women that have been fighting in British courts for years to highlight injustice and the wrongdoing of government. This does not help the cause of any woman while one is exploited and others are being suppressed!

As an intelligent young role model, I don’t imagine Malala would want this. I would think all she wants to do is knuckle down and get on with her education and hopefully will be allowed to do so in peace.

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  She is a Registered Mental Nurse with a Masters in Gender Culture and Development. Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”.

“I condemn both drone strikes and bombing of civilians, both are equally wrong, both acts of terror and one leads to another”    

All Parties Conference (photo left) and Ehsanullah Ehsan, Political Commission with Taliban leader, Hakimullah Mehsud (photo right)

After years of ongoing conflict between Pakistan’s military and militants, Tehreek –r-Taliban (TTP) the All Parties Commission (APC) consisting of ruling party and opposition parties came to the unanimous decision to go for dialogue with all stakeholders. See DAWN, Resolution of APC, September 9^th 2013 http://dawn.com/news/1041675/resolution-of-the-all-parties-conference-on-sept-9-2013

Although to many this may seem a controversial decision, in this informative article “Between militants and military” former ambassador Awaz Wazir lays out the situation in the Tribal Areas stating the following;

Advocates of solely using force to resolve the problem are either not that well aware of the ground realities or have other objectives otherwise they would not have forgotten the fact that combat aircraft have already carried out around 6,000 aerial sorties for dropping more than 11,000 bombs from the sky on Fata although a force of over100,000 regular troops was present there to flush out militants from the area.

But have they? If force alone could have solved the problem it should have done so long ago. So let us not fool ourselves and also not confuse others by calling for use of force in Fata.(Federally Administered Tribal Areas)

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-206041-Between-militants-and-military

Following the decision of the APC I decided to write to UN rapporteur Ben Emmerson who is currently tasked with investigating ethics and legality of drone strikes and impact on civilians to appeal for intervention to cease US targeted killing programme so that dialogue can proceed. It’s important to remember that you cannot address insurgency whilst turning a blind eye to state terror in all its forms. That would be the greatest of hypocrisies.

Here is my letter written as an independent writer/researcher, human rights activist who advocates peace and is also a survivor of US “collateral damage” (not drones) but equally devastating to my family and community.

Letter to UN, request for intervention on drone strikes (12th September 2013)

As you are aware I have been working for several years educating and campaigning against drones and have very good relations with many people in the Tribal Areas of Pakistan. I decided to focus on this contact, writing on drones and trying to promote peace where I could through my articles/website. I work also from my own life experience of loss and injustice as a victim of US “collateral damage” myself (in another form) which I believe was mentioned in earlier emails.

You may have seen that there was a meeting of the All Parties Conference in Pakistan this week and all parties agreed to try for dialogue with insurgents as a first option rather than a heavy military operation which would only add to the region’s problems creating more violence and displacing civilians that have suffered for years.

I have a great deal of respect and affection for the people of the Tribal Areas.

Many people have died due to pressure from America on Pakistan to support its drone strikes and wider foreign policy. Drones are seen by many to be unethical and unlawful with legal cases ongoing from Reprieve. They are creating more violence and “blowback” to the point where media now report that a special militant faction has been set up in retaliation to take revenge for drone strikes. So there are the initial casualties of drone missiles fired, then first responders killed in “double tap” incidents and finally further casualties from revenge attacks..(which are missed off official figures). Its a vicious cycle.

I understand that politicians in Pakistan are looking to approach the UN on drone strikes. I am approaching you myself in an individual capacity as this is a key time to reconsider drone strikes on Pakistan. Please read my article regarding current situation… https://activist1.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/pakistan-us-drone-strikes-must-stop-now-for-dialogue-to-start-a-window-of-opportunity-should-not-be-sabotaged/

First indications are that the Taliban TTP see the move by the APC as a positive step and will I understand hold a meeting of the Central Shura to make a formal response. I have been in daily contact with Tribal Area journalists for several years and now have direct contact with Taliban political commission member. I have nothing to hide, my only agenda is upholding human rights and as a widow, mother and peace activist of many years that believes in preserving life. Drones also operate from British soil through armed drones from UK appear to mainly attack on Afghanistan side of the border however British drone operators were relocated from Creech to work from UK soil which I wrote about in May 2011 http://blog.approximatetargetfilm.com/drones-over-pakistan-the-british-connection/ and many of our questions on drones remain unanswered from government.

Please check these articles…

Pakistan Takes Step Toward Talks with Taliban http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/asia/pakistan-takes-step-toward-talks-with-the-taliban.html?_r=0

TTP welcomes APC’S peace talk decisions. http://dawn.com/news/1041680/ttp-welcomes-apcs-peace-talks-decision

I am making an urgent appeal as an independent human rights campaigner that all possible efforts are made so that America ceases its strikes on Pakistan. John Kerry has indicated that US believes they have eliminated many militant leaders so as he is so adamant why is there a need to continue strikes when there is the possibility of dialogue. He did say to press that they would “stop very soon”. To have drones rain down on those who may be involved in talks is not conducive to creating a positive atmosphere at all and I believe could be considered an aggressive act of sabotage towards those seeking peaceful solutions.

I am therefore approaching you in your capacity of Rapporteur for UN investigating drone strikes and look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely

Carol Anne Grayson

Since the letter was written the Taliban have stated that US drones must stop before talks begin see link http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/10/02/pakistan-taliban-say-us-drones-must-stop-before-peace-talks/

To date, Ben Emmerson QC has failed to acknowledge or reply to my letter.

Link for Ben Emmerson, Special Rapporteur on counter terrorism and human rights

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Terrorism/Pages/SRTerrorismIndex.aspx

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad. Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”. The author is also a survivor of US “collateral damage”.

Back in December 2010, I wrote an article for Asia Despatch website on the assassination of scientists in Iran’s nuclear industry. In October 2013, I note the killing of yet another person working in this field, Mojtaba Ahmadi, who served as commander of the Cyber War Headquarters, found in a wooded area near Karjai, Tehran. According to the Telegraph “five Iranian nuclear scientists and the head of the country’s ballistic missile programme have been killed since 2007. The regime has accused Israel’s external intelligence agency Mossad of carrying out these assassinations.”

According to local police the attack on Ahmadi was a motorbike, related assassin, involving two men. In January last year, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a chemist and Deputy Director at the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, was also assassinated along with his driver, Reza Ghashghaee, with a magnetic explosive device targeting his car during Tehran’s rush hour. An earlier killing I reported on, that of Majid Shahriar used a bomb delivered by motorbike and planted on a car. Prior to that there was a similar motorbike assault injuring nuclear scientist, Fereidom Abassai and before that Masoud Ali- Mohammadi, a quantum mechanics and field theory specialist based at Tehran University killed using the same method of attack.

Living with the fear of becoming another targeted killing appears to go with the job in Iran. In light of this latest murder, I thought I would revisit my previous article from December 17th, 2010

Iran/Israel: Nuclear fall-out

In the same week that Whistleblowing website WikiLeaks revealed in a classified diplomatic cable that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has repeatedly urged the United States to destroy Iran’s nuclear programme, two more nuclear scientists came under attack in Tehran. Assassins on motorbikes rode up to the car of Majid Shahriar part of the nuclear engineering facility at the Shahid Beheshti University in the capital killing him and wounding his wife. Fereidom Abassi, a nuclear physicist from the same university was also targeted and received injuries in a similar incident, his wife who was accompanying him was also hurt. Both men were respected figures in the field of nuclear research.

Shariari was known to have designed the new generation of theoretical nuclear reactors. Abassi, once a member of the Revolutionary Guard specialised in nuclear isotope separation. The semi-official Fars news agency described the two professors as members of the pro-government Basiji militia. Shahriari is now being hailed as a martyr by the Iranian press. Earlier this year in January, Masoud Ali- Mohammadi, a quantum mechanics and field theory specialist based at Tehran University was also assassinated by a remote controlled bomb attached to the side of a motorbike.

Mashreghnews.ir reported: “Dr Fereydoun Abbasi’s name was mentioned in UN security council 1737 resolution as a person linked to Iran’s nuclear activities and this shows they [Americans and Israelis] were planning to assassinate him from [a] long time ago.” According to Iran Daily, the Iran Royal Association, a terrorist organisation claimed responsibility for the murder of Ali-Mohammadi, carried out by their “Tondar” Commandos. The group are seeking to restablish the Pahlavi reign in Iran however the country’s foreign minister stated that there were traces of US and Israeli involvement.

The Guardian newspaper stated that “Iran maintains that its atomic programme is designed to supply power stations rather than to build nuclear warheads. A fresh round of talks with the five permanent members of the UN security council, plus Germany, is due to begin on 5 December.” The CIA had something of an “intelligence coup” recently in relation to their efforts to spy on and undermine Iran’s nuclear programme when ABC News reported that an award winning nuclear scientist, Shahram Amiri (who mysteriously disappeared last year) had defected and resettled in the US. King Abdullah warned (in the cables released by WikiLeaks) that if Iran developed nuclear weapons, other countries in the region, including Saudi Arabia, would develop nuclear weapons as well. The Washington Square News disclosed, “the cables also reveal that Ehud Barak, Israel’s defense minister, stated in July 2009 that there was only a six-18-month window in which stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons might still be viable.” Robert Gates, the US defense secretary, pointed out that the failure of diplomacy would lead to nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war prompted by an Israeli strike, or both.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quick to blame western governments and the Zionist regime for the attacks on the two scientists. He also admitted that the country’s nuclear programme had been disrupted recently by malicious computer software. A worm known as Stuxnet had apparently been responsible for attacking its centrifuges at Iran’s uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. Experts claimed that the programme, which is precisely calibrated to send nuclear centrifuges wildly out of control, was probably developed by technicians working for a government. Haaretz contends, “the Iranians are not alone in assuming Mossad (now headed by newly appointed Tamir Pardo) is responsible for the attacks. Commentators worldwide think so too.” It is hardly surprising then that those connected to the Nuclear Industry in Iran fear for their lives as there have been four attempts to assassinate in less than four years. In 2007, another nuclear scientist, Ardeshir Hosseinpour, apparently died from gas poisoning, there was speculation here too of Israeli involvement.

According to Ali Afoneh, a resident fellow at American Enterprise Institute, “there is too much unknown right now. The attacks could be a concerted effort to retard Iran’s nuclear progress, or they could be meant to hype Iran’s own “terror threat” and provide an excuse to crack down on domestic opposition. The only certainty is that the life expectancy of Iranian nuclear physicists is falling rapidly, and is now almost as low as that of Iran’s civil-rights activists, journalists, and public intellectuals.”

Israel has raised international controversy before in the nuclear field over the treatment of one of its own, Mordechai Vanunu, a former nuclear physician who was jailed for 18 years for disclosing the top secret inner workings of Israel’s Dimona nuclear plant to a British Newspaper, the Sunday Times.  He was released but recently sentenced to a further 3 months for violating the terms of his release. Al Jazeera reported he was led away shouting after being sentenced, “shame on you Israel, and the stupid Shin Bet (internal security wing) and Mossad spies who are returning me to jail after 24 years in which I have spoken the truth”.

One wonders whether WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange might also be at risk of future imprisonment for disclosing such sensitive diplomatic exchanges which includes amongst other things secret accounts of the world’s nuclear anxieties. There is a certain irony perhaps that earlier this year it was reported by several newspapers that WikiLeaks had moved quickly to relocate its servers to a Cold-war era nuclear shelter 30m beneath the ground in the city of Stockholm, one wonders will that be enough to protect its precious data.

The following poem was written by Mordechai Vanunu about his life experience.

I’M YOUR SPY
Mordechai Vanunu

I am the clerk, the technician, the mechanic,
the driver.

They said, Do this, do that, don’t look left
or right,
don’t read the text. Don’t look at the whole
machine. You
are only responsible for this one bolt. For this
one rubber-stamp.
This is your only concern. Don’t bother
with what is above you.
Don’t try to think for us. Go on, drive. Keep
going. On, on.
So they thought, the big ones, the smart ones,
the futurologists.
There is nothing to fear. Not to worry.
Everything is ticking just fine.

Our little clerk is a diligent worker. He’s a
simple mechanic.
He’s a little man.
Little men’s ears don’t hear, their eyes
don’t see.
We have heads, they don’t
Answer them, said he to himself, said the
little man,
the man with a head of his own. Who is in
charge? Who knows
where this train is going?
Where is their head? I too have a head.
Why do I see the whole engine.
Why do I see the precipice —
is there a driver on this train?
The clerk driver technician mechanic
looked up.
He stepped back and saw — what a monster.
Can’t believe it. Rubbed his eyes and — yes,
it’s there all right. I’m all right. I do see
the monster. I’m part of the system.
I signed this form. Only now I am reading the
rest of it.
This bolt is part of a bomb. This bolt is me.
How
did I fail to see, and how do the others go on
fitting bolts. Who else knows?
Who has seen? Who has heard — The
emperor really is naked.
I see him. Why me? It’s not for me. It’s too big.
Rise and cry out. Rise and tell the people.
You can.
I, the bolt, the technician, mechanic —
Yes, you.
You are the secret agent of the people. You are
the eyes of the nation.
Agent-spy, tell us what you’ve seen. Tell us
what the insiders, the clever ones, have
hidden from us.
Without you, there is only the precipice.
Only catastrophe.
I have no choice. I’m a little man, a citizen,
one of the people,
but I’ll do what I have to. I’ve heard the voice
of my conscience
and there is nowhere to hide.
The world is small, small for Big Brother.
I’m your mission. I’m doing my duty. Take
it from me.
Come and see for yourselves. Lighten my
burden. Stop the train.
Get off the train. The next stop — nuclear
disaster. The next book,
the next machine. No. There is no such thing.

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  She is a Registered Mental Nurse with a Masters in Gender Culture and Development. Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”.

“The first casualty of peace may be truth”

Victims of bombings and a vigil for families of “enforced disappearances” Pakistan

At a time when the All Parties Commission, APC (government and opposition parties) voted for dialogue to end years of violence in Pakistan, all efforts must be made to secure a ceasefire date.

Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP) responded positively which gave a sign of hope to end the killing on all sides. Spokesperson, Shahidullah Shahid told DAWN media that TTP welcomes suggestion from Pakistan’s clerics (Ulema) for a ceasefire though claimed it was the government launching the offensive against them so it should take the lead in stopping the war. They would then follow. However until there is a date agreed there are concerns that casualty figures will continue to rise day by day.

This is not a time to clampdown on freedom of speech, surely civilians have a right to be kept informed (at least in general terms) as to what is on the agenda for discussion from both government and militants. Closing down social media accounts connected to insurgents while other state elements with an alleged history of violence can tweet freely stinks of double standards.

It is very easy to polarize and demonize insurgents as being all bad versus good upstanding Pakistani state institutions but that would be to deny reality and bury heads in the sand. Let’s face it there are killings and unlawful actions on all sides, that is often part of the difficulties for those embarking on conflict resolution.

The aftermath of terrible bombings we see are visually very graphic and distressing with many civilian casualties and gain much media attention. (TTP have denied involvement in recent Peshawar bombings). Such appalling acts are to be condemned at the strongest level and all efforts made to find those responsible and hold them to account. To get an idea of the dreadful impact you can read this heartbreaking story of a grandfather who lost 15 members of his family with another 5 lying in hospital injured http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24352693?ocid=socialflow_twitter_bbcworld

Peshawar bombing, image from Mohammad Sajjad (Associated Press) Sept 29th 2013

What’s needed now however is not more brutal violence to keep the cycle going but brutal honesty which can sometimes be more challenging.

Imran Khan has spoken of the need to work within the constitution of Pakistan, his interview on dialogue for peace can be viewed here http://www.zemtv.com/2013/10/01/off-the-record-exclusive-interview-of-imran-khan-1st-october-2013/ Taliban dismiss the Constitution, giving some reasons why in a statement at the end of this article.

This morning I was invited to make comment on the following post by Abdullah Khan, Director of the Conflict Monitoring Centre, Islamabad about that very Constitution. The following question was put to a group of people from diverse backgrounds:-

Question: If someone does not endorse or accept Pakistan’s constitution and parliamentary system of government, what will be his/her legal and constitutional position?
Will he/she remain a Pakistani citizen or not ?
Will this action of not accepting the constitution require a legal action against him/her?

These are important questions to consider and would take a committed ongoing process to answer fully. This was the opinion of Jamila Jahanoor Aslam an advocate at the Supreme Court with her own law firm, “anybody can approve or disapprove the constitution. it’s a matter of personal opinion and no action can be taken against this person unless he/she violates the articles, then they would be guilty of treason and legal action can be taken against the individual.”

One thought comes immediately to mind. Upholding the Constitution and working within the law starts at the top. States must lead by example not repeatedly violate their own laws. Once the line is crossed you have a problem as morally and legally the State does not have much of a leg to stand on when condemning the violence of others.

If you look back over on upholding the Constitution and laws of the country, legally you should prosecute EVERYONE that has violated the Constitution which could mean large numbers of people tied up in courts from all sides. When following the Constitution and law there would have to be no exemptions whether ordinary civilian, politician, insurgent, member of security services or armed forces.

Take cases of “enforced disappearances” as one example of violation of human rights law, here you see kidnapping, maybe even murder and little or no legal representation for those detained. Enforced Disappearances are well outside of the law and Constitution. How would that work in practice given some groups appear to be above the law and protected? Are there any other options which could be considered? Where might a Truth and Reconciliation process fit in to encompass such issues?

Is supporting the US to carry out drone strikes within the law and Constitution of Pakistan given that many of those killed are civilians or persons “alleged” to have committed crimes that have not gone through fair judicial process read Drones Now Haunt Nawaz Sharif  http://www.cmcpk.net/2013/10/drones-now-haunt-nawaz-sharif/

Mullah Muhammad Sangeen of Afghan Taliban recently killed in drone strike

As I was pondering on these issues an an independent writer/researcher/human rights activist, a statement appeared posted on social media written by Umar Khalid Khursasani – the Leader of TTP in Mohmand Agency, FATA. Now some would say don’t publish this but I have never suffered from Ostrich syndrome and like to breath above the sand so I want to hear what is being said. Friends kindly translated and this is what they sent me:-

The following statement reads as follows:-

1. Named four individuals of their group that were arrested and were killed above the law and their bodies dumped in Rawir Roead, Laki Paharai. 10-15 days before they were killed, there were 3 other already arrested brothers and many are arrested without any trial.

2. We praise the martyrdom of our brothers but we ask these so called journalists and scholars, that ask us to accept the law of Pakistan. Would we accept this law which kills others above the law without judicial process? Should we accept this law which has no rights for prisoners? If we cease-fire, they kill our arrested brothers and the talks get underway, some unknown hands kill innocent people and Christians in car-bomb blasts, to which TTP has no role.

3. From this we conclude that Government, Army and Intelligence Agencies don’t want to solve the problems.

4. We appreciate the efforts of Imran Khan and other political parties. We respect Imran Khan thinking for peace. Even though they are sincere in their efforts and we appreciate their positive thoughts but this country is under the control of enemies of Islam.

5. If this country remains under these enemies of Islam and if this the law of Pakistan, then we don’t accept it and we’ll continue to strive to free Pakistan from this so called Non-Islamic Law and save Pakistani people from the hands of these Intelligence Agencies and we’ll revenge the martyrdom of our deceased brothers.

Umar Khalid Khursanai.
TTP – Mohmond Agency.

So bearing in mind the above statement, these are the types of questions that are likely to arise and need to be addressed if Pakistan ever reaches the stage of dialogue. We should also remember that the killing of Major Sanaullah Niazi, Commander of Pakistani Army troops in Swat alongside others on the 15th September (claimed by Taliban Commander, Mullah Fazlullah) brought condemnation at a time when dialogue was being mooted by politicians in the media. Unless the behaviour of ALL sides is taken into consideration during any proposed dialogue, the battle for peace will probably be lost at the first hurdle.

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  She is a Registered Mental Nurse with a Masters in Gender Culture and Development. Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”.

Update on the case of Masood Janjua

Amina Masood Janjua has been campaigning for eight long years to determine what happened to her husband Masood who disappeared in July 2005 (age 44) alongside his friend 25 year old Faisal Faraz while travelling together on a bus from Rawalpindi to Peshawar, see earlier link  https://activist1.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/amina-masood-janjua-championing-the-cause-of-pakistans-disappeared-as-she-marks-the-8th-annversary-of-the-search-for-her-missing-husband/

Masood is one of thousands of persons classed as “enforced disappearances” in Pakistan, caught up in the War on Terror, many allegedly detained by the security services without charge, trial and legal representation.

Amina set up the organization Defence of Human Rights (DHR) which submits each case of disappearance to the Supreme Court as well as to the Commission of Inquiry for Missing Persons and takes an average of ten to twenty days for each case

Amina continues to remain optimistic on being reunited with her husband, recalling that her father in law received a phone call from former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s military secretary stating that Masood was still alive. However she has been forced to challenge other narratives regarding the fate of Masood as according to a statement from Lt Gen Nusrat Naeem (who could not be compelled to appear in the Supreme Court) he has been killed by terrorists. This statement however was declared false and not viable by a two member bench of the Supreme Court consisting of Justice Jawwad S Khawaja and Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed who ordered the release of Masood Janjua and Faisal Faraz.

Amina meeting politicians and speaking on International Day of the Disappeared

I received the following update from Amina on 24th September 2013

In the Supreme court proceedings of 23rd Sept 2013. Amina Masood Janjua pleaded to the honorable bench to include 5 more names of those who were at the helm of affairs related to her husband’s case and who should submit their affidavits regarding the disappearance of Masood Janjua and Faisal Faraz missing since 30th July 2005.

The list of names includes:

 1. Former President of Pakistan. Pervaiz Musharaf.

2. Former Sect Interior Kamal Shah.

3. Former Sect Defence Syed Ather Ali Abbas.

4. Former DG. NCMC Brig. Javaid Iqbal Cheema.

5. Former DG. NCMC Brig. Javaid Iqbal Lodhi.

The old list which was already submitted included the following names:

 1. Lt. Gen. (Retd) Nusrat Naeem.

2. Maj. Gen. (Retd) Safqaat Ahmad.

3. Lt. Gen ( Retd) Nadeem Taj.

4. Brig. Mansoor Saeed Shaikh

5. Col. Habibullah

6. Col. Jehangir Akhter (Retd)

7. Former Attorney General Malik Abdul Qayyum.

Honorable Justice Jawad S. Khawaja leading the 2 member bench ordered these 12 persons to submit Affidavits within 15 days through the Ministry of Defence. After the submission of these documents their cross examination forum will be decided. The honorable bench concluded that indeed it’s a great torture on the family to face this dilemma for such a long time. Considering the pain and suffering of the families and the enforced disappeared; Masood Janjua and Faisal Faraz, the Supreme Court intends to trace the abductees and conclude the case at the earliest in the interest of justice.

 We appeal to the political and military leadership to show solidarity with honourable citizens releasing them as soon as possible.

Amina Masood Janjua (Chairperson DHR)

Cases such as this have become an embarrassment to the security services and highly distressing for the families. Although the government Commission of Inquiry for Enforced Disappearance is in operation Amina has no faith in the process. International human rights campaigners wonder whether the setting up of a constitutional Truth and Reconciliation Commission might prove a better forum to elicit facts about the circumstances of many missing persons.

A Truth and Reconciliation Commission is generally tasked with discovering and revealing past wrongdoing by a government (or, depending on the circumstances, non-state actors also) in the hope of resolving conflict left over from the past. This process was used with some success in South Africa championed by Nelson Mandela and recently Imran Khan also highlighted the importance of considering this option within Pakistan.

Alistair Boddy-Evans wrote that “the adoption of this Constitution lays the secure foundation for the people of South Africa to transcend the divisions and strife of the past, which generated gross violations of human rights, the transgression of humanitarian principles in violent conflicts and a legacy of hatred, fear, guilt and revenge.” The emphasis is on understanding but not for vengeance, a need for reparation but not for retaliation, a need for ubuntu being human and connected but not for victimization.

http://africanhistory.about.com/b/2013/06/28/28-june-1995-nelson-mandela-announces-the-truth-and-reconciliation-commission.htm

I asked Amina her thoughts on this, she stated,

I truly understand that historically in such situations truth and reconciliation commission has proved to be the only way. I have tried to convey my will to T & R many times via letters, meetings, media and public speeches but as of yet the other party is silent and has kept itself completely hidden behind a wall of darkness. Now I am at a loss of ideas as to how to convince them.

Maybe if someone like Imran Khan takes up this issue wholeheartedly and conveys with full conviction, I am confident the possibilities of resolution are 100%

In a statement given during a Supreme Court proceeding I have offered pardon to all those responsible if they release my husband and I can offer a certain level of assurance that all other families will follow my example especially if I persuade them.

So how are Amina’s family coping now?

Amina writes,

Presently Masood’s father Raja Ali Muhammad, a retired colonel of ninety two, is in fragile health and unable to move around, his condition deteriorating fast. Masood’s children have grown up without the love and affection of their very much alive father. In spite of getting along with life courageously, their hearts are broken as justice remains denied. There are immense financial and psychological and emotional agonies which have become a permanent part of the Janjua family.

Amina and her family deserve the truth, there can be no peace until they know what has happened to Masood. They do not speak of revenge, simply seek honesty and to be treated with compassion. As the years pass by and still no answers the old saying comes to mind…  “justice delayed is justice denied”.

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  She is a Registered Mental Nurse with a Masters in Gender Culture and Development. Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”.

Libel: A published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation; a written defamation

Over the last few days an extraordinary amount of venomous comments have been hurled at Pakistan, Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) leader Imran Khan following two terrible bombings in Peshawar. What is concerning is that when examined many of these remarks could be labelled as libel, a deliberate attempt to defame a person’s character.

Let’s look at some facts… So far not one person has been able to show me a PTI, Imran Khan statement where he or a party member says the party “support” the Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP) despite multiple claims to this on social media networks. What Khan and PTI clearly state is that they “support dialogue” in an effort to end violence, a decision agreed by other political parties at the All Parties Conference (APC) in Pakistan. One could argue that had other parties listened to Khan earlier regarding talks with Taliban, some previous attacks might have been prevented.

Last Friday an article appeared in DAWN entitled “Sharif defends talks with Taliban, seeks end to drone strikes” http://www.dawn.com/news/1045950/sharif-defends-talks-with-taliban-seeks-end-to-drone-strikes interestingly Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif did not attract the same poisonous comments which seem to be reserved only for Imran. Why are certain elements wanting him to fail?

The attacks on civilians at a church and local market are horrific and must be condemned in the strongest terms with every effort made to find the culprits. What is disturbing however is that some people seem less worried about the impact on the victims and more focused on vilifying Khan. Imran’s accusers also appear totally disinterested in finding out who was actually behind the last two Peshawar blasts, so it has to be asked, what are their motives for such diatribe?

I have watched numerous press reports, national and international on Peshawar bombings in recent days that have named Taliban as responsible for these attacks while failing to include their denial statements. Surely they must be included otherwise the public are being given only half a picture which could be inaccurate. Past history has shown that TTP have no hesitation in claiming their victims so why deny now? Responsible reporting is very important and the public may form a decision on whether or not to support dialogue based on these media reports.

I am reminded of several violent incidents in Afghanistan where certain attacks were initially blamed on Taliban. A number of us queried who was responsible when vehement denials were issued by Islamic Emirate. This was happening at a time when there were proposals for a Taliban office in Qatar and hope of talks appeared in the press. What we should be asking ourselves now is who would wish to sabotage dialogue in Pakistan? Again Imran Khan has rightly highlighted this concern.

All efforts must be made to identify those carrying out recent bombings as stated by Imran Khan and take whatever action is possible to protect the population. There is however no such thing as absolute security, any security analyst will tell you that. The reality is if terrorists are determined to attack they will go all out to breach the tightest of security whatever measures are put in place.

In the last two days there have also been further drone attacks on the Tribal Areas which given the Peshawar bombings, is adding fuel to an already raging fire. US and its allies are refusing to address retaliation attacks, those claimed by militant groups to be in direct response to drones. These include the killing of mountaineers at Nanga Parbat and the Peshawar Church bombing. No attack on civilians can ever be justified. The sensible approach is to go all out to end drone strikes, such as engaging the UN in support and take away militants using drone strikes as a reason to perpetrate violence.

When we consider drone victims there is a strong case for arguing that those killed in retaliation attacks must be included in official figures which would raise the number of victims considerably.  I am so concerned at this burying of heads in the sand on this issue that I felt compelled to write to the UN rapporteur Ben Emmerson who is investigating drone strikes to take up this matter. The US and allies given this information on revenge attacks are knowingly inciting terrorism and if an individual did this there would be severe legal consequences.

It is important to keep in mind that drones are weapons of mass division causing splits even within the armed forces. Such divisions are dangerous and can be exploited for deadly purposes.

There are so many double standards. Imran Khan who works for peace is ostracised while others get away with extra-judicial killings. On social media, the accounts of militant groups are shut down while states that terrorise are free to express themselves through political accounts on Twitter and Facebook.

Defamatory statements must be challenged and reported as such to those operating social media sites. Although it may be difficult to take such cases forward within certain countries (see article by Zafat and Associates law firm on libel in Pakistan, http://zallp.com/defamation.html ) there have already been cases taken up from cyberspace. I suggest people think twice before making libelous remarks and read up on Twitter law http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20782257

Please note the following for starters on a UK case:-

If a tweet or blog post is defamatory, untrue and cannot be defended, the maker of the statement can be liable for defamation and for substantial damages.  As Lord McAlpine’s actions demonstrate, formal legal consequences may well follow.  When individuals post material online, they act as publishers and their publications are subject to the same laws and are as legally responsible as those of professional publishers, such as newspapers or broadcasters.

http://www.taylorwessing.com/news-insights/details/exposing-libel-myths-surrounding-twitter-and-social-media-2012-11-20.html

It is worth noting England’s first libel case involving Twitter,

New Zealand cricketer Chris Cairns was awarded £90,000 in damages after he was wrongly accused of match-fixing by Lalit Modi on Twitter, the former chairman of the Indian Premier League.

I wonder if in future we could see a former cricketer taking up a libel case against misguided attackers, now that would be worth reporting on Twitter!

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  She is a Registered Mental Nurse with a Masters in Gender Culture and Development. Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”.

Drones and Contaminated Blood

At least let us “own” our collateral damage!

Anti -drone campaigners (Pakistan) and “bad blood” protesters (US)

You know an issue is finally making waves when an industry develops around it as with drones and as previously happened with the scandal of contaminated US prison blood, the rise of the “collateral damage” industry.

So firstly what is collateral damage? It is damage to people and/or property which is incidental to the intended target, sometimes but not exclusively a military term.

Secondly, what is meant by industry? This is the journalists, researchers, lawyers, politicians, medical staff, psychologists, tradespersons and policy makers, the NGOs (Non – Governmental Organizations) and charities that develop around an issue. Those actually affected by collateral damage are often the last to be heard. They are occasionally trotted out under the supervision of one of those afore mentioned, suffering huge multiple losses and having to fight for self -determination and the power to direct their own lives.

I campaign jointly with the first group of communities. Citizens that have experienced the terrible impact of US drones used to target and anhilate alleged insurgents as part of the War On Terror but often striking civilian populations with devastating effect. Those hit by drones are termed “collateral damage” a term employed by the military as if to explain away their murderous actions. No death by drone is acceptable as the intended targets are extra-judicial killings, they have never had an opportunity to defend themselves through fair legal process.

I am part of the second community I have chosen to speak about… Those who were born with haemophilia (a blood clotting disorder) and given contaminated US prison blood as part of unethical experimentation and their families. This blood came from prisoners who were DELIBERATELY injected with deadly viruses including types of hepatitis as part of live experimentation to study viruses against the Nuremberg Code. Prisoners received a reduction of their prison sentence in return for participation. The blood was later sold by plasma companies and shipped to hospitals round the world as “treatment”. The term used in litigation for HIV/hepatitis C infected patients and their families was “collateral damage”.

Both examples of collateral damage are a result of dangerous and unethical government policies, resulting in thousands of injuries, and unlawful deaths, causing a devastating impact on the daily life of families and resulting in years of legal action against governments with traumatized survivors fighting for justice.

Children protest “bad blood” (UK) and against drones (Pakistan)

There is often a dichotomy… a mismatch between the information produced by the industry and the reality on the ground of those living with the consequences of collateral damage. Survivors become “experts” through life experience, often spending years carrying out their own research yet rarely becoming a significant part of any policy and decision making process.

It is apparent that some of those campaigning on behalf of drone victims have little or no daily engagement with those in affected areas and actively exclude those activists that do. Being in the company of survivors can also ironically cause embarrassment, people don’t know what to say or how to handle our emotions nor do they recognize the strength of willpower it takes to keep going day by day.

In the case of drones, invading airbases, interrupting the speeches of Presidents and planting peace gardens have a place but are not survivor led activities. Part of victim frustration is often living thousands of miles away from those that harmed us… there is not even a nearby place where we can vent our anger.

Some industry people mean well but despite eloquently describing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder remotely in their research articles and academic journals would be unlikely to recognize anyone with the symptoms of PTSD even if directly in their company. This makes for a very distant approach to highlighting the issues surrounding collateral damage.

We celebrate the work of young educators on drones and “bad blood” who were also victims, Saadullah (Pakistan) and Ryan, deceased (US)

There is also the hypocrisy of some industry campaign groups that are very selective in the type of collateral damage they highlight, completely ignoring cases in their own backyard. For example there are campaigners in the west who ignore the ongoing plight of bad blood victims whilst flying off to meet survivors of drone attacks across the globe. Both equally need highlighting, neither have had justice.

Human rights should not be selective and turning a back on thousands of victims of US collateral damage in near proximity breeds anger and resentment at the double standards and is hardly a gesture of caring. There must be support for ALL survivors of US collateral damage, making connections at the enormity of damage caused by US is key and strengthens the case against unethical and illegal practices by governments. Lets face it if governments were to fully compensate all their victims of collateral damage for all their losses most would be bankrupt and therein lies another problem. The reality is that many will never know justice!

If an individual is both a campaigner and survivor of collateral damage, they are generally very well accepted by other survivors at home and abroad but a “persona non grata” to the industry workers, penalized for having insight that they can never have unless they are unfortunate in life and suffer long term physical and/or psychological trauma themselves.

The affected are suppressed by governments and have even been detained and imprisoned for speaking out. Survivors are also frequently the missing element from conferences discussing their plight. It is not that they do not want to attend but little or no financial provision is made to accomodate them which further fuels frustration and distress.

When those affected do have a voice it can be very positive. One young man named Farea al Muslimi was very effective in describing the impact of drones on his village of Wessab in Yemen to a US Senate committee. People across the world sat up and listened  http://blog.approximatetargetfilm.com/farea-al-muslimi-a-yemeni-voice-on-drones/ He was fortunately not himself injured though clearly affected and had spent time and received education in the US. He was also a journalist, so well able to seize an opportunity to present his case.

Farea Al-Muslimi testifying on drones in US, Hadyn Lewis giving evidence on “bad blood” just before he died

Farea al Muslimi is the exception rather than the rule. Disabled victims of US collateral damage are further disadvantaged in society and may have little income even for the basics of daily living. At times survivors have even been robbed and deceived. There was one criminal case in the UK where a lawyer for collateral damage families have used legal aid funding to furnish their own lavish life style. In another case a government civil servant embezzled trust funds set up to provide care for victims by creating false profiles and pocketing the money Although these individuals were eventually struck off and imprisoned in one case this betrayal of trust has added to the stress of those already grieving for lost relatives.

Those affected by drones or deadly diseases are chronically disempowered by their position. having lost family members, support structure, community, health, right to have children, homes and often income. Instead of working jointly with those whose lives have been destroyed to empower and ensure they have a voice, there is a tendency for the collateral damage industry workers to speak for them.

This does little to support the victims but often furthers the careers of those within the industry as they compete to be seen as trailblazing lobbyists, initiators, care providers. Sadly this reflects a microcosm of wider society, a cultural hegemony with a focus on developing the “aid” and research empire rather than determining what the affected actually want and need.

Of course few of the industry workers involved would admit this when they adopt their self congratulatory position while their careers grow and/or the funds roll in rarely giving the victims ownership of their story but rather funding a “voice over” maintaining control of the discourse of drones or contaminated blood.

In the case of bad blood the majority of the media got the narrative so badly wrong believing government spin that it was an “unavoidably accident” that they inadvertantly colluded against the victims for years making their situation worse and despite award winning research that proved this was completely wrong have to this day not apologized to victims or put this right in print.

Survivors adapt over time, develop coping mechanism, caring skills and can appear very strong on the surface but that does not mean they don’t suffer every single day of their lives. There are good days and desperate days and and often a failure by industry to both detect and support.

Joint initiatives are key. There have been news conferences with lawyers that have included drone victims but that is only the beginning http://tribune.com.pk/story/561076/families-of-drone-victims-appeal-to-nawaz-sharif-for-justice/  Where are the survivor led groups? Where are the conference opportunities which put victims at the fore. Different collateral damage communities across the world can meet to share their experience of loss and trauma, the practicalities of surviving, litigating, truth and reconciliation. To have greater impact on thought and policy, inclusion of victims must be a given in all major events NOT a rare exception.

Survivors of various forms of US collateral damage should be financially supported by politicians that claim to support human rights so they can work with other survivor groups internationally. This enables survivors to learn from each other with regard to setting up community based support groups, educating and lobbying and initiating avenues to justice. Survivors of collateral damage that are invited to work jointly with victims abroad should not have to self -fund their trips. If trillions can be invested in war, surely there can be an adequate budget for those harmed by their governments.

How many displaced drone victims are even aware of conferences discussing their plight or have funds to travel 100 kms within their own region let alone fly across the world to a centre in the UK or the US. It is the same for victims of contaminated blood and their families. Having a voice in educational forums is often the privilege of those employed within the industry not the affected themselves. Industry workers who may travel to meet victims appear to be prioritizing their own agenda and careers as opposed to ascertaining what can assist and empower disadvantaged communities.

Survivors in the hands of others

And then are the industry “awards”… again often presented to the collateral damage workers but barely recognising the grassroots survivors that have fought to overcome grave injustice, support families and community, gain control of their lives once more and forge a new pathway ahead. Awards are not uppermost on survivors mind but acceptance and social inclusion is important.

In a sense the collateral damage industry is an extension of what Naomi Klein called “shock doctrine” … the rise of disaster capitalism… Some industry workers exploit opportunities to gain financially from disaster shocked people and countries. People have to make a living but budget allocation is imbalanced between industry and survivors who often make committed, dedicated researchers on the subject of disaster management and damage prevention.

If those involved in the industry really care, they should look to the affected but not in a derogatory manner. They should make genuine efforts to learn about their lives, coping strategies and how THEY wish to campaign and highlight the damage caused by drones or contaminated blood. First, take a step back and listen, engage to empower, don’t become part of the exploitation and hegemony suppressing victims’ voices.  Those who currently dominate collateral damage discourse are colluding with governments to keep victims on the periphery unheard.

Voices need to be heard in Pakistan and UK

Recently I spoke with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Drones (UK) and my views were reinforced when a spokesperson pointed out that they were only hearing “voices in London”. We discussed the need for those that have experienced collateral damage first hand to be included in future presentations but there was no funding.

If funding can be found for politicians to participate in international forums then it can be found for the victims of trauma caused by unethical and allegedly unlawful government policies too! Billions of dollars are generated by both the drone and blood industries, both have caused many deaths (thousands for drones and an estimated 1 million victims of bad blood from prisons globally) yet so little compensation for affected families and virtually no budget for survivor led initiatives. It is time for this to change!

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”. (She is also a survivor of US “collateral damage”)

It is hard to believe that it it is over 36 years since the death of Steve Bantu Biko (12th September 1977) a day that brought tears to the eyes of many of us standing against apartheid in South Africa. It is also a reminder of a time when Britain too struggled with its race relations.

Steve Biko was a renowned political activist and a leading founder of South Africa’s Black Consciousness Movement. Born in King William’s Town in 1946 in the present day Eastern Cape province, he was an extremely bright student but expelled from Lovedale High School due to his political activities. A further educational opportunity arose when he received a scholarship to attend St. Francis College in Natal, a liberal Catholic boarding school. Biko went on to enroll in University of Natal Medical School and became involved in the NUSAS (National Union Of South African Students), a multiracial politically moderate organization.

At college the young campaigner became involved in the National Union of South African Students (NUSAS) but the commitments of political activism led to a decline in his studies leading to his de-registration by university authorities. In 1968, disillusioned with lack of leadership opportunities for black students he established a new all-Black organisation, the South African Students Organization (SASO) adopting a radical doctrine known as “Black Consciousness”.

Biko went on to establish the Black People’s Convention and Black Community Programmes. Threatened by his growing influence, the South African government clamped down heavily on his activities which led to a ban preventing him from conversing with more than one person at a time and from speaking in public. Refusing to be silenced, Biko established an underground publication called Frank Talk.

Biko can be seen here in a rare interview for German TV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNmAcgdO2Ck

Oppression of black communities increased with Biko detained under Section 6 of the Terrorism Act which made use of indefinate detention to close down many activists. Biko was repeatedly arrested and imprisoned for 24 days where he was interrogated, starved and brutally beaten. The following report from the BBC (12th Sept, 1977) informed the world of his death:-

The leader of the black consciousness movement in South Africa, Steve Biko, has died in police custody.

The 30-year-old’s death was confirmed by the commissioner of police, General Gert Prinsloo, today.

It is understood Mr Biko died in hospital in Pretoria. The government minister of Justice and Police, James Kruger, stated that Mr Biko had been transferred 740 miles (1,191 km) from Port Elizabeth to Pretoria for medical attention following a seven-day hunger strike.

Mr Biko had been in custody since 18 August when he was arrested and detained under the Terrorism Act. He is the 20th person to die in custody during the past 18 months

A government cover-up followed Biko’s death being labelled as a “hunger strike”. A world-wide outcry ensued after details of his injuries emerged and the persistence of campaigners led to further investigations being carried out. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission South Africa (1999 report) determined that his death was a “gross human rights violation” and concluded the following,

Despite the inquest finding no person responsible for his death, the Commission finds that, in view of the fact that Biko died in the custody of law enforcement officials, the probabilities are that he died as a result of injuries sustained during his detention.”

Biko’s book “I Write What I like” (A Collection Of His Writings)

Today his achievements are celebrated and memory honored through, art, buildings, song and the Steve Biko annual memorial lecture (this lecture from 2012, can be viewed on the following link) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIQtNot1BeI His life is captured in the 1987 Richard Attenborough film Cry Freedom starring Denzel Washington http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq4VjE0_AVQ

See also article by Khaya Dlanga, Steve Biko and White Peoples Things http://mg.co.za/article/2013-09-12-00-khaya-dlanga-steve-biko-and-white-peoples-things

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”. The author is also a survivor of US “collateral damage”.

ALL PARTIES CONFERENCE RESOLUTION BRINGS NEW HOPE

After a decade of escalating violence in Pakistan in the aftermath of 9/11 and submerged under the weight of the US War on Terror (WOT) Pakistani leaders at yesterday’s All Parties Conference (APC) have opted for dialogue over increased military action in FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas). A window of opportunity may be opening. However unless US drones strikes cease, talks would be difficult under a rain of missiles and once again America will be controlling the fate of millions of Pakistanis who deserve peace.

The US government appears unable (or unwilling) to assimilate the true impact of drone strikes. American politicians remains in chronic denial, refusing to accept the simple equation that for every missile fired there are consequences and often violent retaliation. Therefore if America refuses to take note of the outcome of yesterday’s meeting, this must be seen as deliberately sabotaging efforts for peace in the region.

Imran Khan, Chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, (PTI) met with General Kiyani and Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and later presented a 4 point plan to the APC. He stated;

The missile strikes have increased our enemies. The tribal people are our people, they are patriots, only our policies have turned them into our enemies. These issues can be resolved by negotiations. We should first heal their wounds. We made a big mistake by sending troops to the Tribal Areas. We must abandon this war and convince our people that this is not our war

Khan who has long campaigned against drones declared the resolution of the APC as a vindication of the PTI position demanding “give peace a chance”. PTI putting forward a policy of extricating from the US War on Terror in order to seek dialogue, truth and reconciliation, an initiative that proved positive under Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

The text of the Resolution of the APC can be read on this link http://www.newspakistan.pk/2013/09/09/text-resolution-parties-conference/

Meanwhile in Britain, George Monbiot, a writer known for his environmental and political activism launched the verbal equivalent of a drone strike today on US governments past and present. The Guardian columnist blew up the cosy picture of a benevolent US upholding human rights and promoting peace to paint instead “a rogue state” mired in dirt. He stated;

You could almost pity these people. For 67 years successive US governments have resisted calls to reform the UN Security Council. They’ve defended a system which grants five nations a veto over world affairs, reducing all others to impotent spectators. They have abused the powers and trust with which they have been vested. They have collaborated with the other four permanent members (the UK, Russia, China and France) in a colonial carve-up, through which these nations can pursue their own corrupt interests at the expense of peace and global justice.

The US has already devastated the lives of many civilians in Waziristan through drone strikes so it is easy to understand the need to disengage from the WOT. Aside from casualties, communities in areas at high risk from drones and caught between the Pakistan army and Taliban conflict have been displaced, this has halted normal family life and children’s education. A secure environment with minimal stress is essential for development.

Governments must stop denying families the right to a peaceful existence. They also need to wake up and stop “shooting the messenger” for reporting on the serious “blowback” caused by US drone strikes targeting “alleged” insurgents in Pakistan. Here are three examples of blowback.

Ten climbers of different nationalities were shot dead at Nanga Parbat basecamp by militants dressed as local security forces. This was said to be in direct retaliation for the killing of Taliban leader, Maulvi Wali ur -Rehman, second in command, annhilated in a drone strike on a house in Miranshah, North Waziristan in May. Locals and foreigners seeking adventure tourism have paid with their lives. Spokesperson Ehsanullah Ehsan was reported to have spoken to Agence France press claiming the hikers were killed by Taliban faction, Junood ul -Hifsa  in response to American missile attacks https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/24-2

In June, DAWN media reported that a new militant group by the name of Ansarul Mujahideen claimed responsibility for an attack on Parachinar which left at least 57 dead and around 180 injured. Spokesman for Ansarul Mujahideen, Abu Baseer, said the group had been set up to respond to US drone strikes and that the organisation was “very clear” about its mission, “with each drone attack, we will be responding with a suicide attack…we have done it and shown it” http://dawn.com/news/1032326/anti-drone-militant-group-claims-parachinar-twin-blasts

Avenging death is seen as a matter of honour and very much part of the culture of the Tribal Areas. “Violence breeds violence” is a fact long highlighted by anti -drone campaigners that have warned that each new drone strike leads to radicalization of more young people and revenge attacks.

Governments in both Pakistan and US have repeatedly downplayed blowback from drone strikes. My late colleague, Pakistani investigative journalist Saleem Shahzad highlighted a third form of blowback which may have led to his kidnapping, torture and murder. He dared to write about divisions within Pakistan armed services due to drone attacks. Such was the anger by some regarding deaths of civilians and failure of Pakistan government to deal with US violation of sovereignty that individuals within the military/navy were allegedly ACTIVELY recruiting insurgent sympathizers into the services!

Pakistan government was viewed then by many to be playing both sides, condemning drone strikes but sharing intelligence to aid targeted killing. Musharaff admitted his part in a recent video interview though cables previously released by Wikileaks had indicated his role. Let us reflect on the attack on Mehran Navy base with alleged insider help. Saleem Shahzad’s last interview can be seen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTM6gyHxbo

After yesterday’s APC there is now hope for positive change with a new initiative to take the drone issue to the UN. Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) are reported to “welcome the dialogue offer and has a positive outlook about the joint communiqué,” the message from Shahid Shahidullah, a Pakistani Taliban spokesman to Geo News. Political Commission member, Ehsanullah Ehsan gave his comments to the Express Tribune highlighting that “the Government will also have to convince the army and to decide a road-map for the talks”. There was also mention of an exchange of letters between TTP and Nawaz Sharif and the possibility that “Jamaat-e-Islami and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) could play a serious role in the proposed dialogue” http://tribune.com.pk/story/602245/renewed-correspondence-ttp-welcomes-unanimous-resolution/

BBC reported that Ben Emmerson, a United Nations human rights special rapporteur, launched an inquiry into drones in January, saying that their use “represents a real challenge to the framework of international law”. Mr Emmerson has already paid a visit to Pakistan. It is hoped then that alongside addressing civilian casualties, he will adopt a common sense approach, recognize the danger of retaliation attacks and hold US accountable for any attempts to sabotage peace efforts through a continuation of drone strikes.

On a visit to Islamabad last month John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, said that drone strikes in Pakistan could end “very soon”. NOW would seem a very good time to make that happen!

Carol Anne Grayson is an independent writer/researcher on global health/human rights and is Executive Producer of the Oscar nominated, Incident in New Baghdad.  Carol was awarded the ESRC, Michael Young Prize for Research 2009, and the COTT ‘Action = Life’ Human Rights Award’ for “upholding truth and justice”. The author is also a survivor of US “collateral damage”.