As the guns continue to fire at terrorists using the Pakistani territory for their activities, the government of the country is facing another major challenge, one not acknowledged by the mainstream media as such – the burden of proof. After India’s war threats on account of the Mumbai Blasts of November 2008, now the country faces the burden of refuting the American senator Feinstein’s claim that US drones targeting the terrorists in Pakistani territory actually fly from some Pakistani airbase.

Dianne Feinstein’s claim itself, at this point at least, lacks confidence and strength. ‘As I understand it, these are flown out of a Pakistani base,’ said the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at a hearing, while commenting on anti-terrorist attacks in Pakistan. Until now, the general view has been that the drones take off from Afghanistan and target the terrorists hiding in Pakistan’s tribal belt. Feinstein’s statement has added to Pakistan’s burden of proving its case of effective involvement in controlling terrorist acts on its soil while also maintaining its sovereignty intact. Pakistan has officially denied Senator Feinstein’s claim about the use of any Pakistani bases for drone attacks.

The Mumbai Basts of November 2008 have already resulted in a similar pressure on Pakistan for providing proof of its innocence. Not convinced over India’s proof, the dossier on Ajmal Kasab, Pakistan returned the demand for a more convincing proof in support of its claims. On a diplomatic level, it appears that the unavailability of the putative proof(s) is the major check on an otherwise disastrous war between nuclear powers. As long as the diplomats can argue over the convincing power of ‘proofs’, cross-border aggression can be avoided. Still, it is not possible to apply the same delaying strategy to militants within the country who do not need any ‘proofs’ to go about killing people. For them, President Zardari has recently spoken of force as the only option to end militancy.