Yesterday, I made a statement that it appeared that the Pakistani government was implicitly alright with the use of US drone predator missile attacks in their territory, as long they avoided civilian casualties. While according to statements by Pakistan's Foreign Ministry and several members of the country's ruling coalition, this is not completely true. The Foreign Ministry and several parliament members requested the appearance of US Ambassador Anne Patterson so they could voice their protest of such measures to the US government. The For Ministry stated that the missile attacks should 'stop immediately’ as they argued that not only were they undermining Pakistani sovereignty and legitimacy, they were just adding fuel to the fire and turning the whole Pakistani populace against the US/NATO forces in Afghanistan. A report stated that many Pakistani's even blamed the recent Marriot Hotel attack in Islamabad on US air strikes.
The US military/government and the Pakistani military/government are both smashed tightly between a rock and a hard place. The US desires to stabilize Afghanistan and keep its troops safe and they believe one of the best way to do this is to go after the Taliban and Al Qaeda elements were ever they may be, as was shown by a similar US strike in Syria against militant forces. The Pakistani government/military are fighting for legitimacy and the right to govern their own lands. Though we all know the issue is more complicated than just these two aims for each side, I would like to think that these goals can have one combined strategy. Afterall, the US would love to have a stronger Pakistani government that could effectively rule over all its sovereign territory and the Pakistani government needs some help in putting down the Taliban, at least to a point where many of them would be forced to negotiate.
How are the goals of the Pakistani government/military and US government/military congruent? Different?
