Another factor that fueled anti-American sentiment during the elections was the fact that Pakistan’s military has never gotten over the U.S.’s May 1, 2011 daring raid into Abbottadad to eliminate Osama bin Laden. The world’s most wanted terrorist was living deep in the country apparently with the consent and knowledge of the country’s intelligence service. The raid embarrassed and demoralized the average Pakistani, enraged the militants and left the government searching for explanations and answers. The winding down of America’s involvement in Afghanistan and the Obama administration’s increase use of drones served notice to Pakistan that it will no longer be paid billions for its forced partnership in the war of terror. Does President Obama’s pledge to curtail the use of drones serve as a signal to the new Pakistan government that it cannot continue to count on billions of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars? I believe that Pakistan’s fat American paydays are coming to an end.

The day before the President stood before the nation to discuss U.S. drone policy, the incoming Pakistani prime minister held a similar press conference. Nawaz Sharif promised to change the country’s foreign and national security policies once he is in office. He made it clear he would fight to end U.S. drone attacks on Pakistani soil. Sharif has the backing of the military in his efforts to stop U.S. drone attacks. Some commentators and experts in U.S.-Pakistan affairs believe that Sharif reached a secret agreement with the military and Taliban to halt the U.S. strikes in the Tribal Areas. A secret agreement would explain why the Taliban did not try to disrupt Sharif’s election campaign while attacking the other candidates’ campaigns. 

Pakistan denounced President Obama’s statements that the U.S. would continue to use drones, though with constraint, only to save lives . A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry reiterated the country’s objections to drone strikes; saying that they are counter-productive, kill innocent civilians, have human rights implications, and violate national and international law. However, the ministry did welcome the President’s implied recognition that force alone would not resolve the terrorist threat. Pakistan has consistently criticized America’s use of drones to target militants hiding out in its territory. The Pakistan has not offered to take meaningful steps that it would eradicate the terrorist breeding grounds and camps along the Afghan border.

It is important to understand the context in which the President delivered his speech. Dan Balz in his piece in the Washington Post’s “The Take” tries to put the speech into proper perspective. In his post entitled “Obama Rebalances his Course on War” Balz explores some of the political forces that compelled the President to address the nation about the U.S.’s use of drones. In part Balz stated the following:

“The speech came at a time when he has been under fire for his administration’s extensive use of drones to kill suspected terrorists, a practice that goes beyond anything any previous president has done. It also came amid revelations that his administration had attempted to criminalize the work of reporters in its effort to plug leaks. He was also mindful that he has failed to fulfill an early campaign promise to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama’s many facets also were on display in Thursday’s speech: liberal idealist, civil libertarian, constitutional scholar, pragmatist and, perhaps most relevant, commander in chief in the middle of a war”.

After reading the post I seriously considered the possibility that maybe President Obama enunciated a policy that would improve his approval ratings. I am  convinced that American drone usage policy is not likely to change that much. Up to this point the use of drones has proven to be a win-win situation for the Obama Administration. The successful targeting of terror suspects without any politically negative collateral damage enhances the President reputation as being tough on terror. Many believe that by attacking the terrorists on foreign soil America lessen the chances that foreign terrorists will successful stage a major attack here. This makes sense though there is no direct evidence that a drone attack has actually thwarted a planned attack on U.S. soil. 

Wednesday morning the major news outlets reported another drone strike in Pakistan. I thought it odd that another strike had come so soon on the heels of the President’s speech. The strike dealt a serious blow  to the Pakistani Taliban, which operates along the no-man’s land along the Afghanistan border. The reports stated that Wali ur-Redman, the Taliban’s second in command, along with other officials were killed in a targeted raid. A Pakistani official confirmed that the deputy commander was one of the person’s killed when a missile slammed into the house. It is unclear if this attack represent’s the implementation of the President’s new drone program or an exception to the new policy. What has not changed is the fact that drones are excellent killing machines