ISLAMABAD — In Pakistan’s northwest tribal region, where drones hum overhead and militants hide, this is romantic: “I am looking for you like a drone, my love,” a verse of a local folk poem says. “You have become Osama, no one knows your whereabouts.”
When Americans talk about drones, they envision terrorist targets in faraway lands. When Washington pundits talk about drones, they question whether push-button combat impedes intelligence-gathering or if civilians are accidental casualties.
But for those who live in the areas bombarded by armed drones, shadowy U.S. warfare has infected culture. Drones, reported to have killed at least 2,500 people in Pakistan alone, are featured in the music and poetry created there.
An Islamabad-based research group tracked the impact of the war on terrorism on Pashto literature and art in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, speaking with artists, poets, and literary figures to illustrate the cultural transformation since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
“As a war was initiated on the soil of Pashtuns almost immediately … the bloodshed, bomb blasts, drone attacks, and aerial firing compelled writers to forget evergreen topics of love, romance, and nature,” said the FATA Research Center’s March report. “The violent circumstances that rose from the ashes of 9/11 compelled Pashto literati to write about broken families, severed limbs “¦ rather than silky curls and rosy cheeks of their beloveds.”
Those traditional, flowery images are sometimes combined with the war machines in art. A popular Pashto singer, Sitara Younis sings: “The touch of my lips sweeten words. Intoxicating as wine are my looks. My gaze is as fatal as a drone attack.”
Younis’s popular songs play on the radio and at weddings. Her other hit has an even darker theme: “Don’t chase me, I’m a trick,” she sings, warning a man to keep his distance. “I’m a suicide bomb.”
The violence in art reflects how dramatically life has changed in the tribal areas over the last decade. Average Pashtuns, the report found, now understand the meaning of English words such as “drone,” “terrorist,” and “suicide blast.” Children reference the Taliban and the Army in games. Many families were too afraid to invite guests to their homes after the drone campaign began for fear they could not protect them, says Irfan Uddin, a FATA Center researcher.
Some artists refer specifically to the Taliban as intended targets of the U.S. strikes. “Your eyes are no less than a drone,” one poem reads. “They turned me into ashes, as I was facing them like a member of the Taliban.”
When Uddin lived in Miranshah to conduct research, he saw how drones could inspire the acute fear that formed the basis for the art and poetry to follow. He was sitting in a courtyard one day when a friend calmly said, “The drone is coming.”
“I did feel it coming, but I never saw it,” Uddin said. “I got up, and started running to the house. It was the most awful moment in my life.”
A Pashto singer, Nazia Iqbal, highlights those feelings of helplessness in her poems: “My love, you are far away from me, and these drones will target you. I am helpless and can’t stop them, and my tears are dropping from my eyes as if water is dropping from a spring.”
- 1 Hillary Clinton Will Win the Nomination, But Then What?
- 2 Bernie Sanders Is a Loud, Stubborn Socialist. Republicans Like Him Anyway.
- 3 Why Gun Control Can’t Eliminate Gun Violence
- 4 Few Privacy Limitations Exist on How Police Use Drones
- 5 How Politics Breaks Our Brains, and How We Can Put Them Back Together
What We're Following See More »
Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:
- Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
- Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
- They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
- One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”
At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”