SkyReporter NEWS
welcome to sky reporter
10 Comments
Sep
27
2007COLLATERAL KILLINGS STILL “TOO REMOTE” FOR NATO TO QUANTIFY
ARTICLE
More Afghan Civilians Confirmed Dead In Air Strikes
Story Tools:
Email This Story
Email This Story
Who’s counting: stats are vital to air ops, so why not use them to prevent civilian deaths?
Scant notice was paid, last week, to the latest incident of collateral killings of Afghan civilians by US air bombardment directed by NATO forces on the ground.
A statement Friday from ISAF, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, admitted that an air strike called in against Taliban gunmen in Gereshk district of Helmand province had claimed the lives “of a number of non-combatants.”
ISAF did not specify the number of civilian dead, but said an investigation was underway. US and NATO commanders still claim to be unable to keep accurate count of innocent victims of incidents of this nature. The usual excuse given is that air strikes are directed at areas "too remote" to allow assessment.
The international forces’ generals, political leaders and diplomats have insisted their personnel try to avoid collateral killings, but they have yet to explain how that can be accomplished without first quantifying their mistakes. For example, understanding how many deaths are due to human error on the part of ground-based forward air controllers, or pilots, or ordnance malfunctions.
On the ground in Helmand province, district officials put the death toll in Gereshk at six women and children. Taliban fighters reportedly had sought refuge in a village, hoping to use residents to shield themselves against an approaching NATO ground force. The Taliban evidently escaped before the air strike occurred.
In Kabul, ISAF stated: "ISAF was unaware of civilians in the vicinity of the target and unfortunately it appears that a number of non-combatants were caught in the attack and killed.”
The phrase “it appears that” is in sharp contrast to the tone of certainty in a statement today, Wednesday, by ISAF’s partner force, the U.S.-led coalition, about clashes this week in Uruzgan and Helmand provinces. An estimated 104 “insurgents,” the phrase used to describe Taliban fighters, have been killed since Tuesday morning near Musa Qalah in Helmand, with a further 65 killed by coalition forces in Uruzgan.
The statement went on to say: “…last night’s overwhelming victory by ANSF against the extremists is one more example of this strategy to secure a stable and safe living area for the residents of the province.”
Really?
That triumphal wording seems at odds with the findings of the only organization in Afghanistan that attempts to keep accurate count of civilian loss of life, the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission.
Earlier this month the commission reported that 168 civilians died in armed clashes, suicide attacks and bombings in August. While denouncing the Taliban’s use of innocent Afghans as human shields, the report concluded that two thirds of the civilian deaths “happened in military operations conducted by international forces against their opposition,” according to the commission’s Mohammed Farid Hamidi.
Question.
Shouldn’t ISAF and its NATO command, together with the US-led coalition, get something like a credible position worked out on these issues?
Or is there a double standard for the dead in Afghanistan – count the bodies that make good copy, and just ignore the rest…
Arthur,sadly most in the west don't care about civilian casulties.Most often,it is justified by the fact it was the Taliban's fault for using them as human shields.Death of these low life cowardly animals(Taliban) supercedes everything.
Like in Iraq with Blackwater.Who cared they killed innocents a week or so ago?Not Rice,or Bush.Their main concern was in protecting them and keeping them there to continue their murder.
I would like to know how this might affect the the day to day combat soldiers.And if it will become a lifelong battle of endless nightmares.
If we here in the west could actually see first hand the damage done by these bombs to the men women and children maybe our outrage would become louder.MAYBE??????????
Arthur:
Oh, but I do get tired of the daily media stories of how many Taliban we killed today. And ... so what? Are we actually winning the war? Body counts strongly remind me of the American effort in VIETNAM (remember Vietnam?) where the body counts of the dead VC were constantly reported as a measure of how "we were winning the war". Yeah, right. And that's all that I see here. I hope that other people reading this propaganda are not fooled as well.
"...We succumb to 'thoughtlessness' when we believe that we are mysteriously imbued with values of democracy and peace, more so than anyone else. This is equivalent to saying, 'We are not like them. They are not like us'. The sentiment has dozens of everyday versions to be found in our media, in general and in intimate dinner table conversations. Included in this list are such claims as there is nothing but madness there, we confront absolute evil when we go there, and so on. We find the beginning of 'thoughtlessness' in claims that the 'malevolence of the environment' drove [soldiers] to madness [in Afghanistan], that democracy just hasn't taken root [there], a problem we have to fix. 'Thoughtlessness' is there when we intervene on these grounds, when we go unprepared, not knowing where countries are on a map yet feeling that we can actually do some good.
It is an ignorance and nationalist fantasy of the most dangerous kind."
Dark Threats & white Knights: The Somalia Affair, Peacekeeping, and the New Imperialism by Sherene Razack
What is the minimum wage in Afghanistan ? How much aid money would it cost to send the unemployed to trade schools , drive heavy equipment to assist plastic mine removal or rebuild irrigation systems .
Would Karzai and the like be satisfied with income tax money instead of aid handouts ?
Bush in his U.N. speach was bragging about a buy local aid program . Is it being used in Afghanistan ?
Aziz,
"The world is, in truth, moving on towards its destiny. The interdependence of the peoples and nations of the earth, whatever the leaders of the divisive forces of the world may say or do, is already an accomplished fact. Its unity in the economic sphere is now understood and recognized. The welfare of the part means the welfare of the whole, and the distress of the part brings distress to the whole."
Shogi Effendi
The real problem is in how the American forces rely on airpower and artillery to engage the enemy rather than engage with actual boots on the ground. Real soldiers ENGAGE the enemy using infantry tactics which may include tactical fire support in the right circumstances (ie. not in populated villages and with proper civilian casualty verification procedure) Sadly, American troops seek only to LOCATE instead of ENGAGING, calling in overwhelming fire support when available as the tactic to engage lone AK-47 gunmen holed up in a mud hut. This 'swatting mosquitos with sledgehammers' technique is causing Afghan civilian casualties because the Americans are afraid to incur casualties of their own in operations. In a real army, it's the soldiers who die to protect the women and children who you are tasked to protect from the enemy. Apparently, in the American army, its the civilians who are expendable. It's OK to kill a mother and her 2 year old as long as you get the muji beside them. Cowards.
The notion of "interdependence of the peoples and nations of the earth," as Effendi suggests, would entail partnership between peoples and nations, and not a constant fight for power and dominance.
Only a capitalist system would understand and recognize the world's "unity in the economic sphere," which is extremely sad as not everything revolves around money.
Yes, I totally agree with Effendi's last comment, that is, that we, as Sa'di Shirazi puts it, resemble the parts of our body. If one "limb" or part of the body is suffering, it is enough to make the other parts of the body suffer, too.
Of one Essence is the human race,
Thusly has Creation put the Base;
One Limb impacted is sufficient,
For all Others to feel the Mace.
Keith, I hope you don't misunderstand me, as I feel I have always been misunderstood. The solution to Afghan problem is not solved through "handouts." Nor is it true that Afghans need to be sent to trade schools so that they could find employment.
As Arthur might attest to this fact, it is not that there is lack of resourcefulness or skills on the part of Afghan people to earn a living, the environment and the situation as such is not conducive for those initiatives to be taken.
As someone who used to work in the UN Mine Action Centre for Afghanistan (a coordinating body), I can tell you that mine clearance is a very slow process and it will take years before we are rid of that problem, especially that war is still continuing. So additional equipment for mechanical mine clearance would not make a huge difference. We have very competent and experienced mine action teams, whether it is mechanical mine clearance teams, mine awareness teams, manual mine clearance teams or mine detection dog teams, etc...
As for Bush bragging about a "by local aid program," well, you have to sell the whole package with nice wrappings.
Thanks Aziz for taking the time to enlighten me . Besides Arthurs articles and a few documentaries info on the present life in your country is scarce .
I realize you were a functioning trading nation when my ancestors still lived in caves so please do not be offended by my lack of understanding .
Some articles had said much farmlands were unusable as they were mined , irrigation systems destroyed and unemployment was a serious problem .
A Canadian working in Kabul gave an aid report to the Canadian Government last spring but it's contents are not public knowledge .