Illustration by Faraz Aamer Khan/Dawn.com

Writing for the Atlantic, three American academics posed a challenge in their article titled: “You Say Pakistanis All Hate the Drone War? Prove It.” I thought I did prove it a few weeks ago. But I welcome the opportunity to elaborate even further.

The American academics are convinced that a large number of Pakistanis are ignorant of drone strikes, and that another sufficiently large number of Pakistanis support the American drone strikes on Pakistani territory. The academics have relied on a data set by Pew Global Attitudes Project to reach these conclusions. I have demonstrated in an earlier submission that their conclusions are not supported by data. I further illustrate here that the data set is deficient in answering questions of such wide implications.

Let me begin by answering the question, “how many Pakistanis support drone strikes?” Using the same data set as the one used by the American academics I found no more than the 20 respondents out of the 2,000 (i.e., 1 per cent) surveyed by the Pew Global Attitudes Project who truly supported the drone war. Let me explain: if we consider only those respondents who were aware of the drone strikes and who considered drones to be a good thing and went ahead with supporting the drone strikes, they add up to only 20, which is a much smaller number than the one estimated by the American academics.

I would also like to mention that Pew’s questionnaire is deficient in several ways. For instance, some key questions about drones are convoluted while other questions force respondents to either support or oppose the drone attacks. The questionnaire does not allow respondents to declare indifference, i.e., neither support nor oppose drone strikes, which may be the reason why so many chose the option ‘Don’t Know’ or refused to answer the question. I am of the view that the ‘Don’t know’ option in the data set is capturing ignorance of, indifference to, and the refusal to answer questions about drone attacks. Thus, the data set imposes restrictions on one’s ability to infer from it.

Let me first make it clear that my opposition to drone attacks is not a disguised support for the Taliban. I consider Taliban to be murderous thugs who pose a clear and present danger to Pakistani people and the State. I am, however, also convinced that the American drone attacks weaken the efforts by the Pakistani State and the civil society to confront the menace head-on.

Pew data limitations

Data analysis is somewhat similar to being interrogated by an intelligence agency in the dungeons of the Lahore Fort. Given enough servings of torture, eventually the suspect, in our case the data, will say whatever the interrogator wants.  The American academics have also acted like Punjab Police. First, they have tortured data enough to ensure it sang their ideological song. Second, just like the Pakistani Police, they have discarded useful evidence that contradicted their assumptions.

The Pew data is not sufficient to support the conclusions drawn by the American academics. In addition to the data deficiencies I have mentioned in my earlier blog, let me explain my additional concerns about the data and the methods used. The Pew Centre’s questionnaire posed a convoluted question about the support for drone attacks, which suggested to the respondents that the drones will be managed by the Pakistani authorities and not the Americans. Even with a highly misleading question, only 23 per cent reported the support for drone attacks whereas another 32 per cent registered outright opposition to the drone attacks (see the table below).

Support or oppose drone strikes Freq. Percent
support 454 22.70
oppose 648 32.40
don't know 860 43.00
refused 38 1.90
Total 2,000 100
What is not obvious from the above table is that the option ‘don’t know’ is not read to the respondent. It was up to the interviewer to assign ‘don’t know’ or ‘refused’ as a response to those who neither supported nor opposed drone strikes. I am doubtful of the manner in which the interviewers decided upon ‘don’t know’ as the response, whereas I see this as a simple refusal to answer the question.


Comments are closed.

Comments (42)

aabdul
February 1, 2013 3:14 am
TTP has killed more people than Drone attacks, but many Pakistanis support TTP. Pak military has taken Pakistanis for a ride, but all Pakistanis support military. So, if you poll what Pakistanis think, the data may not mean much.
aabdul
February 1, 2013 3:12 am
Pakistanis do not support anything that disagrees with their view, even if those views are totally flawed.
Silajit
January 31, 2013 6:38 pm
The drones fly at the speed of a World War ONE plane. Shooting them down is just a matter of deciding to do so. And as far as “I am, however, also convinced that the American drone attacks weaken the efforts by the Pakistani State and the civil society to confront the menace head-on.”, I disagree. On the face of it, the establishment claims that they don’t have the resources to go after them. Of course, when resources are provided, they have been used to purchase amongst other things: harpoon anti ship missiles. So there is no intention, leave aside effort from the Pakistani side to tackle the menace. Unlike India, the US is not going to sit by idly while terrorists cross the border and kill their troops.
9present)
January 31, 2013 5:59 pm
abdulazeem, we are worlds apart in many ways, but what you write here makes us brothers. Shukria!
9present)
January 31, 2013 5:53 pm
1. What you say sounds good, but you're naive. In order to shoot something down it first must be detected and tracked. F-16's and (present) air defense systems are not capable of reliably finding and targeting small objects flying at at treetop level . . . and drones are getting smaller and smaller every day! 2. Your government & your military, have their own agendas and internal fiefdoms, all centered pelf and personal power - money and its acquisition. They are more concerned with their own current, concrete personal economics than they are with your and my abstract "Freedom". 3. It's very probable that the CIA has it's fingers deep OUR government and military here in the USA . . . so what does that say about yours?
David Timm
January 31, 2013 5:25 pm
Not yet, they don't.
David Timm
January 31, 2013 5:24 pm
Maybe not today, Omar, because so few nations own and operate them. It will, however, be a different story tomorrow when, like firearms, they proliferate ---as they inevitably will --- into the hands of corporations, warlords, criminals, psychopaths, terrorists, etc. When, as they will, surveillance and extra-judicial executions become commonplace, we'll fervently wish for a return of (these) good days.
Atif
January 31, 2013 3:27 pm
the writer has made it amply clear, that this "don't know" is a questionable thing. These may be downright illiterate people who haven't had any information about what's going on or as pointed out by the author, a wrong question put forward.
Atif
January 31, 2013 3:23 pm
yup. they should continue in Delhi.
Mustafa Razavi
January 31, 2013 1:42 pm
Why don't you conduct a survey in India about Mumbai attacks and Gujarat genocide combined.
Mustafa Razavi
January 31, 2013 1:34 pm
I think you are thinking of India as the world, the world is a little bit larger than India.
Dr Mazhar
January 31, 2013 11:40 am
I laughed a lot when I heard in news that security council of UN gave permission for drone attacks that means US has been doing another violations against UN laws as US started drone attackes in pakistan in 2006 or US does not need any permission to do anything with this world.
Mubashir
January 31, 2013 11:35 am
Large percentage of Pakistanis lives in village so they don't know about drone attacks. Another percentage of citizens do not read newspaper or they do not have updates on current issues,so they do not have clear opinion on drones. Also this question doesn't matter whether they like drone or not. The question should be like that whether drones are legal or not. They are killing the innocents more than the terrorists, whom they are trying to protect ? Innocents are killed by their own hands and also by terrorists,its like a double edge sword.
Dr Mazhar
January 31, 2013 11:35 am
Dear Rajesh, If these attacks are on Indian territory than what will be your percentage guess?
Mikal
January 31, 2013 11:06 am
Because 90% of people do not have drones flying over their heads, bombing their villages, their homes, their weddings.
Mustafa Moiz
January 31, 2013 10:16 am
Why would we take worldwide data?
Palvasha von Hassell
January 31, 2013 9:52 am
Well done to Murtaza Haider. So glad the UN has finally taken up this issue. Drones are terrorizing a whole region for gains that are questionable at best. High time people united in efforts to stop their use.
Omar
January 31, 2013 8:40 am
it doesn't concern the worldwide people, does it?
Rajesh
January 31, 2013 7:52 am
If we take worldwide data, we will find 90% of the people will support the drone strikes
sdf
January 31, 2013 6:24 am
I feel your overall conclusion is as unfounded as theirs. What does it mean when a person supports drones and at the same time thinks it a "bad thing". Why are we ignoring these people, and focusing on the 20 who think drones are a good thing? It is SUPPORT that matters: Do we SUPPORT drones or not? Ofcourse only a small odd fraction will think drone is a "good thing". There should have been some sort of control question perhaps. Replace drones with something else: Do you think war is a good thing? and Do you support war against the taliban? You'd get the same result wouldn't you, because who thinks war is good, but we all support it at some time, and THAT is what matters isn't it? The correct percentages to look at are 22% support vs 32% who oppose, and we don't know what 46% really think . And that's that. We can't assign meaning to the refusals/don't know. But yes, its very strange that they didn't give a third option, it makes the whole thing rather uninformative. It raises more questions than it answers i.e. bad survey: we simply don't know what almost half of Pakistanis think.
Udayakumar
January 31, 2013 4:55 am
Murtaza Haider has convinced me that drone strikes must continue. Has he taken a survey in Pakistan for the number of people supporting fanatic Islam, mad Mullas and barbaric Talibans? Has he taken a survey in Pakistan for the number of people supporting civilized behavior and respect for women? If one goes by the Pakistani statistics the world will remain a very unsafe place indeed.
suleman
January 31, 2013 4:40 am
Hmm, nice to read something fresh on the topic. And I also believe that just like the author, there are several people out there who consider drones to be bad without hating the US or having a soft corner for militants..
Ammar Sami
January 31, 2013 3:13 am
Discussion is the alternative, in previous history there are many examples which had been resolved by table talk, since these drone attacks continuously incerasing the Pakistan internal violence. So, immediate and fruitful negotiations are required.
Muhammad
January 31, 2013 3:10 am
All this is happening in Pakistan, because the Pakistani government is good for nothing.
Muhammad
January 31, 2013 3:08 am
No. Pakistani army or government is not capable of controling the TTP. I believe, drone attacks should continue.
Yahya
January 31, 2013 2:37 am
It is always a treat reading your article. Moreover, It does not matter how we consider the drone attacks untill they are serving the US purpose. They are considered to be deadly against the terrorists and it very much enjoys the blessings of the leadership.
Khan
January 31, 2013 1:50 am
Why are we even taklking about this? How hard it is to shoot down a drone? If the pakistan airforce cannot shot down a drone, then they must be waisting our money. On the other hand if the Pakistan airpower is capable of shooting down these droes, but it would not do so because the military power is also on the same page with USA . Also, it has a full backing of the govt. too. So why and what are we complaining about? The writer has got a lot of time on his hand and just trying to write now and then without looking at the big pictture.
Don Johnson
January 31, 2013 1:20 am
Talk is always about stopping the drone attacks but no talks about the alternatives like 200000 American Troops or carpet bombing. What would the collateral damage be then. The best solution would be for Pakistan to clean up its own house. The west found out what happens when you try to appease facism, 100 million dead during World ll.
abdulazeem
January 30, 2013 10:00 pm
If Pakistani government or army not able to stop these drones attacks, write down my word their homes will drone attachs in the future. Their evil action of drone attachs should be stop immediately. Who is the terrorists? Aazeem
Balaji Prasad
January 30, 2013 8:56 pm
Instead of having 1 survey about drone attacks, one should consider a joint survey that includes questions on drone attacks and suicide bombers, given that the latter is claimed (by the PTI) to be the result of the former. The results of this survey would be interesting.
Shayo
January 30, 2013 8:52 pm
I would like to see some stats based on reviews of the citizens of FATA. Those done on populations not actually affected seem meaningless.
Raj
January 30, 2013 7:24 pm
My friend stats ia a two edged sword. For the sake of arguments 715 out 0f 2000 is @ 36 % do not have any idea about drones Pakistan is making big hue and cry about. That implies 1/3 rd population do not have any kind of interest in drones at all and it is a failure on the part of media and Government could not inform or educate the mass about drones. Second thing 2000 out of how many million people for the sample data they consider is also important. This stats has no value whatsoever.
John the Baptist
January 30, 2013 6:26 pm
There are lies, damn lies and then statistics! Anyone who has taken marketing classes at a US university is taught how to lie effectively with statistics to sell something, a product or an idea--it is part of the academic culture at large.
malik1010
January 30, 2013 6:11 pm
I support drone attacks if they are killing terrorists.
anony
January 30, 2013 5:27 pm
An excellent article. Thank you.
Solomon2
January 30, 2013 5:04 pm
Mr. Haider sir, did you contact The Atlantic and offer them your rebuttal?
Omar
January 30, 2013 2:26 pm
A well presented and statistically based argument. As a business analyst, I fully agree that data is only as good as one wants it - It is not difficult to interpret a data set to a preconceived notion, as Murtaza has shown in this argument here. Quality of the primary research begins with the quality of the questions, which in Pew's case were not only misleading but also trying to deduce conclusions.
Cyrus Howell
January 30, 2013 1:56 pm
Was this written for Al-Jazeera? Pakistanis hate drones because they hate to feel powerless.
MAB
January 30, 2013 1:26 pm
Brilliant! I praise your work to counter the propaganda of the drone war preachers.
Sami Ullah Swati
January 30, 2013 12:57 pm
I commend your statistical synthesis of the data set Murtaza and salute your intent of clarification and interpretation based on soundness compared to what PEW did (bias). PEW need a training in how to avoid errors in sampling that arise due to sheer personal biases..Oppps American academics need the training. It it was me as an academic, I would have apologized for my persona bias dripping into my interpretation. Bravo Murtaza
Sandip
January 30, 2013 12:54 pm
I agree statistically no country would support Drone strikes but then what is the other alternative. It is like who would like to have army in there backyard. No one will support that either to have army all the time but then what is the solution. If we stop drone attacks is Pakistan army and intelligence officers capable of tackling those terrorists?
khanm
January 30, 2013 12:52 pm
My dear the data speaks the volume. The irony is if you kill one person it is considered as murder if you kill in volume is classified as strategy. Senseless killing prevails in the world these days. Twenty or so is killed in Karachi only. It leads to only one thing that men is damn no good.