The CIA's unaccountable drone war claims another casualty

If Tariq Aziz, the 16-year-old soccer fan I met last week in Pakistan, was a dangerous Taliban terrorist, let the CIA prove it
Pratap Chatterjee
guardian.co.uk, Monday 7 November 2011 15.41 GMT
Article history

Tariq Aziz (centre, second row) attending a meeting about drones strikes in Waziristan, held in Islamabad, Pakistan on 28 October 2011. Three days later, the 16 year old was reported killed by a drone-launched missile. Photograph: Pratap Chatterjee/BIJ

Last Friday, I met a boy, just before he was assassinated by the CIA. Tariq Aziz was 16, a quiet young man from North Waziristan, who, like most teenagers, enjoyed soccer. Seventy-two hours later, a Hellfire missile is believed to have killed him as he was travelling in a car to meet his aunt in Miran Shah, to take her home after her wedding. Killed with him was his 12-year-old cousin, Waheed Khan.

Over 2,300 people in Pakistan have been killed by such missiles carried by drone aircraft such as the Predator and the Reaper, and launched by remote control from Langley, Virginia. Tariq and Waheed brought the known total of children killed in this way to 175, according to statistics maintained by the organisation I work for, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

The final order to kill is signed allegedly by Stephen Preston, the general counsel at the CIA headquarters. What evidence, I would like to know, does Mr Preston have against Tariq and Waheed? What right does he have to act as judge, jury and executioner of two teenage boys neither he nor his staff have ever met, let alone cross-examined, or given the opportunity to present witnesses?

It is not too late to call for a prosecution and trial of whoever pushed the button and the US government officials who gave the order: that is, Mr Preston and his boss, President Barack Obama.

There are many people whom I know who can appear as witnesses in this trial. We – a pair of reporters, together with several lawyers from Britain, Pakistan and the US – met the victim and dozens of other young men from North Waziristan for dinner at the Margalla hotel in Islamabad on Thursday 27 October. We talked about their local soccer teams, which they proudly related were named for Brazil, New Zealand and other nations, which they had heard about but never visited.
The next morning, I filmed young Tariq walking into a conference hall to greet his elders. I reviewed the tape after he was killed to see what was recorded of some of his last moments: he walks shyly and greets the Waziri elders in the traditional style by briefly touching their chests. With his friends, he walks to a set of chairs towards the back of the hall, and they argue briefly about where each of them will sit. Over the course of the morning, Tariq appears again in many photographs that dozens of those present took, always sitting quietly and listening intently.

Tariq was attending a "Waziristan Grand Jirga" on behalf of drone strike victims in Pakistan, which was held at the Margalla hotel the following day. As is the Pashtun custom, the young men, each of whom had lost a friend or relative in a drone strike, did not speak. For four hours, the Waziri elders debated the drone war, and then they listened to a resolution condemning the attacks, read out by Mirza Shahzad Akbar, a lawyer from the Foundation for Fundamental Rights. The group voted for this unanimously.

Neil Williams, a volunteer from Reprieve, the British legal charity, sat down and chatted with Tariq after the jirga was over. Together, they traveled in a van to the Pakistani parliament for a protest rally against drone strikes led by Imran Khan, a former cricketer, and now the leader of the Tehreek-e-Insaaf political party.

The next day, the group returned home to Waziristan. On Monday, Tariq was killed, according to his uncle Noor Kalam.

The question I would pose to the jury is this: would a terrorist suspect come to a public meeting and converse openly with foreign lawyers and reporters, and allow himself to be photographed and interviewed? More importantly, since he was so easily available, why could Tariq not have been detained in Islamabad, when we spent 48 hours together? Neither Tariz Aziz nor the lawyers attending this meeting had a highly trained private security detail that could have put up resistance.
Attending that jirga, however, were Clive Stafford Smith and Tara Murray, two US lawyers who trained at Columbia and Harvard. They tell me, unequivocally, that US law is based on the fact that every person is innocent until proven guilty. Why was Tariq, even if a terrorist suspect, not offered an opportunity to defend himself?

Let me offer important alternative argument – the US government has a record of making terrible mistakes in this covert war. On 2 September 2010, the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan claimed to have killed Muhammad Amin, the alleged Taliban deputy governor of Takhar province in Afghanistan, in a drone strike. There was only one problem: Michael Semple, a Taliban expert at Harvard University, subsequently interviewed Muhammad Amin and confirmed that he was alive and well and living in Pakistan in March 2011.

The man who was killed was Zabet Amanullah, who was out campaigning in parliamentary elections – along with nine of his fellow election workers. This was confirmed by exhaustive research conducted by Kate Clark, a former BBC correspondent in Kabul who now works for the Afghanistan Analysts Network, who had met with Zabet Amanullah in 2008. The error could have been avoided, Clark points out in her report, if US military intelligence officers had just been "watching election coverage on television", instead of living in its "parallel world" remote from "normal, everyday world of Afghan politics".

If Barack Obama's CIA believed in justice and judicial process, they could have attended the Islamabad jirga last Friday and met with Tariq. It was, after all, an open meeting. They could have arrested and charged Tariq with the help of the Pakistani police. If a prosecution is ever mounted over the death of Tariq, those of us who met him on several occasions last week would be happy to testify to the character of the young man that we had met. But if the CIA has evidence to the contrary, it should present it to the world.

Unless the CIA can prove that Tariq Aziz posed an imminent threat (as the White House's legal advice stipulates a targeted killing must in order for an attack to be carried out), or that he was a key planner in a war against the US or Pakistan, the killing of this 16 year old was murder, and any jury should convict the CIA accordingly.

A group of Pakistanis met in Islamabad late last month to discuss the impact of U.S. drone strikes in their communities. One of the attendees was a 16-year-old boy named Tariq Aziz, who had volunteered to learn photography to begin documenting drone strikes near his home. Within 72 hours of the meeting, Aziz was killed in a U.S. drone strike. His 12-year-old cousin was also killed in the Oct. 31 attack. "People were aware of the threat to them. Yet they volunteered—Tariq, in particular, because he, at his age in that remote community, was familiar with computers, was excited about the idea of being able to document the civilian casualties," says reporter Pratap Chatterjee, who met Aziz days before he was killed. As part of a larger investigation on the CIA-led U.S. covert drone war, Chatterjee and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports that drone strikes in Pakistan have killed at least 392 civilians, including 175 children. "I question as to whether the CIA is really attempting to identify people before they kill them," he says. "It would have been so easy for the CIA, the ISI, to come question these kids, to have taken them aside, even put them in jail or interrogated them... But instead they chose to kill them."

"It would have been so easy for the CIA, the ISI, to come question these kids, to have taken them aside, even put them in jail or interrogated them... But instead they chose to kill them."

Frazzled wrote:Sad it didn't have a fusion bomb warhead? Sad Pakistan's intelligence agency is playing the terrorism game and killing NATO troops? Sad this article is so biased its not funny?

sarpedons-right-hand wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Sad it didn't have a fusion bomb warhead? Sad Pakistan's intelligence agency is playing the terrorism game and killing NATO troops? Sad this article is so biased its not funny?

Nope, sad that a 16 year old boy and his 12 year old cousin were killed...Biased reporting or not, that's just sad. Someone should be held accountable, but it won't be whoever pulled the trigger. Drones being piloted by Drones, ironic no?

sarpedons-right-hand wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Sad it didn't have a fusion bomb warhead? Sad Pakistan's intelligence agency is playing the terrorism game and killing NATO troops? Sad this article is so biased its not funny?

Nope, sad that a 16 year old boy and his 12 year old cousin were killed...Biased reporting or not, that's just sad. Someone should be held accountable, but it won't be whoever pulled the trigger. Drones being piloted by Drones, ironic no?

mattyrm wrote: I don't believe he was either innocent, or that he was travelling to his aunts house.

Even if you don't believe that the government care about innocent lives (they probably don't very much) they most definitely do care about money. Why launch hellfire missiles at boys who are merely visiting their aunts?

The US/UK do at least attempt to take the moral high ground. We train our forces well, demand that they not shoot innocent people, impose strict ROE on all of our forces, and have due process and criminal trials for those that we deem to have acted irresponsibly. I know for a fact that the overwhelming majority of our military strikes are intelligence led. You think they waste good money by just dropping ordanance willy nilly on anybody and everyone?

I don't think that our government's are faultless and shining beacons of light, but I trust them far more than Pakistan's government.

I don't think our soldiers and intelligence operatives are entirely competent and blameless, but I trust them far more than their Pakistani counterparts.

I don't trust The Guardian, a ridiculously left leaning rag, that recently had to print an apology, to that marvel of journalistic integrity, The Sun!

I don't trust Pratap Chatterjee, author of Halliburton's Army: How A Well-Connected Texas Oil Company Revolutionized The Way America Makes War, Iraq, Inc : A Profitable Occupation and Gold, Greed, and Genocide.

I care nothing for this boys life. I trust our intelligence community more than I trust any of the above, and I presume that he deserved it. There is no smoke without fire, and in the intelligence world, that is very very often the case. You mix in bad circles, you tend to get a bad reputation.

And on the very slim chance that he didn't, well, its regrettable, but there's a war on don't you know.

Frazzled wrote:

mattyrm wrote: I don't believe he was either innocent, or that he was travelling to his aunts house.

Even if you don't believe that the government care about innocent lives (they probably don't very much) they most definitely do care about money. Why launch hellfire missiles at boys who are merely visiting their aunts?

The US/UK do at least attempt to take the moral high ground. We train our forces well, demand that they not shoot innocent people, impose strict ROE on all of our forces, and have due process and criminal trials for those that we deem to have acted irresponsibly. I know for a fact that the overwhelming majority of our military strikes are intelligence led. You think they waste good money by just dropping ordanance willy nilly on anybody and everyone?

I don't think that our government's are faultless and shining beacons of light, but I trust them far more than Pakistan's government.

I don't think our soldiers and intelligence operatives are entirely competent and blameless, but I trust them far more than their Pakistani counterparts.

I don't trust The Guardian, a ridiculously left leaning rag, that recently had to print an apology, to that marvel of journalistic integrity, The Sun!

I don't trust Pratap Chatterjee, author of Halliburton's Army: How A Well-Connected Texas Oil Company Revolutionized The Way America Makes War, Iraq, Inc : A Profitable Occupation and Gold, Greed, and Genocide.

I care nothing for this boys life. I trust our intelligence community more than I trust any of the above, and I presume that he deserved it. There is no smoke without fire, and in the intelligence world, that is very very often the case. You mix in bad circles, you tend to get a bad reputation.

And on the very slim chance that he didn't, well, its regrettable, but there's a war on don't you know.

What Matty the Peacenik said.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

mattyrm wrote: I don't believe he was either innocent, or that he was travelling to his aunts house.

Even if you don't believe that the government care about innocent lives (they probably don't very much) they most definitely do care about money. Why launch hellfire missiles at boys who are merely visiting their aunts?

The US/UK do at least attempt to take the moral high ground. We train our forces well, demand that they not shoot innocent people, impose strict ROE on all of our forces, and have due process and criminal trials for those that we deem to have acted irresponsibly. I know for a fact that the overwhelming majority of our military strikes are intelligence led. You think they waste good money by just dropping ordanance willy nilly on anybody and everyone?

I don't think that our government's are faultless and shining beacons of light, but I trust them far more than Pakistan's government.

I don't think our soldiers and intelligence operatives are entirely competent and blameless, but I trust them far more than their Pakistani counterparts.

I don't trust The Guardian, a ridiculously left leaning rag, that recently had to print an apology, to that marvel of journalistic integrity, The Sun!

I don't trust Pratap Chatterjee, author of Halliburton's Army: How A Well-Connected Texas Oil Company Revolutionized The Way America Makes War, Iraq, Inc : A Profitable Occupation and Gold, Greed, and Genocide.

I care nothing for this boys life. I trust our intelligence community more than I trust any of the above, and I presume that he deserved it. There is no smoke without fire, and in the intelligence world, that is very very often the case. You mix in bad circles, you tend to get a bad reputation.

And on the very slim chance that he didn't, well, its regrettable, but there's a war on don't you know.

What Matty the Peacenik said.

It's reassuring to know that so few of you care about 'that boys life'. The lack of compassion in conservatism is as strong as ever. It's good to know that you people have a role in maintaining the world order. I can't imagine what would happen if you all had hearts as big as your bullets.

On Monday, Tariq was killed, according to his uncle Noor Kalam.

sarpedons-right-hand wrote:Military Intelligence?! Riiiight. You know what, a 12 year old kid is most likely innocent, as is his cousin. Wether or not they were travelling to an Aunts house is pretty much not important. As for the Armed forces not wasting money? Behold some truly wasteful American Spending:

Frazzled wrote:No refresh for YOU!

Here's the fun part. I believe absolutely nothing in that article, other than a missile may or may not have been fired at someone. but to your point, even then, I don't care.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:No refresh for YOU!

Here's the fun part. I believe absolutely nothing in that article, other than a missile may or may not have been fired at someone. but to your point, even then, I don't care.

I see you have chosen your side in the class war!

The V-22 Osprey aircraft is way over budget, way behind schedule, and falling way short of the benefits it was supposed to deliver. Cancelling it and stopping the wasteful money drain would save over $6 billion by 2015.

- According to the GAO, the Pentagon could save $184.5 billion by 2015 if they stopped buying military parts and equipment that are never used or are obsolete if they made some simple enhancements to their purchasing processes.

The same logic applies to the Expeditionary Force Fighting Vehicle which is 14 YEARS behind schedule and is viewed in its current state as "highly unreliable." Cancel this program and save over $16 billion by 2015.

The Space Tracking Surveillance System satellite system has failed to deliver on its promises, is behind schedule, and suffers significant cost overruns. More importantly, its job can be handled by much less expensive, proven technology, according to an internal Defense Department analysis.

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:No refresh for YOU!

Here's the fun part. I believe absolutely nothing in that article, other than a missile may or may not have been fired at someone. but to your point, even then, I don't care.

I see you have chosen your side in the class war!

I'm Frazzled, and I'm a 96.5784878256145687192471669544448541%er!

sarpedons-right-hand wrote:Completely agree. It's unjustified, and worse than that, its cowardly..

Oh I'm sure the usual bullgak will be trotted out: "It was a mistake, bad intelligence, misfiring Drone etc etc" Disgraceful, and no one will be held accountable. Itll just be swept under a carpet of red-tape and apologists....

How sad.....

Drones don't misfire, it not that it couldn't happen, it's just that it doesn't. I doubt the CIA has the same constraints as military drones, but targets cannot be solely identified by the imaging sensors on the drone itself. Weirdly everybody looks pretty much the same in IR. The difference really is that the CIA isn't generally held accountable for the collateral damage they cause. However I doubt this person was a blameless innocent if he was personally targeted.
In other words, this likely wasn't a mistake; the kid was probably not innocent; and no one will be held feet to the fire.

I couldn't care less about this kid. His age is irrelevant, I've seen 9 year olds emplace and detonate bombs. Innocence isn't limited by age. A 15 year old "probably" fired the rocket that killed two of my friends in Najaf, in other words. He's 16, so what: feth him.

I couldn't care less about this kid. His age is irrelevant, I've seen 9 year olds emplace and detonate bombs. Innocence isn't limited by age. A 15 year old "probably" fired the rocket that killed two of my friends in Najaf, in other words. He's 16, so what: feth him.

12 year old who wanted practice with his camera doesn't require much more then that