Abstract

Pakistan and the United States have had a history of complex relations since the former's inception. After the 9/11 attacks, changes were observed in the foreign policy of the United States towards Pakistan, followed by a strategic shift in Pakistan’s approach towards its ally in Afghanistan. This study aims to analyze the implications of the post-9/11 Pak-U.S. alliance by examining the impacts of terrorism and U.S. drone strikes on Pakistan’s national security. The theoretical framework focuses on John Mearsheimer’s theory of offensive realism. The study employs qualitative research methodology and focuses on secondary data. This research argues that as a result of the post-9/11 Pak-U.S. alliance, the national security of Pakistan was compromised. This study opines that a pragmatic foreign policy combined with a comprehensive national security approach is of paramount importance to Pakistan in order to survive and progress.

Key Words

Afghanistan, Alliance, Drone Strikes, FATA, Foreign Policy, Military Campaign, National Security, Pakistan, Suicide Attacks, Terrorism, United States

Introduction

Since the beginning, relations between the United States and Pakistan have been sporadic. When there was a convergence of interests, the two states' governments worked together. Both parties opposed the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War, and the Pakistani government chose to support American military operations in Afghanistan after 9/11. The United States launched a campaign to combat any actor they deemed a threat to their national security following the 9/11 attacks. They participated in many military operations across the world, especially in Afghanistan and the Middle East. They looked for allies in places close to their areas of activity during this time, and Pakistan was one of the states in a highly advantageous location for them. The sanctions imposed by the United States on Pakistan due to its exhibition of nuclear weapons in retaliation for India's 1998 nuclear detonations put the country in a precarious position at the time.  Following 9/11, the U.S. and Pakistani governments became tight, and Pakistan was viewed as a key regional ally of the United States. Pakistan's national security was consequently jeopardized.

The purpose of this study is to investigate how Pakistan's alliance with the United States since 9/11 has affected its national security in relation to terrorism and American drone strikes.  It focuses on how Pakistan's partnership with the United States led to the emergence of terrorism and how it increased domestic instability and fatalities. Furthermore, by concentrating on the deaths brought on by the American drone strikes, especially in Pakistan's tribal regions, this study will also look at the ramifications for Pakistan's national security.




Background of the Study

Following attaining independence, Pakistan had a number of difficulties and needed outside help. The United States backed Pakistan's friendly posture, but only because it saw Pakistan as a regional partner and wanted to work with them to keep communism in check. For military, political, and economic reasons, Pakistan wanted to be friends with the United States. The tenth-largest Muslim country and a vital component of the United States' global network connecting Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, Pakistan played a significant role in the early years of the Cold War as a key ally for the US (Hussain, 2021).

While the United States wanted the alliance for a specific period of time in order to subdue the interests of the communist Soviet Union, Pakistan's main interests in having an alliance with the United States during the Cold War were security, economy, and diplomatic support on the international stage. During the Cold War, the interests of both states converged, and both states, with the help of some other international state actors, achieved their desired objectives. While the United States was trying to contain communism, Pakistan was dealing with economic and security issues, and the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan presented Pakistan with an opportunity to improve relations with the United States, which was important for the military and the economy. The foreign policy of Pakistan towards the U.S. in this era changed, and both states got close to each other (Stewart, 2021).

Pakistan was in a tough spot after 9/11; sanctions were in place, and the country's economy was struggling. However, in order to support their military campaign in Afghanistan after 9/11, the United States required someone in the area near Afghanistan. The decision-makers of both parties got closer once again and the government of Pakistan became the frontline ally of the U.S. in their military campaign in Afghanistan. Pakistan was subject to four distinct sanctions before the events of September 11. Bush instituted the first through the Pressler Amendment, which severed Pakistan's access to financial and military help. Pakistan displayed its nuclear weapons in reaction to India's nuclear tests, prompting the second to be implemented. Both the third and fourth were enacted as a result of the Democracy Law. The fourth was enacted in response to the purchase of missile technology from China by Pakistan's Ministry of Defense and Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO) (Jabeen, Mazhar, & Goraya, 2010).

As a result of the alliance forged post-9/11, Pakistan's national security was compromised. Terrorism emerged in Pakistan and organizations like the TTP (Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan) began to operate by employing violent strategies. Moreover, the drone campaigns of the U.S. led to substantial civilian casualties, particularly in the tribal regions of Pakistan.




Research Question

? What were the impacts of terrorism and U.S. drone strikes on Pakistan's national security as implications of its post-9/11 alliance with the U.S.? 




Research Objectives

? To explore how a strategic alliance was formed between Pakistan and the U.S. post 9/11.

? To understand how terrorism emerged as a consequence of the strategic alliance between Pakistan and the U.S.

? To examine how terrorism contributed to the loss of lives and jeopardized internal stability.

? To analyze the casualties caused by the U.S drone strikes, particularly in the tribal areas of Pakistan.




Theoretical Framework

The research's theoretical framework centers on Offensive Realism, an international relations theory that, in and of itself, is a subset of Realism, which emphasizes the competitive and conflictual aspects of international affairs. John Mearsheimer, 2001 was a political scientist who created the theory of offensive realism. States are motivated by the ambition to attain regional or global hegemony, according to offensive realism, which discusses the power-seeking behavior of states in anarchic societies. For these reasons, states are concerned with relative gains and occasionally use coercive methods to accomplish their objectives. According to this theory, the world is anarchic and power struggles occur between actors on the international stage. It discusses international anarchy, power struggles, and a lack of trust between international actors as well as the attempts made by states to secure themselves and accomplish their objectives. States seek power and take action to ensure their survival due to the chaotic nature of international relations. Since governments in the international arena cannot always predict the intentions of their opponents, they must rely on their military might to safeguard their own interests. A state's objective should be to increase its strength in relation to its adversaries (Mershiemer, 2001).

This paper analyzes the reasons behind the nexus developed between Pakistan and the U.S. post 9/11 and analyzes the ramifications of this alliance by focusing on the impacts of terrorism and U.S. drone attacks on the national security of Pakistan.

Research Methodology

This study's methodology is entirely qualitative; secondary data was gathered from books, articles, websites, and journals; information pertaining to Pakistan's national security was also gathered and analyzed in order to determine how the post-9/11 alliance affected Pakistan's national security.




Road Towards the Post 9/11 Alliance

Pakistan was dealing with a number of political and economic issues, and its slow growth rate fueled civil unrest. The United States placed a number of sanctions on Pakistan as a result of India's nuclear weapons being detonated in response. The sanctions imposed under the Pressler amendment, which decreased the country's yearly economic flow and affected its defense capabilities, caused Pakistan to become isolated internationally. Furthermore, Pakistan was subject to additional sanctions following the 1998 nuclear weapons explosion. The state's economy suffered as a result of these sanctions, and the US also convinced the G-7 to follow suit. Furthermore, a new set of sanctions was put in place following the 1999 military takeover due to the disruption of democratic processes. In the same period, the World Bank classified Pakistan as one of the world's severely indebted low-income states, along with Congo and Ethiopia (Singh, 2009).

The U.S. and Pakistani governments made the third decision to pursue an alliance policy in response to the 9/11 attacks. President Bush announced on September 20, 2001, that America would launch a worldwide military campaign and warned other nations in other parts of the world that they would be viewed as having allied themselves with the United States' enemies if they did not support the United States in its military campaign. This approach of the U.S. was a clear message to states like Pakistan involved in the domestic affairs of Afghanistan that they are either with them or against them (Asghar, 2015).

Right after 9/11, demand was raised with or against demand. President Musharraf was approached by the U.S. ambassador and asked to cut off relations with the Taliban and provide military bases for the U.S.-led forces to operate. The ambassador also talked about the economic and military assistance that can be arranged to become an ally in the war and the possibility of lifting up the sanctions (War on the Rocks, 2021).




Shift in the United States Foreign Policy and Pakistan’s Strategic Switch

The U.S. and Pakistan's foreign policies underwent significant changes after 9/11. Pakistan is a significant non-NATO ally despite accusations from both sides that it is dishonest. The U.S.'s main goals in the region after 9/11 were to defeat the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and to stop China's expansion, so it has a long-term strategic interest in developing strong relations with India. Pakistan's diplomatic and security strategy has been influenced by its adversarial relationship with India. Without Pakistan's assistance, the U.S. could not have been able to accomplish its goals in the region. Pakistan furnished the United States with intelligence assistance and secure routes. The U.S. provided Pakistan with about $30 billion in aid and assisted its soldiers in combating extremists (Yusuf, 2017).

Washington exerted tremendous pressure on Islamabad to join their military campaign immediately after 9/11 because Al-Qaeda had bases in Afghanistan and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had information about the internal political situation in Afghanistan. The Bush administration considered Islamabad's support to be crucial and wanted its help in Afghanistan, and in October 2001, as the United States prepared for military deployment in Afghanistan, they were granted permission to use Pakistani airspace for invading Afghanistan, as well as access to military bases and intelligence. In exchange, Washington lifted the pro-democracy and nuclear sanctions that had restrained Pakistan's economic growth. Musharraf in his September 19 speech to his nation declared that all this was for the sake of Pakistan, and not assisting the U.S. in its military campaign in Afghanistan can have adverse effects on the state and can further isolate Pakistan (Baxter, 2005).

In exchange for financial assistance and the repayment of a portion of Pakistan's debt, the United States supported Pakistan throughout its war in Afghanistan. When Musharraf agreed to help the United States, Washington immediately erased Pakistan's $1 billion debt to it. To top it all off, they helped Pakistan in other ways by using their connections in foreign banks. During their June 2003 meeting at Camp David, Bush gave Musharraf a three billion dollar aid plan that covered both the military and civilian sectors. The U.S. provided Pakistan with over $4 billion USD at year's end of 2004 (Markey, 2013).




Pakistan’s Importance for the U.S Military Campaign

Pakistan's potential as a supply conduit to the coalition forces in Afghanistan made its assistance to the United States crucial. Additionally, Pakistan and the Taliban had a long-standing alliance, and ISI, Pakistan's top intelligence organization, had extensive penetration within Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. This was extremely important to the United States because, in addition to being a supply line, the Pakistani intelligence community in Afghanistan was viewed by the Americans as a potential source of intelligence. Later on, when the war zone grew beyond Afghanistan and included Pakistan's tribal areas as a battlefield, Pakistan's significance only increased. Former FATA (Federally administered tribal areas) became the principal sanctuary for Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters to regain their strength and strike back in Afghanistan (Yusuf, 2009).

Figure 1

Afghanistan Supply Routes



Source: “https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/pakistan-reopens-nato-route-after-us-says-sorry-2472”




 

Figure 1 shows how the geography of Pakistan was used by the U.S. to supply their war machinery to Afghanistan and how important it was for them to maintain the supply chain that was of paramount importance for the survival of NATO and ISAF forces in Afghanistan. 

Figure 2

Key supply routes through KP and tribal areas.



Source: “https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-15901363”




 

Figure 2 shows the key supply routes that passed through Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan, it also shows the strategic locations of Pakistan’s tribal areas located close to Afghanistan.




AF-Pak Approach of the United States

The battlefield was not only limited to Afghanistan but Pakistan also became part of it because the militants used to hide in the tribal areas of Pakistan that were close to Afghanistan as shown in figure 2.

A new approach by the U.S. was observed and during the 2008 presidential campaign, the then Senator Obama stressed a new approach that could facilitate the military endeavors in Afghanistan. He said in one of his speeches, that the threat lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan. After being elected as president in 2008, Obama in one of his interviews spoke of a new foreign policy approach and instead of looking at the military campaign by looking at Afghanistan in Isolation, he emphasized that it should be seen through a regional lens and Pakistan should be focused. The AF-PAK concept was publicized by Obama's administration (Jafferlot, 2012).

After the 9/11 attacks, Pakistan was involved in a major international event because of the decisions taken by its leaders. International standing was restored and a massive influx of resources was observed because of siding with the U.S. in their military campaign in Afghanistan. Moreover, the involvement of Pakistani armed forces in military campaigns in the tribal areas of Pakistan made them adversaries of their former strategic allies. Economic weakness with a debt of 38 billion, along with the possible strategic threats from the U.S. and India, led to the decision to reverse its policy of supporting the Afghan Taliban. Only three nations recognized the Taliban's rule in Kabul, while the majority chose to ignore it. The Taliban were seen by Pakistan as a means of achieving its regional objectives. Pakistan's decision-makers supported the military operation called Enduring Freedom in November 2001 by allowing the U.S. to use its airspace, facilitating the logistical supply, and providing intelligence support to the U.S. armed forces. In return, it gained the recognition of the International community when its standing was low not just because of the military coup but also because of the display of nuclear weapons (Talbot, 2012).




Tribal Areas of Pakistan

The tribal territories of Pakistan were one of the loosely managed geographical parts of the state. Literacy rate was low in this section of the state and these areas became part of Pakistan under a special dispensation. The treatment of the inhabitants of tribal areas differed from that of other regions of the state in Pakistan. Pakistan's military endeavored to maintain firm control in the region. (FCR) Frontier crime regulation was employed in the tribal areas of Pakistan (Shehzad, 2011).

Figure 3

Tribal areas of Pakistan, bordering Afghanistan



SOURCE: https://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/2019/pakistans-tribal-areas-fata/index.html




 

Pakistan shares its 2nd longest border with Afghanistan. After the invasion, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda were pushed into the bordering zone with Pakistan presently (KP) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, then called the (NWFP), North West Frontier Province. Later on, this area of Pakistan became the hub of terrorists and was affected intensely by terror activities. In the 1st decade of the 21st century, Pakistan has been the largest sufferer of terror activities (Shahbaz, Shabbir, Malik, & Wolters, 2013). 




Consequences to Pakistan's Security as a result of the Alliance

In the first decade of the 21st century, Pakistan faced various challenges to its internal stability as a result of the decision to join the U.S. in its war campaign in Afghanistan. Pakistan has paid a heavy cost for its involvement in the U.S.-led war. In terms of human losses, Pakistan from 2002-2013 lost more than 52,000 lives including civilians, personnel from law enforcement agencies, and the military. Moreover, the economic damage endured by Pakistan has had negative consequences as well (Abbasi, 2013).

The decision made by General Musharraf to side with the United States has had a tremendous impact on Pakistani lives. The casualties were not only the result of strikes from the terrorist organizations but also the U.S. forces and particularly the drone strikes have contributed to the killing of civilians in Pakistan particularly in the tribal areas of the state. The Salala tragedy was one of the cases in which the U.S. military was responsible for the loss of Pakistani soldiers. Moreover, allowing drone strikes inside the Pakistani region, especially in the tribal belt resulted in the loss of unarmed civilians in significant numbers. The military losses were equivalent to two full-fledged military brigades. Furthermore, military installations were also targeted. Additionally, the attack on APS (Army public school), which is considered to be carried out by TTP is one of the worst in the history of the state. Moreover, thousands of civilians have been displaced and around 40-50 thousand people have lost their lives (Yamin, 2015).




Rise of Terrorism and TTP

The Government of Pakistan's decision to join the U.S.-led war has been one of the main factors behind the rise of terrorism in Pakistan which disturbed the fabric of peace in the country. Pakistan supported the U.S. and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) by allowing access to sea, air, and land routes as well as logistics and intelligence support to the coalition forces. Pakistan's support to the U.S. resulted in the rise of anti-Pakistani sentiments and various groups inside Pakistan turned against the state and have conducted various terrorist acts (Haider, Heredero, Ahmad & Dastgeer, 2015).

Baitullah Mehsud of South Waziristan was chosen as the first commander-in-chief of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Initially, 27 militant organizations joined the TTP and decided to strengthen their foothold in the tribal areas of Pakistan (then called FATA). Later on with the passage of time, TTP endeavored to extend their area of operations from FATA to major cities of Pakistan including cities in Punjab by establishing relations with other terrorist organizations in Punjab (Khan, 2016).




Terrorist Strikes

Pakistan saw a sharp increase in terrorist activities following 9/11, especially when the TTP was established in 2007 as a coordinating and facilitating umbrella group. Attacks on hospitals, busy marketplaces, masjids, hotels, diplomatic offices, railroads, buses, and other locations were noted; up until 2015, an estimated 60,000 people, including military personnel, police officers, and civilians, have been killed. Moreover, the destruction of public and private assets was estimated to be around 118 billion USD (Sattar, 2020).

Organizations like the TTP have disturbed the peace of Pakistan and have been a major challenge to the national security of the state. This anti-Pakistani outfit has been a centripetal force for other militant organizations and the state of Pakistan has given a great amount of attention in order to counter this threat (Yusuf, 2014).

Figure 4

Attacks carried out by TTP 2008-15



SOURCE: The pie chart is taken from a conference paper named: When Friends Turned into enemies: The role of national state vs Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in war against terrorism in Pakistan.




 

Author: Muhammad Khalil Khan

:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326147134_When_Friends_turned_into_Enemies_The_role_of_National_State_vs_TehrikiTaliban_Pakistan_TTP_in_War_against_Terrorism_in_Pakistan”

Post 9/11, Pakistan has suffered a large number of casualties. After 2006, the casualties mounted up in a significant manner. In 2006, the casualties were 993, and in the following year, it rose to 2120 including civilians and security personnel. In 2009 alone, 500 bombings 86 of which were suicide attacks took place with the majority of them taking place in the tribal areas and KP (CRSS, 2010).

In Pakistan, the TTP has been behind multiple terrorist incidents. According to the Pakistani government's official statements, the TTP has carried out terrorist attacks that have severely damaged the nation's economy and claimed the lives of over 50,000 civilians and military people. Some estimates place the state's economic losses at around $100 billion USD (Hussain, 2016).

According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security database, the TTP has used Guerrilla tactics to achieve its objectives. After the decision taken by the government of Pakistan to side with the U.S. in its military campaign in Afghanistan, terror hikes have been observed (Khan, 2016).

The state witnessed two significant terrorist attacks in 2014: the terrorist attack on Jinnah Airport in Karachi and the far more horrific and terrible attack on the Army public school in Peshawar on December 16, 2014. Pakistan started Operation Zarb-e-Azb on June 15 to destroy the terrorist groups operating in the state after 28 people, including 10 terrorists, were killed in the attack on Karachi. According to TTP claims, an attack on the Army public school in Peshawar in December 2014 killed eight teachers and 147 innocent students. Following this brutal assault, state stakeholders made the decision to change Pakistan's stance on terrorism, and efforts to create a national response plan were observed (Naveed, 2019).




Suicide Attacks

Suicide attacks have been one of the main means adopted by terrorists to cause damage. After joining the U.S.-led war, Pakistan has faced a rise in suicide bombings and this has contributed to damaging the peace of the state. After the formation of the TTP, suicide bombings have increased (Khan, 2016). 

Figure 5

Suicide Attacks After The Formation Of Ttp



SOURCE: "https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326147134_When_Friends_turned_into_Enemies_The_role_of_National_State_vs_TehrikiTaliban_Pakistan_TTP_in_War_against_Terrorism_in_Pakistan? “




 

This figure is taken from a conference paper titled: When Friends Turned into Enemies: The Role of National State vs Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in the war against terrorism in Pakistan.\

Author: Muhammad Khalil Khan

In Figure 5, it can be seen that after the formation of TTP in 2007 there has been a rise in suicide attacks. In 2007, 56 suicide attacks were carried out and in 2013, 80 suicide attacks were reporte

The United States Drone Campaign Inside Pakistan

The United States drone operations contributed to the deaths of civilians in addition to the destruction done by terrorist organizations operating inside Pakistan.

The people of the state have been greatly affected by drone assaults, also known as unmanned aerial strikes, which started in 2004 and mostly targeted the former FATA region. During a drone target assassination operation, the United States attempted to murder Al-Qaeda members thought to be sheltering in tribal areas, but instead killed innocent people (Kakar & Kassi, 2015).

In 2004, American drones started attacking Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) in Pakistan. Tribal areas in Pakistan had special political status prior to the 25th Amendment and were exempt from the nation's general laws. A significant number of Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists set up new bases of operations in Afghanistan after the US invasion in December 2001. The Americans quickly concluded that the remoteness of the tribal areas made it unlikely that they would be able to locate these individuals without considerable Pakistani cooperation. Drone attacks therefore were considered as a means to target their adversaries (Aslam, 2014).

 




Figure 6

locations of the drone strikes under Bush, Obama, and Trump.


SOURCE “:https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/americas-counterterrorism-wars/the-drone-war-in-pakistan/”


 
Figure 6 shows that the majority of drone strikes under the administrations of Bush, Obama, and Trump have been carried out in the tribal regions (ex-FATA) of Pakistan. 
President Obama oversaw a sharp rise in drone operations, which peaked in 2010 at over 125 strikes. Compared to 2010, there were about 41 drone assaults in 2012 and about 27 in 2013. A major pause in these activities occurred in 2014, coinciding with negotiations between the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the Pakistani government. U.S. drone operations began when those negotiations failed and the Pakistani military launched Operation Zarb-e-Azb, a major offensive against militant groups in North Waziristan (Foundations, 2014).
 


















Figure 7
U.S. air and drone strikes in Pakistan, by administration and year

SOURCE: "https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/americas-counterterrorism-wars/the-drone-war-in-pakistan/”


 
Figure 7 shows the number of drone attacks carried out by three different presidents of the United States from 2004 to 2022. The use of drone technology began during Bush's administration and later accelerated when Obama stepped into office. 2010 was the deadliest year, a sharp rise in attacks can be observed in the graph, the attacks gradually began to be reduced and under Trump's administration, they were the least.
The Bush administration's drone program in Pakistan was very limited until 2008 when the administration began to increase the frequency of strikes. Obama's term saw a rise in strikes, which peaked in 2010 before they steadily declined until 2016 when there were just three strikes in Pakistan that were officially authorized by the administration (America, 2022).
 


Figure 8
Drone Strikes in Pakistan

Source: “www.The Bureau of investigative journalism.com”


 
Figure 8 shows the number of drone strikes from 2004-2017, it can be seen that the strikes increased from 2007 onwards and a constant increase in the graph can be observed until 2010, that’s when the strikes peaked.


Casualties as a Result of the U.S. Drone Strikes
Between 2004 and 2018, at least 430 confirmed drone strikes occurred in Pakistan, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Between 2,515 and 4,026 persons were murdered in the drone assaults. 424 to 969 of those were classified as civilians. The issue was made worse by the fact that 172-207 of the victims were minors. When the United States invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan backed them. At first, US military actions were concentrated in Afghanistan. However, the CIA resumed its drone activity in Pakistan's FATA after a drone attack in Pakistan killed a Taliban commander. Even if these bombings started under Bush's presidency, the US did not openly acknowledge them until Barack Obama's administration (Khudadad, 2022).
In Pakistan, the most common drone assault target was residential buildings, according to research firm Bureau Forensic Architecture, which has offices in New York and London's Goldsmiths University. Nearly 380 strikes occurred between 2010 and 2014, destroying at least 132 homes. Nearly 61% of the attacks targeted residential buildings. American households have long been the target of the CIA's drone program (Ross & Serle, 2014).
 


Table 1
Casualties as a result of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan.

Year	US Drone Strikes	Minimum people killed	Maximum people killed	Minimum civilians killed	Maximum civilians killed	Minimum children killed	Maximum children killed	Minimum people injured	Maximum people injured
2004	1	6	8	2	2	2	2	1	1
2005	3	16	16	5	11	4	5	1	1
2006	2	94	105	90	100	73	76	3	3
2007	5	36	56	11	46	1	1	20	37
2008	38	252	401	59	173	26	45	146	228
2009	54	471	753	100	210	36	39	266	404
2010	128	755	1,108	89	197	23	23	351	428
2011	75	362	666	52	152	6	11	158	236
2012	50	212	410	13	63	1	2	100	212
2013	27	109	195	0	4	0	1	43	89
2014	25	115	186	0	2	0	2	44	67
2015	13	60	85	2	5	0	0	25	32
2016	3	11	12	1	1	0	0	3	6
2017	5	15	22	0	3	0	0	1	5
2018	1	1	3	0	0	0	0	0	0
TOTAL	430	2,515	4,026	424	969	172	207	1,162	1,749

Source: “The Bureau of Investigative Journalism IJ. (2017, January 13). CIA and US military drone strikes inPakistan,2004topresent.Retrievedhttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NAfjFonMTn7fziqiv33HlGt09wgLZDSCP-BQaux51w/edit#gid=694046452”
 The above table shows the casualties as a result of the U.S. drone strikes inside Pakistan's territory. The data collected from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism claims that the casualties after 2007 increased at a drastic rate and were the highest in 2010. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism is also of the view that the casualties in these strikes consisted of women and children who had nothing to do with the war. 

Figure 9Minimum people killed in drone strikes 2004-17

SOURCE: “www.The Bureau of investigative journalism.com”


 
Figure 9 Shows the number of casualties as a result of drone strikes by the United States, 2010 turned out to be the peak year and the casualties were highest. Moreover, after 2010, the decline can be observed.
 


Figure 10


CIA Drone strikes by presidents and casualties because of the strikes

Source: “www.The Bureau of investigative journalism.com:


 
Figure 10 explains the number of drone strikes carried out under the administration of three different presidents of the United States post 9/11 and the casualties in the tenure of each president’s drone campaign.
Over 2000 people, including an undetermined number of civilians, have been murdered by US drone strikes in Pakistan. The people of Pakistan have strongly condemned the U.S. approach, but in spite of their fears and efforts, the United States has not kept its pledge of transparency or made amends for the harm their drone campaigns have caused to civilians (foundations, 2014).
The peace situation in Pakistan was disrupted and many people suffered as a result of the terrorist attacks and the violent activities committed by the United States, including drone operations. For the inhabitants of the tribal areas, the psychological effects were an issue. The population of Pakistan particularly the people of the tribal areas have suffered the most because of the military campaign of the U.S. in Afghanistan (Kakar & Kassi, 2015).

Conclusion

Since Pakistan's founding, there has been a rather difficult relationship between the United States and Pakistan. The United States' foreign policy toward Pakistan underwent significant adjustments following 9/11, and Pakistan's strategy toward its key partner Afghanistan also changed as a result. The goal of this study was to determine how the alliance affected internal stability and peace as well as how terrorism manifested as a result of it. Furthermore, the repercussions of US drone operations on Pakistan's peace and stability, particularly in tribal areas, have been made clear by this research project. The following are some of the detrimental repercussions of the research findings. The research contends that the U.S.-Pakistan national security conversations began following 9/11. 

The qualitative approach was employed, and the theoretical framework was founded on John Mearsheimer's thesis of Offensive Realism. This paper also explained how the U.S. and Pakistani governments' activities led to the emergence of terrorism following 9/11, which had a peaceful impact on internal security.

This research also finds out that the affected national security has not only been by the terrorist organizations but also by the U.S. through drone campaigns. Drones employed by the U.S. have proven to be devastating to the civilians in the tribal territories.

This research contributes to the current existing knowledge in International relations, security studies, and Foreign policy analysis, by examining the various facets of this evolving relationship between the USA and Pakistan and how it explains how Pakistan's national security was impacted by the advent of post 9/11 bilateral partnership between the two actors.

Recommendations

This study sought to examine the effects of U.S. drone strikes and terrorism on Pakistan's national security as a result of the US-Pakistan partnership that was formed after 9/11. The results of this study highlight the negative effects on Pakistan's national security and suggest that the U.S.-Pakistan partnership following 9/11 jeopardized Pakistan's national security.

It is advised that Pakistan should eliminate the terrorist groups operating there as soon as possible in order to find peace in the nation. Since terrorism is a cancer that might worsen state security, these groups must be completely eradicated as quickly as possible. In the fight against terrorism, logical military tactics should be used, and foreign assistance and experience can be valuable resources. Furthermore, in order to stop cross-border terrorist activity, border security measures must be strengthened.

It is advised that the U.S. drone strikes program be looked into and that those impacted in Pakistan's tribal areas receive compensation. 

Lastly, after a comprehensive analysis, it is highly recommended that for a state like Pakistan, to have abundant potential, it is of paramount importance to have a pragmatic foreign policy combined with a comprehensive national security approach in order to survive and progress in the international arena. 

References

• Abbasi, N. M. (2013). Impact of terrorism on Pakistan. Strategic Studies, 33, 33-68. https://www.issi.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/1393573242_59579987.pdf

• America, N. (2022). The drone war in Pakistan. New America. https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/reports/americas-counterterrorism-wars/the-drone-war-in-pakistan
• Asghar, A. (2015). Pak-U.S. relations re-defined after 9/11. International Research Journal of Social Sciences, 4(1), 74-78. https://www.isca.in/IJSS/Archive/v4/i1/12.ISCA-IRJSS-2014-283.php
• Aslam, W. (2014, February). The US drone strikes and on-the-ground consequences in Pakistan. International Catalan Institute for Peace. https://www.icip.cat/perlapau/en/article/the-us-drone-strikes-and-on-the-ground-consequences-in-pakistan/
• Baxter, C. (2005). Pakistan on the brink. Oxford University Press.
• CRSS. (2010). The cost of conflict in Pakistan. Center for Research and Security Studies.
• Foundations.O (2014). After the dead are counted: U.S. and Pakistani responsibilities to victims of drone strikes. Open Society Foundations. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/after-dead-are-counted-us-and-pakistani-responsibilities-victims-drone-strikes
• Haider, S., Heredero, D. C., Ahmad, M., & Dastgeer, S. (2015). Identifying causes of terrorism in Pakistan. The Dialogue, 10(3), 220-236. https://www.qurtuba.edu.pk/thedialogue/The%20Dialogue/10_3/Dialogue_July_September2015_220-236.pdf
• Hussain, T. (2016, September 16). FATA: Terrorists or victims of a covert war? Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2016/9/14/fata-terrorists-or-victims-of-a-covert-war/
• Hussain, T. (2021, March 30). The misunderstood history of Pakistan-US relations. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2021/03/the-misunderstood-history-of-pakistan-us-relations/
• Jabeen, M., Muhammad, M., & Goraya, N. (2010). Trends and challenges in Pak-US relations: Post. South Asian Studies, 25(2), 185-198. http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/csas/PDF/V_25_No_2_2010_501-01-Dr.%20M.%20Saleem%20Mazhar.pdf
• Jafferlot, C. (2012, November 1). The AfPak question. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2012/11/01/afpak-question-pub-50049
• Kakar, N., & Kassi, N. A. (2015). Foreign policy of Pakistan after 9/11 concerning U.S. and its ominous pitfalls for Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Central Asia Journal, 76(1). http://asc-centralasia.edu.pk/old_site/02_Naqeebullah_%20Kakar.pdf
• Khan, M. K. (2016). When friends turned into enemies: The role of national state vs. Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in war against terrorism in Pakistan. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 28(4), 596-626. https://doi.org/10.22883/kjda.2016.28.4.007
• Khudadad, A. (2022, November 29). Secret war: U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan. Immigration and Human Rights Law Review. https://lawblogs.uc.edu/ihrlr/2022/11/29/secret-war-u-s-drone-strikes-in-pakistan/
• Markey, D. (2013). No exit from Pakistan: America's tortured relationship with Islamabad. Cambridge University Press. https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/45460/frontmatter/9781107045460_frontmatter.pdf