Afghan and coalition forces kill at nine civilians as they destroy arms cache

Afghan officials said that they were investigating claims that at least nine civilians including six children had been killed during an operation by Afghan and coalition forces that blew up a Taliban weapons depot in southern Helmand Provice.

A spokesperson for the governor of Helmand, Omar Zwak, said that troops on a joint military operation just outside the capital Lashkar Gah, found the munitions cache late Saturday: “They set up explosives to detonate the cache, and it damaged the house where the civilians were staying.” Captain Bill Salvin a spokesperson for the Afghan coalition said that the coalition had seen the reports of civilian casualties and would continue an inquiry into the allegations. General Dawiat Wazirr, a spokesperson for the Afghan Defense Ministry said that investigators had been sent to Helmand to investigate the claims. The concrete building next door had been a clinic until the Taliban moved in.

Haji Sadiq, who owned the house that collapsed said it was being occupied by a family that had been looking after his farm after he had moved to the capital Lashkar Gar to escape the fighting. Sadiq said: “Last night, Afghan forces, along with foreign forces, raided the clinic around 11:30 p.m., and arrested some 40 to 50 villagers, and took them to the desert, and only left women and children in the houses. They put explosives over the clinic and detonated it, and the mud house next to the clinic collapsed.”

Saidq said he rushed to the scene next morning, but at first the police would not let any civilians near the collapsed house. When they finally were allowed in, he said they pulled nine bodies from the wreckage, including two older adults, their daughter-in-law and six grandchildren. One child was unaccounted for. One son had gone to Herat province to work and so escaped the carnage. The deaths of civilians in the ongoing civil war at the hands of Afghan and coalition forces as well as the Taliban has always been a problem.

In February, local residents US bombings in the Sangin district killed at least 22 civilians. The NATO mission in Afghanistan has claimed that it is investigating the deaths. The Taliban now hold seven of 14 districts in Helmand province which is Afghan's largest province in area. Of the other seven, five are contested, with the Afghan government fully in control of only two areas and the provincial capital.

At first, Afghan officials claimed their own commandos detonated the weapons cache. Later this report was revised to claim that members of the U.S.-led coalition detonated the weapons but the nationality of those responsible was not disclosed. Often official reports are unreliable and official investigations often come up with accounts of what happened that contradict that of locals and eyewitnesses. The detonation of the explosives without ensuring that nearby civilians were evacuated is surely inexcusable.

At present, there are 8,400 US troops in Afghanistan along with 5,000 from other NATO countries. The U.S. general in charge of operations has requested that 5,000 more troops be sent to help defeat the Taliban. The U.S. has said it will defeat the Islamic State in Afghanistan in 2017 which is operating there as well as the Taliban. The combat mission of the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan ended in January of 2015 but there is no sign of an end to the civil war and under Trump it appears that the U.S. involvement may increase as it has in Yemen and Somalia. as well as Iraq and Syria.

A member of the Kandahar provincial council says that at least seventeen civilians were killed as a result of the shooting spree. However the governor's puts the number killed at 15. Haji Samad an elder from the area said:"Eleven members of my family are dead. They are all dead," Haji Samad, an elder from Panjwai district.

A spokesperson for the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) Captain Brockhoff could not confirm that anyone was killed. This cautiousness about such issues often makes authorities seem foolish or completely out of touch with reality. He did say however:"This is a horrific incident, and our thoughts are with the families of the affected. Our initial reports indicate multiple civilians - between four and six- are wounded. Those civilians are receiving care at coalition medical facilities,"

Bernard Smith an Al Jazeera reporter said: "We are now being told by the police sources that the US soldier left his base at three o clock this morning. It would have been pitch-black wherever he walked," "The soldier went through three separate houses, shooting at people as they slept in their beds.""The soldier then returned to his base and turned himself in. One wonders why a soldier would be allowed out of the base at 3 AM to wander off by himself and obviously armed as well.

Some reports say that the soldier suffered a nervous breakdown before the incident. So a person suffering a nervous breakdown is allowed out of the base at 3 AM and armed into the bargain.The soldier will be held in U.S. custody. The Afghan authorities will probably have nothing to do with any trial or punishment since U.S. troops are not subject to Afghan law.

There is already a huge surge in opposition to NATO forces after the recent burning of copies of the Koran. There has been strong opposition as well to night raids that often kill civilians. This latest incident will make things worse.

Forty one people have already been killed since the Koran burning. I imagine similar violent protests will follow this event.

Najeeb Azizi an analyst in Kabul said::"It is a very tragic incident in particular because the Afghan and US governments are trying to sign a strategic agreement for a long term," Everyone seems to have forgotten that the U.S. far from getting out entirely from Afghanistan in 2014 is trying to negotiate a long term stay in the country. For more see this Al Jazeera article. The event is also covered here by Reuters. in the BBC.

"

Civilian Deaths soar in southern Afghanistan

As the article mentions most of the casualties are the result of insurgent action but some are also caused by NATO forces. One wonders too how many casualties are caused by special forces who operate underneath press radar. Once the offensive begins to forcefully attempt to dislodge the Taliban from Kandahar no doubt casualties will go up especially if there are battles right within the city as seems highly probable. This is from antiwar.com.

Civilian Toll Soaring in Southern Afghanistan
Posted By Jason Ditz

Despite President Obama’s claims of “progress” in Afghanistan the nation’s restive south, where virtually all of the latest escalation of troops have been deployed, has continued to see soaring violence, particularly in Kandahar.

According to the latest numbers out of the Red Cross in Kandahar, the number of civilians wounded in roadside bombings has risen between 30-40 percent compared to the same months in 2009. Despite massive increases in the amount of personnel and funding the US has thrown at tackling the roadside bombs, the attacks are still rising dramatically.

These numbers are, of course, separate from the civilian toll caused by the foreign troops themselves, and while specific figures in that regard have not been released, a number of high profile attacks, like the US attack on a busload of civilians near Kandahar, seems to be on the rise as well.

The number will likely continue to rise as the June invasion of Kandahar looms. An attack today inside the city killed at least 11 people, 10 of them private security contractors, and injured at least 18 others. Two other bombings in the city earlier in the day killed at least two others and wounded 23.

Record Afghan bombings in May

This is from the impeccable non-left publication Navy Times.

As the article mentions this record comes despite the constant complaints about the bombings and the civilian casualties caused. I have included after this article a recent article in which Gates claims that more care is being taken even as more civilians are killed. There seems a lot more concern about public relations than civilian deaths. Of course the policy probably reduces troop deaths.
Given that there was a peak in May no doubt if the June figures both for bombings and casualties go down this will be taken as proof that there is more concern being shown for civilian deaths even though both figures remain at high levels.

Afghanistan bombings top charts in May
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writerPosted : Friday Jun 12, 2009 16:30:41 EDT

Air Force, Navy and other coalition warplanes dropped a record number of bombs in Afghanistan for May, Air Forces Central figures show.
During May, warplanes released 478 bombs, the highest May count since numbers started being tracked in 2004.
The increase came despite Afghan complaints that on May 4, an Air Force B-1B and three Navy F/A-18s killed dozens of civilians in western Afghanistan when Afghan troops and their Marine advisers were attacked by insurgents hiding in a village. The bombing is under investigation by Central Command.
May also marked the fifth consecutive month of an increasing use of bombs, after a decline that started last July.
The munitions release came during 2,196 close air support sorties.
The actual number of air strikes was higher because the AFCent numbers don’t include attacks by helicopters and special operations gunships. The numbers also don’t include strafing runs or launches of small missiles.
Over Iraq, two bombs were released during 725 strike sorties.
Transport crews airdropped 1.5 million pounds of supplies, mostly in Afghanistan, and tankers flew 4,441 sorties supporting Iraq and Afghanistan operations
Reconnaissance aircraft flew 1,566 missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, a 10 percent increase over April’s flights.

________________________________----

- News From Antiwar.com - http://news.antiwar.com -
As Gates Promises to Reduce Afghan Civilian Toll, NATO Kills More
Posted By Jason Ditz On June 12, 2009 @ 5:22 pm
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates today promised that in the effort to win the hearts and minds of the civilian populace of Afghanistan, NATO would put an increased emphasis on reducing the number of civilians being killed by international forces.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates
Meanwhile, during fighting in Afghanistan’s Kunar Province NATO forces fired artillery at civilians, killing two and wounding five others. NATO declined to provide further details about the killings, but said it was investigating the matter.
Not long after, a NATO military vehicle crashed into a civilian truck in Khas Kunar, killing four other civilians. The growing number of civilian deaths seem not to be slowing down the repeated promises of Obama Administration officials that they have changed their tactics.
Just days ago a US air strike was reported to have killed 10 civilians in Ghor Province. Earlier in the week it was also reported that a US soldier had thrown a hand grenade into a crowd of civilians in the Kunar Province, though the US is denying this claim.
Copyright © 2009 News From Antiwar.com. All rights reserved.

Karzai Admits Rift with US, NATO over Civilian Killings

THe UN supports Karzai on this matter but the response of NATO and the US is not to stop the attacks but to try and oust Karzai and replace him by a more pliant president if possible. In a related incident a British officer has been arrested for releasing statistics about civilian deaths.
These attacks show that Karzai and the Afghan government have virtually no control over what their occupiers do. They may be elected but they are not sovereign since they have no monopoly over the use of legitimate force in their territory. They are occupied. Face it.





Karzai Admits Rift With US, NATO Over Civilian Killings
Afghan President Says NATO Trying to Silence Him With Criticism
Posted February 4, 2009
It’s no secret that the Afghan government and the international forces have not seen eye to eye on the large civilian death toll in the ongoing war: President Hamid Karzai regularly complains about such killings, while NATO tries to minimize them (to the point of dramatically underreporting their numbers). For the first time however, President Karzai has conceded that the dispute is causing a growing rift between the two sides.
“For a long time now we and the Americans have discord in our opinions regarding the civilian casualties… and therefore there are tensions in our relations,” Karzai insists, adding that “it is natural that they in return put pressure on us so that we keep quiet.”
As the soaring violence has led to a soaring civilian toll, Karzai’s complaints have become louder and more frequent. The result has been increasingly public expressions of discontent with the Karzai government and reports that the Obama Administration is eager to see him go.
But even if Karzai is replaced, the killings seem bound to continue, and escalate as the fighting does. With the desire not to be killed by international forces at the forefront of the Afghan populace’s mind, will a replacement administration be any more capable of staying silent as villages are bombed and homes are raided?


Copyright 2008 Antiwar.com
setTimeout('showLayer();',200);

Karzai: US forces alienated Afghans.

This is from presstv.
Karzai has been complaining of US air attacks and other attacks for ages but it seems to have no effect on US policy. Karzai really has little or no control on what the US does and often will not even be informed of what is happening in case govt. sources might inform the Taliban or other insurgents.

Karzai: US forces alienated Afghans Sat, 20 Dec 2008 03:10:26 GMT

President Hamid Karzai takes harsh view of US strategiesAfghan President Hamid Karzai has criticized the US strategy in troop deployment, admitting his government's mistake concerning security. In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, Karzai blamed US operational strategy as a key element in alienating the Afghan tribes with "extrajudicial killings", leading to the fragile security condition in the country. He said the NATO forces should have focused on fighting insurgents in their hideouts in neighboring Pakistan. "For years, I've been saying that the war on terrorism is not in Afghanistan, that it's in the training camps, it's in sanctuaries," Karzai noted, adding that the US officials ignored the warnings. Karzai reiterated that concentrating more troops around the Afghan capital was not a good idea and called for clarification of responsibilities of the ISAF forces and the Afghan government. President Hamid Karzai has grown increasingly impatient with the American-led war effort against the Taliban insurgency and has repeatedly condemned the US strikes against the Afghan civilians. A deadly US military raid on a house near Afghanistan's border with Pakistan became a new source of tension on Thursday, with the Americans calling it a successful counterterrorism strike and the Afghans saying it left three innocent civilians dead and two wounded, including a 4-year-old boy bitten by an attack dog. RZS/HAR

Troops losing civilian support in Afghanistan

This is from the Telegraph.
This is hardly news but perhaps it is necessary to keep repeating the facts since NATO and ISAF refuse to pay much attention. Karzai has gone on and on complaining about air attacks and civilian casualties, but with no tangible results except perhaps a plan to have him ousted as president and elect someone less critical. Of course the Taliban use the civilian population as shields when they can and hide in civilian houses. But only if the allied forces who are so careful about civilian casualties bomb those areas or attack them will there be civilian casualties.


Afghan troops losing support from locals
The behaviour of international troops is jeopardising the support of the Afghan people, the country's most senior United Nations official has warned.

By Ben Farmer in Kabul Last Updated: 3:02PM GMT 12 Dec 2008
Kai Edie, the UN Secretary-General's special representative, said he was worried about the effects of civilian casualties, unlawful detentions and heavy-handed searches.
Civilian deaths, particularly from coalition airstrikes, have caused deep resentment in Afghanistan and President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly demanded villages are not bombed.
Civilians have also repeatedly been shot dead when cars and buses have failed to heed warnings and strayed too close to coalition convoys and patrols.
He said: "In the end the Afghans themselves have to win the hearts and minds of their population, we can contribute, but I am afraid that we will be less welcome in the Afghan public if we do not correct our behaviour."
Mr Eide's comments came as the Nato-led coalition said three bus passengers were shot dead yesterday (FRI) when their bus veered towards a patrol and ignored warnings in Wardak province.
He said there was growing concern among Afghans about the behaviour of coalition forces.
"Does it mean that the Afghans do not want international military troops there? No, they still want it, but we must maintain that support which is fundamental for our success."
There are some 65,000 international troops in Afghanistan and General David McKiernan, the Nato commander, has requested more than 20,000 US reinforcements which will begin arriving next month.
Afghanistan has seen its bloodiest year since the Taliban regime was toppled in 2001, with some estimates putting the number killed in fighting at more than 5,000. Fighting is expected to get heavier next year as the US surge moves troops into previously ungarrisoned areas.
A spokesman for the Nato-led coalition said troops were under specific directions how to avoid civilian casualties and how to avoid causing offence.
"ISAF is in Afghanistan under UN mandate at the invitation of the Afghan government," he said.
"One civilian casualty is one too many and ISAF does everything possible to avoid civilian casualties and distress to the Afghan people.
"The insurgents however, seek to exploit the civilian population, using them as human shields, causing terror and destruction to their homes, infrastructure and livelihoods."

US strike that killed 90 civilians based on false tip

This is from antiwar.com.
The easiest way to obtain revenge on a rival tribe in Afghanistan is to associate the rival with the Taliban and call in the US to bomb them! This is probably just the tip of the iceberg. Also people have also snitched on rivals in order to get them arrested and sent off for interrogation and sometimes even ending up in Guantanamo. Not only do you get even, you get paid for getting even. The U.S. so far has not owned up to the fact that their intelligence might have been bad. It would not be good for PR or for public confidence in the US intelligence capabilities.

Afghan Govt: US Air Strike That Killed 90 Civilians Based on False Tip
Posted September 14, 2008
Afghan police arrested three people and accused them of providing the false tip that led to last month’s disastrous US air strike in Herat Province which a UN investigation determined killed at least 90 civilians and strained ties between NATO forces and the Afghan government.
The US claimed to have targeted and killed a known militant commander in the strike along with 30 militants, but villagers insist that the information that led to the strike was provided to the US by a rival tribesman named Nader Tawakil, whom the US has placed under protective custody.
After the incident, the United States denied that civilians were killed and accused villagers who spoke of the higher death tolls of spreading “outrageous Taliban propaganda“. They continued their denials well after both the United Nations and several investigations by the Afghan government all found similar numbers of slain civilians, but promised to “review” its initial claims after a video emerged showing a large number of dead civilians in the village mosque in the wake of the attack.
A spokesman for Afghan President Hamid Karzai told the AP that the strike was the result of “total misinformation fed to the coalition forces,” and said the incident “was a total disaster, and it made it even worse when there were denials”.
NATO has attempted to repair ties with the Afghan government by announcing a joint probe, Shortly after the attack, the Afghan Council of Ministers called for a review of the presence of international forces and a status of forces agreement to curb the “aerial bombing and illegal detentions” by international forces. Afghan civilians have also expressed outrage at the dramatic increase in US air strikes in 2008, which have led to a large increase in the number of US-inflicted civilian deaths.

Human rights group says civilian deaths in Afghanistan on the rise.

This is from the CBC Canada. Karzai has complained about the NATO and US bombing many times but the deaths seem to be increasing. The reason is clear. The political fallout at home is much greater for troop deaths than Afghan casualties. The main aim of the occupying forces is to keep down their own casualties as far as possible. Of course in the propaganda war the occupiers insist that they do their best to avoid civilian casualties and their reports always understate civilian deaths or collateral damage as it is called. The occuppiers do not even both to count these deaths.


Human rights group says civilian deaths in Afghanistan on rise
Last Updated: Monday, September 8, 2008 | 4:03 PM ET Comments9Recommend7CBC News
Human Rights Watch is urging the U.S. and NATO to change tactics to prevent civilian deaths in Afghanistan.

The human rights group, based in New York City, issued a report Monday that said most civilian deaths in Afghanistan occur during "unplanned air strikes," when bombing is carried out to support ground troops under attack by insurgents.

Civilian deaths undermine local support for the international effort in Afghanistan and could be prevented through better intelligence, the report said.

"The recent air strikes killing dozens of Afghans make clear that the system is still broken and that civilians continue to pay the ultimate price," Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said in a release.

"Civilian deaths from air strikes act as a recruiting tool for the Taliban and risk fatally undermining the international effort to provide basic security to the people of Afghanistan."

In the 43-page report titled "Troops in Contact: Airstrikes and Civilian Deaths in Afghanistan," Human Rights Watch urged the U.S. to take responsibility immediately after deaths occur.

It said U.S. officials often deny responsibility or blame the Taliban.

Investigations by the U.S. have been "unilateral, ponderous and lacking in transparency," an approach which undercuts rather than improves relations with local populations.

'Must take responsibility'
"The U.S. needs to end the mistakes that are killing so many civilians," Adam said.

"The U.S. must also take responsibility, including by providing timely compensation, when its air strikes kill Afghan civilians. While Taliban shielding is a factor in some civilian deaths, the U.S. shouldn't use this as an excuse when it could have taken better precautions.

"It is, after all, its bombs that are doing the killing."

The report said air strikes in densely populated areas are a particular problem.

"Rapid-response air strikes have meant higher civilian casualties, while every bomb dropped in populated areas amplifies the chance of a mistake," Adams said.

In the first seven months of 2008, at least 540 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related to the conflict.

Civilians used as shields
Of that number, at least 367 died during attacks by the various insurgent forces, and 173 died during U.S. or NATO attacks. At least 119 were killed by U.S. or NATO air strikes.

The report documents how insurgent forces have contributed to the civilian death toll by deploying forces in populated villages, sometimes with the intent to shield their forces from counterattack.

Human Rights Watch found several instances where Taliban forces purposefully used civilians as shields to ward off attacks by foreign troops.

In July 2007, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force announced it would change tactics to reduce civilian casualties.

The changes included using smaller bombs, delaying attacks where civilians might be harmed and asking the Afghan National Army to take charge of house-to-house searches.

Human Rights Watch said the changes made a difference in the last half of 2007 but it remains concerned about continuing civilian casualties from air strikes because numbers increased dramatically this summer.

The report comes two weeks after Afghan and UN officials found that a U.S.-led military operation in the village of Azizabad killed 90 civilians, including dozens of children. The U.S. military initially played down the claims, saying its review of the incident indicated about 30 Taliban members were killed and only a few civilians died.

But on Sunday, the U.S military said it would send a senior officer to Afghanistan to review its initial investigation, given new information about the attack.

Two videos obtained by the Associated Press on Monday appear to show the dead bodies of dozens of people killed in the attack. At least 10 children's bodies, some with graphic wounds, are visible.

Many of the bodies are shrouded in white cloths, and wailing Afghan women and men are seen lifting the blankets to expose the bodies.

With files from the Associated Press

Film Backs Afghans Claims of US Killings

I find it a bit surprising that the US would continue with what seems like a blatant attempt to misrepresent the casualties involved. It is really hard to imagine that the military investigation did not look at everything the UN and Afghan authorities had. Of course the U.S. military no doubt writes off any eyewitness accounts as the work of pro-Taliban propagandists. Perhaps the investigators overlooked the film documentation and have been caught out now with material it is difficult to write off!

Film Backs Afghans’ Claims of US Killings
Posted September 7, 2008

Updated 9/7 9:35 PM EST

On August 22, the US military reported that an airstrike in Herat province killed 30 militants and no civilians. It didn’t take long for locals and Afghan officials to dispute this report, claiming that the toll included scores of civilians. The toll rose as bodies were pulled from the rubble, rising to at least 90 civilians, a count later confirmed by a United Nations investigator. The US however stuck to its original account, revising the number only slightly to include seven civilians killed. The US has also accused villagers who claimed higher numbers killed of spreading Taliban propaganda. However, a video has emerged which seems to dispute the US military’s account and support the accounts of every other agency.

The grainy eight minute video was shot by a doctor with his cellphone, and shows scores of dead civilians in the village’s mosque. Citing “new information” about the attacks General McKiernan, the senior commander for US troops in Afghanistan, has asked CENTCOM to send a general to review the initial investigation. While the general didn’t specify what the information was the New York Times article cites a myriad of items that have been available to investigators, including the aforementioned video footage of the aftermath and statements from several credible witnesses placing the account roughly in line with the findings of both the UN and Afghan governments.

However, this information was all available to officials at the time of the UN investigation and was apparently an important aspect of their findings. Since the US military’s investigation did not conclude until after the UN’s did, it is unclear how any of this would constitute “new” information.

The vast difference between the US account and that of everyone else has strained ties with the Afghan government, an issue NATO has attempted to ease with an announced joint probe. But Afghan villagers and officials continue to express outrage at both the high number of US-inflicted civilian deaths and the all-too-familiar US denials.

Karzai says NATO tie strained as US disputes Herat toll.

This is from antiwar.com.
Good old Zalmay Khalilzad explains that the discrepancy occurs because of the fog of war. No blame there, this explanation shows that he is deserving of Karzai's job when the next election for president takes place. Karzai has been complaining for ages to no avail. He should please the U.S. with a neat explanation such as that of Khalilzad. Maybe he could stay on as president of Afghanistan.

Karzai says NATO Ties Strained as US Continues to Dispute Herat Toll
Posted September 4, 2008
Afghan President Hamid Karzai visited the scene of last month’s deadly US air strike in Herat Province today. During the visit President Karzai vowed “swift punishment” for those responsible for the incident, and warned that relations with NATO had been strained by the large number of civilian deaths.
The strike occurred on August 22 in the small village of Azizabad, and sparked angry protests by the village residents. Investigations by the Afghan government and the United Nations have both determined that at least 90 civilians were killed in the strike, and this has led Afghanistan’s cabinet to announce a review of the presence of international forces. In an attempt to placate the Afghan government, NATO announced a tripartite probe into the incident late last week.
But the United States has stood more or less behind its initial story: that the strike targeted and killed numerous militants. They have altered this somewhat, claiming initially no civilians killed then conceding first that five civilians were killed in the strike, and later revising that up to seven. This wildly different account is, according to US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, caused by “a fog of war”.
compiled by Jason Ditz [email the author

Karzai ousts general as religious leaders call for trials.

Perhaps the general gave the U.S. the information that led to the airstrikes. Probably he sanctioned the U.S. version of the incident as well. Maybe he even provided that disinformation to the U.S. authorities. Who would be on trial? The NATO brass. Forget it. Occupiers don't commit war crimes and the Afghan government has no power to bring them to court in any event. Also, this is a UN sanctioned mission with the neat acronym ISAF the International Security Assistance Force. There is also the US Enduring Freedom aspect of the situation too. With all those high sounding phrases surely a few dozen civilian deaths are a small price to pay for such a noble mission.


Karzai Ousts General as Religious Leaders Call for Trials
Posted August 24, 2008
As the fallout from the Herat bombing continues, Afghan President Hamid Karzai issued a Presidential decree today ordering the immediate firing of two Army officials, including the top ranking officer in western Afghanistan, General Jalandar Shah Behnam, for “negligence and concealing facts,” as al-Jazeera reports that the air strikes have cost Karzai considerable support in the area.
Meanwhile, a council of local religious leaders demanded that those involved in the deaths be brought to trial. In a statement released earlier today they declared “(we) will not accept their apologies this time,” while United Nations Envoy Kai Eide issued a statement cautioning that civilian casualties “undermine the confidence of the Afghan people.”
Stopping short of an apology, the White House expressed its “regret” for the loss of innocent life while promising an investigation. Though the US military had persistently denied that any civilians were killed in Friday’s strike, the Times reported that they had conceded the deaths of at least five civilians.
Initially reported by US military as a raid killing 30 militants and no civilians, Afghan officials quickly contested the account, claiming a large number of civilian deaths. The toll rose as Afghan officials completed their investigations to 95 dead and an unknown additional number wounded. Afghan Minister Nematullah Shahrani said that most were women and children, and challenged US forces to produce evidence that any Taliban were at the site of the strike, which stands as one of the largest incidents of US-inflicted civilian casualties since the 2001 invasion.

Afghan officials: US Airstrikes kill 76 civilians.

This is from antiwar.com.
The official U.S. story is almost always that it was only Taliban militants who were killed although after investigation this is often changed. In any event it should be no surprise that in a tribal society where revenge is demanded when relatives are killed that there are no shortages of recruits for the Taliban. Karzai has consistently decried the bombing policy. Notice that there has been no attempt to resurrect the Afghan air force. All of this activity seems to devolve upon the U.S. as far as I can see. The U.S. wants to stay in charge of air space both in Afghanistan and in Iraq.


Interior Ministry: US Airstrikes Kill 76 Afghan Civilians
Written on August 22, 2008
Just one day after US airstrikes in Laghman province were reported to have killed at least 20 civilians, a much larger incident has occurred on the opposite side of the country in Herat Province.
As with yesterday’s story, the initial US report claimed that 30 militants were killed, including an al-Qaeda commander. Though the Afghan Defense Ministry reported several homes were destroyed and that civilians were among the dead, US officials denied that there were any civilians killed.
Shortly later, Afghanistan’s Interior Ministry released a statement regarding the incident. In it they announced that 76 people, all civilians, had actually been killed in the strike. Among those killed were seven men, 19 women, and 50 children under the age of 15. The Ministry expressed “profound regret” for the killings, which they described as accidental, and promised to dispatch a delegation to conduct a full investigation.
In May of last year, US airstrikes in the same region killed over 50 civilians. After the incident, NATO promised to review its military tactics to ensure that similar incidents didn’t happen in the future. An American commander said he was “ashamed” of the incident, and announced that compensation of approximately $2,000 would be paid to each victim’s family.

Afghan air war grows in intensity

The NATO force is called ISAF the International Security Assistance Force. However their priority is security for their own forces not Afghans as the article puts it: But U.S. and allied troops in trouble take precedenceKarzai has complained constantly about civilian casualties caused by these airstrikes. The response of the U.S. and NATO has been to increase the number of airstrikes rather than reduce them. Last fall, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, responding to the rising civilian death toll from airstrikes, publicly demanded that the United States find an alternative. But airstrikes only increased. The increasing civilian deaths will recruit more to the Taliban ranks. This will increase the number of attacks. In response the U.S. and others will increase troop levels and increase the level of casualties and violence. Welcome to the New American Century.
www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.airstrikes28jul28,0,6638715.storybaltimoresun.comAfghan air war grows in intensityFears of civilian casualties rise as airstrikes increaseBy David WoodSun reporterJuly 28, 2008.Daily airstrikes by U.S. and allied fighter-bombers in Afghanistan have almost doubled since last summer, according to U.S. Air Force data, a trend that reflects increased insurgent attacks but also raises concerns about civilian casualties.The growing reliance on airstrikes by U.S. commanders in Afghanistan appears to mark a turn in the course of the war.Responding to requests from ground commanders, allied aircraft over the past week have pummeled enemy ground targets an average of 68 times a day across Afghanistan, dropping 500- and 2,000-pound guided bombs and strafing enemy forces with cannon fire, according to Air Force daily strike reports.A year ago, the Air Force was recording about 35 airstrikes per day in Afghanistan.Although the Air Force takes what it says are exhaustive measures to avoid accidental deaths, civilian casualties from airstrikes have spiked twice this year, from none in January to 23 in March to 60 so far this month, according to new, unpublished data from Human Rights Watch researcher Marc Garlasco, a former targeting chief for the Pentagon's Joint Staff.Taliban-led insurgents are attacking in significant numbers and staying to fight rather than engaging in traditional hit-and-run guerrilla tactics, according to U.S. commanders.In several recent incidents, U.S. and allied troops prevailed in pitched battles only after fighter-bombers showed up to blast the insurgents.The growing role of air power suggests that the war will require more than the additional troops recommended by President Bush and both presidential candidates. It might require more manned and unmanned aircraft from an already overstretched Air Force and Navy.And greater use of air power would likely result in more civilian casualties, in a conflict in which winning local loyalty is considered the key to success.Last fall, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, responding to the rising civilian death toll from airstrikes, publicly demanded that the United States find an alternative. But airstrikes only increased.Allied commanders are still investigating a July 6 airstrike that the Afghan government says killed 47 civilians on their way to a wedding."We deeply regret any incident where civilians are harmed," said Royal Navy Capt. Mike Finney, a spokesman for the U.S.-led military coalition in Afghanistan.Enemy 'emboldened'But the Air Force says it is only responding to the intensity of fighting on the ground."Let's face it, the enemy is more emboldened," said Air Force Maj. Gen. Douglas L. Raaberg, deputy commander of air operations in the region. Raaberg is a B-1 bomber pilot who has flown strike missions over Afghanistan as recently as last week."The Taliban, when they have an opportunity to take a stand, they are doing that," he said in a telephone interview from the region.Coalition aircraft have doubled the number of hours they spend each day on airborne "armed overwatch" of U.S. and allied convoys and other operations, he said. He acknowledged that strike missions also have doubled as ground commanders increasingly request air support.To meet the demand, allied air crews are flying more sorties each day, and more U.S. aircraft are on station with the recent diversion of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln from Iraq operations to supporting operations in Afghanistan."We are shifting assets as needed to make sure we don't leave [ground forces] uncovered," Raaberg said.But the Air Force has to scramble to meet unexpected demand.A Taliban attack July 13, for example, nearly overran a remote U.S. and Afghan outpost near the Pakistani border. Insurgents held the upper hand in combat until an Air Force B-1 bomber flew in to drop 2,000-pound bombs, an unmanned Predator fired a Hellfire missile and other strike aircraft dropped bombs and strafed the enemy with cannon. The insurgents retreated, leaving nine American soldiers dead."The only reason they weren't completely overrun was air power, and that's the first time that has happened" in the Afghan war, said John McCreary, who retired in 2006 as a senior intelligence analyst for the Pentagon's Joint Staff."Coalition ground forces are not winning every battle, but they are winning every battle where they have air support," said McCreary, who follows Afghanistan closely and still assembles a daily open-source intelligence report.On July 20, Raaberg was piloting a B-1 bomber over Afghanistan when he was redirected to attack Taliban forces gathering for an assault on a U.S. forward operating base in Kunar province, in eastern Afghanistan near the border with Pakistan."They started attacking within half an hour of when I got there," Raaberg recalled. He said U.S. artillery fired at the enemy, followed by airstrikes, followed by more artillery and more airstrikes, "until we ran out of bombs."Defeating such Taliban attacks, he said, is "not so much air [power] saving the day, it's air combined with ground forces combined with our coalition partners. We're trying to use everything."Analysts who have studied casualty patterns in Afghanistan say that the vast majority are caused, deliberately or not, by the Taliban and other insurgents.According to Human Rights Watch, a nonpartisan international research organization, 929 Afghan civilians were killed in the fighting in 2006. Of those, 699 were killed by the Taliban and 230 by U.S. or coalition forces, including 116 by airstrikes.In 2007, 1,633 Afghan civilians died in the fighting, with 950 killed by the Taliban and 434 by U.S. and coalition forces, according to data provided by Garlasco. The rest died under unclear or unknown circumstances, he said.But while the number killed by U.S. or coalition ground forces stayed about the same, those killed by airstrikes more than doubled, to 321.A key reason for the increase is that the Taliban are "shielding" their fighters among Afghanistan's civilian population, Garlasco said."They actually go into peoples' homes, force them to stay there during a battle, force them to build defensive trenches for them - these are true Geneva Conventions violations," Garlasco said.Raaberg said the Air Force will not attack insurgents shielding themselves among civilians "and the enemy knows that."Unplanned strikesBut Garlasco said the Air Force has not taken as much care with its quick-reaction airstrike missions as it has with those planned in detail and reviewed by intelligence analysts and lawyers at the U.S. regional air operations headquarters in Qatar."In their planned airstrikes, they have virtually eliminated the danger of civilian casualties," Garlasco said. "It is in the unplanned airstrikes that you're seeing almost all of the civilian casualties."Such unplanned missions often involve urgent calls to support U.S. and allied troops who unexpectedly engage in battle. Or an unmanned surveillance plane might find a group of people mistakenly identified by targeters as insurgents.Raaberg said that for unplanned missions - such as the one in which he participated July 20 - the air command dispatches not just strike aircraft but intelligence and command aircraft, all in close coordination with ground commanders and tactical air controllers."It's a painstaking effort," he said. If insurgents are mixed in with civilians, "we will wait them out if we can" or ask the ground commander to flush them out.But U.S. and allied troops in trouble take precedence."My hat's off to the ones on the ground," Raaberg said."There's nothing more uncomfortable than to hear on the radio mortars and grenades going off. You've got to go help them."david.wood@baltsun.comCopyright © 2008, The Baltimore Sun

Death at a Distance: The US Air War

Another excellent article on this matter. Not too much attention is paid to this in the mainstream press but it is crucial to understanding what is going on. In order to minimise casualties the US is carrying out more air operations. Imagine drone operations have been taking place within Pakistan run from Nevada! The use of bombing support in Afghanistan has long been an irritant since it turns civilian populations against the occupiers. Hardly any one seems to remark on the fact that neither the Iraq or Afghanistan air force is functional. This means that all air operations are in US hands (sometimes with allied support).It seems that the US (and others) are intent on keeping both Afghanistan and Iraq from having a significant air force, a force that would seem part anad parcel of any significant military. What it assures is US dominance of the air in these countries for the forseeable future.

Death at a Distance: The US Air War

by Conn Hallinan
Foreign Policy in Focus
According to the residents of Datta Khel, a town in Pakistan's North Waziristan, three missiles streaked out of Afghanistan's Pakitka Province and slammed into a madrassa, or Islamic school, this past June. When the smoke cleared, the Asia Times reported, 30 people were dead.

The killers were robots, General Atomics MQ-1 Predators. The AGM-114 Hellfire missiles they used in the attack were directed from a base deep in the southern Nevada desert.

It was not the first time Predators had struck. The previous year a CIA Predator took a shot at al-Qaeda's number two man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, but missed. The missile, however, killed 18 people. According to the Asia Times piece, at least one other suspected al-Qaeda member was assassinated by a Predator in Pakistan's northern frontier area, and in 2002 a Predator killed six "suspected al-Qaeda" members in Yemen.

These assaults are part of what may be the best kept secret of the Iraq-Afghanistan conflicts: an enormous intensification of US bombardments in these and other countries in the region, the increasing number of civilian casualties such a strategy entails, and the growing role of pilotless killers in the conflict.

According to Associated Press, there has been a five-fold increase in the number of bombs dropped on Iraq during the first six months of 2007 over the same period in 2006. More than 30 tons of those have been cluster weapons, which take an especially heavy toll on civilians.

The U.S. Navy has added an aircraft carrier to its Persian Gulf force, and the Air Force has moved F-16s into Balad air base north of Baghdad.

Balad, which currently conducts 10,000 air operations a week, is strengthening runways to handle the increase in air activity. Col. David Reynolds told the AP, "We would like to get to be a field like Langley, if you will." The Langley field in Virginia is one of the Air Force's biggest and most sophisticated airfields.

The Air Force certainly appears to be settling in for a long war. "Until we can determine that the Iraqis have got their air force to significant capability," says Lt Gen. Gary North, the regional air commander, "I think the coalition will be here to support that effort."

The Iraqi air force is virtually non-existent. It has no combat aircraft and only a handful of transports.

Improving the runways has allowed the Air Force to move B1-B bombers from Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to Balad, where the big aircraft have been carrying out daily strikes. A B1-B can carry up to 24 tons of bombs.

The step-up in air attacks is partly a reflection of how beaten up and overextended U.S. ground troops are. While Army units put in 15-month tours, Air Force deployments are only four months, with some only half that. And Iraqi and Afghani insurgents have virtually no ability to inflict casualties on aircraft flying at 20,000 feet and using laser and satellite-guided weapons, in contrast to the serious damage they are doing to US ground troops.

Besides increasing the number of F-16s, B1-Bs, and A-10 attack planes, Predator flight hours over both countries have doubled from 2005. "The Predator is coming into its own as a no-kidding weapon verses a reconnaissance-only platform," brags Maj. Jon Dagley, commander of the 46th Expeditionary Reconnaissance Squadron.

The Air Force is also deploying a bigger, faster and more muscular version of the Predator, the MQ-9 "Reaper" – as in grim – a robot capable of carrying four Hellfire missiles, plus two 500 lb. bombs.

The Predators and the Reapers have several advantages, the most obvious being they don't need pilots. "With more Reapers I could send manned airplanes home," says North.

At $8.5 million an aircraft – the smaller Predator comes in at $4.5 million apiece – they are also considerably cheaper than the F-16 ($19 million) the B1-B ($200+ million) and even the A-10 ($9.8 million).

The Air Force plans to deploy 170 Predators and 70 Reapers over the next three years. "It is possible that in our lifetime we will be able to run a war without ever leaving the US," Lt Col David Branham told the New York Times.

The result of the stepped up air war, according to the London-based organization Iraq Body Count, is an increase in civilian casualties. A Lancet study of "excess deaths" caused by the Iraq war found that air attacks were responsible for 13% of the deaths – 76,000 as of June 2006 – and that 50% of the deaths of children under 15 were caused by air strikes.

The number of civilian deaths in Afghanistan from air strikes has created a rift between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the United States.


"A senior British commander," according to the New York Times, has pressed U.S. Special Forces (SF) to leave southern Afghanistan because their use of air power was alienating the local people. SFs work in small teams and are dependent on air power for support.

SFs called in an air strike last November near Kandahar that killed 31 nomads. This past April, a similar air strike in Western Afghanistan killed 57 villagers, half of them women and children. Coalition forces are now killing more Afghan civilians than the Taliban are. The escalating death toll has thrown the government of Hamid Karzai into a crisis and the NATO governments into turmoil. "We need to understand that preventing civilian casualties is crucially important in sustaining the support of the population," British Defense Minister Des Browne told the Financial Times.

It has also opened up the allies to the charge of war crimes. In a recent air attack in southern Afghanistan that killed 25 civilians, NATO spokesman Lt. Col Mike Smith said the Taliban were responsible because they were hiding among the civilian population.

But Article 48 of the Geneva Conventions clearly states: "The Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants." Article 50 dictates that "The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilian does not deprive the population of its civilian character."


The stepped up air war in both countries has less to do with a strategic military decision than the reality that the occupations are coming apart at the seams.

For all intents and purposes, the U.S. Army in Iraq is broken, the victim of multiple tours, inadequate forces, and the kind of war Iraq has become: a conflict of shadows, low-tech but highly effective roadside bombs, and a population which is either hostile to the occupation or at least sympathetic to the resistance.

It is much the same in Afghanistan. Lord Inge, the former British chief of staff, recently said, "The situation in Afghanistan is much worse than many people recognize...it is much more serious than people want to recognize." A well-placed military source told the Observer, "If you talk privately to the generals, they are very worried." Faced with defeat or bloody stalemate on the ground, the allies have turned to air power, much as the U.S. did in Vietnam. But, as in Vietnam, the terrible toll bombing inflicts on civilians all but guarantees long-term failure.

"Far from bringing about the intended softening up of the opposition," Phillip Gordon, a Brookings Institute Fellow, told the Asia Times, "bombing tends to rally people behind their leaders and cause them to dig in against outsiders who, whatever the justification, are destroying their homeland."

Reprinted with permission from Foreign Policy in Focus.

Twenty five civilians reported killed in Afghan air strike.

There seems to be a clear policy emerging of attacking insurgents when they take shelter in homes. The result of course are many more civilian casualties. However, this also teaches the population if they do not rid their area of Taliban they may suffer bombardment. It is doubtful that this policy will have the desired effect. It just causes more civilian casualties caused both by the Taliban and by ISAF. Karzai makes his usual squeaky protests but he does not control what NATO and the US do in Afghanistan.


Afghan police say 25 civilians killed in air strike
AMIR SHAH

Associated Press

June 22, 2007 at 9:36 AM EDT

KABUL — Taliban militants attacked police posts in southern Afghanistan, triggering NATO air strikes that left 25 civilians dead, including three infants and the local mullah, a senior police officer said Friday.

NATO said its overnight bombardment killed most of a group of 30 insurgents and blamed them for the deaths of any innocents, saying they had launched "irresponsible" attacks from civilian homes.

NATO acknowledged for the first time that civilians died in another battle that began last weekend in Uruzgan province, including some possibly in air strikes. But a Dutch military chief accused the Taliban of killing Afghans who refused to join them during the three-day battle in the town of Chora.

Taliban fighters slashed the throats of eight women and hauled other people out of their homes to kill them, General Dick Berlijn told reporters in The Hague, Netherlands, citing "solid reports" from Afghan police.


Although Taliban attacks have killed some 169 civilians in Afghanistan this year, the death of innocents at the hands of foreign forces often stirs the most anger among a population that expects NATO and U.S. troops to be more careful than insurgents.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai criticized the mounting civilian toll from NATO and U.S.-led military operations as "difficult for us to accept or understand."

The police posts came under fire late Thursday in Gereshk district of Helmand province, Mohammad Hussein Andiwal, provincial police chief, told The Associated Press.

NATO responded by calling in air strikes, which killed 20 suspected militants, but also 25 civilians, including nine women, three babies and the mullah at the local mosque, Mr. Andiwal said.

Taliban used at least two civilian compounds for cover during the clashes, which lasted into early Friday, Mr. Andiwal said.

"NATO was targeting the areas where the fire was coming from ... and two compounds were completely destroyed, and the families living in those compounds were killed," he said.

Villagers loaded the victims' bodies onto tractor trailers to take them to the provincial capital, Lashkar Gah, to prove they were innocent victims, but police stopped them, Mr. Andiwal said.

NATO said the aircraft struck after insurgents attacked troops from its International Security Assistance Force nine miles northeast of Gereshk town.

"A compound was assessed to have been occupied by up to 30 insurgent fighters, most of whom were killed in the engagement," an alliance statement said.

Lt. Col. Mike Smith, a NATO spokesman, expressed concern about the reports of civilian deaths, but claimed that as insurgents had chosen the time and location for the attack, "the risk to civilians was probably deliberate."

"It is this irresponsible action that may have led to casualties," he said.

If confirmed, the casualties in Gereshk would bring the number of civilians killed in NATO or U.S.-led military operations this year to 177, according to an AP tally of figures provided by Afghan officials and witness report.

Aid groups and other observers warn that anger at the mounting civilian toll is undermining support for the presence of foreign troops and setting back their goal of securing Mr. Karzai's Western-backed government against a Taliban comeback.

Afghan officials have said more than 100 people — including militants, civilians and police — died in the battle at Chora before NATO and Afghan forces re-established control of the area after Taliban overran three police checkpoints.

Taliban fighters tried to force local civilians to fight alongside them, "and killed citizens who refused — they were hauled out of their houses by the Taliban and executed," Gen. Berlijn said.

"One police checkpoint commander saw two brothers murdered before his eyes by the Taliban," he said. Another police report said "eight women were murdered — they had their throats slashed."

Smith, the NATO spokesman, said some civilians "may have been killed at the hands of the Taliban, some may have been caught in crossfire and some may have died in air strikes against enemy positions." He said it was impossible to say how many people died in the battle.

"No matter the cause, we mourn any loss of innocent life. We are here to help provide safety and security to the people of Afghanistan, so even a single death is cause for sadness," Col. Smith said in a statement.

Mr. Karzai's government has protested repeatedly at NATO's frequent resort to massive firepower, and pleaded for closer co-ordination with Afghan officials to avoid civilian losses.

Mr. Karzai told the British Broadcasting Corp. in an interview broadcast Thursday that the issue of civilian deaths is "becoming difficult for us to accept or understand."

"Every effort has to be made for it to stop ... every detail has to be worked out for it in order for civilians to stop being casualties," Mr. Karzai told the BBC.

US in dispute over Afghan killing

This is another example of US and allied forces turning civilians against them. Anger is also increasing against Karzai who in spite of complaining about these practices has done nothing to stop them. It is not at all clear he even has the power to do so. These policies are determined by NATO and the US not Karzai.

US forces in Afghan killing row
By Charles Haviland
BBC News, Kabul



Relatives of the dead man accuse Nato of firing indiscriminately
A bitter argument has arisen between an Afghan family and US-led coalition forces in the country over the shooting of a man in his twenties.

The man's family insists that he was not a militant, but the coalition says that he was an enemy combatant.

At the same time, charities in Afghanistan have strongly criticised foreign troops killing of civilians.

Aid agencies said earlier that foreign and Afghan forces had killed at least 230 civilians since the start of 2007.

'Falsely accused'

People in the southern city of Kandahar told the BBC that foreign troops had forcibly entered several houses, dynamiting their doors and conducting searches.

One man said that in one of the houses they had woken up his sleeping cousin, aged in his twenties, and killed him before letting dogs sniff around his dead body.



The man said the forces had also detained 10 people and falsely accused them of militancy.

Reports say the dead man's distraught relatives shouted that President Hamid Karzai must resign for letting foreign soldiers attack innocent people.

But a spokesman for the US-led coalition said coalition and Afghan forces entered a building in Kandahar and killed an "enemy combatant".

He said no civilians had been injured or killed, adding that he was not aware of there being any mistake.

The incident coincided with a statement issued by large group of charities working in Afghanistan who said they were concerned at the number of civilians being killed by international forces.

The charities alleged that faulty intelligence was often to blame.

"Excessive and disproportionate use of force is not only illegal and wrong but is also counter-productive," the Agency Co-ordinating Body for Afghan Relief (Acbar) warned.

Acbar, which brings together nearly 100 Afghan and international aid organisations, said such attacks created hostility towards international forces and made relief work more difficult.

Controversy surrounds civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The use of air support in urban or town operations is bound to cause civilian casualties. The aim is to avoid casualties to US or allied forces. I wonder sometimes if the use of bombing is not to punish civilians in areas where insurgents are in control. If you provide support or cover for the insurgents you are fair game. Apparently this includes children.


Controversy surrounds military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan following civilian casualties
US air strike in Afghanistan leaves 7 boys dead and Afghans angry, while continued violence in Iraq takes a toll on the civilian population.
By Dan Murphy
Civilian casualities in Afghanistan and Iraq have many accusing US and coalition forces of causing unnecessary deaths.

A US airstrike on an alleged Taliban position that killed seven Afghan boys on Sunday is the latest source of controversy over who is to blame, according to several media sources.

Agence France-Presse reports that the White House says that the boys were being used as "human shields" by Taliban forces, which bear the responsibility for their deaths.

"Certainly we grieve for those who are lost," said White House spokesman Tony Snow. "We also understand that as a matter of tactics, the Taliban and other terrorists sometimes also try to transform innocents into human shields."

US forces called in the airstrike on the religious school in eastern Afghanistan because they believed it was being used as an Al Qaeda and Taliban staging ground. The New York Times quoted a US military spokesman as saying they didn't know there were any children inside, but it noted that Afghan anger at civilian casualties is rising.

The death of the children on Sunday may well add to the crescendoing anger many Afghans feel about civilian casualties from American and NATO military operations. More than 130 civilians have been killed

in airstrikes and shootings in the past six months, according to Afghan authorities.

The deaths of the children are not an isolated incident, The Washington Post reports. The paper quotes the head of the provincial council of Uruzgan, Mulvi Hamdullah, as saying that 50 civilians had died during intensified NATO operations in the area. A US military spokesman said the operations had claimed an equal number of insurgent lives.

There has been rising anger in Afghanistan toward international forces for not doing more to protect noncombatants.

Opinion writer Mathew Yglesias in an article for The Guardian of England, says the US may well eventually lose in Afghanistan if more care isn't taken to avoid civilian casualties.

A headline like seven Afghan children killed in airstrike, which I read in Monday's New York Times, can't help but make you angry. Angry about the dead children, of course, but also angry about the knowledge that there are bound to be others out there angrier over their deaths than I am. They'll have brothers and sisters, friends and neighbors, uncles and fathers, mothers, and cousins. Many of them, naturally enough, will become America's enemies. And with enough such enemies, we'll lose in Afghanistan.

The Los Angeles Times reports that anger is also being directed at Afghanistan's US-backed President Hamid Kharzai (free registration required).

Accidental civilian deaths at the hands of coalition troops have become a highly emotional issue in Afghanistan. The country's pro-Western president, Hamid Karzai, has appealed repeatedly for greater caution in military operations in civilian areas, but public anger at his government is growing as well.


Civilian casualties are also on the rise once more in Iraq, though media reports indicate that is mostly because of local death squads and insurgent bombings. On Tuesday, 75 Iraqis were killed by a truck bomb at a Shiite mosque in Baghdad, the Associated Press reported.

On Monday, fierce fighting in Maysan Province, south of Baghdad, left at least 30 people dead, most of them alleged Shiite militants, The Independent reported.

But the paper also quoted a local official as saying many of the dead were civilians.

Maysan provincial council member Latif al-Timimi said 16 "residents" were killed and a woman and child were among another 14 wounded.

"Most of the dead were killed in bombings as they were sleeping on the roofs of their homes. Those killed were residents and not linked to any political party," he said.

Timimi said the council decided at an emergency meeting to demand an apology from British and Iraqi forces, and to suspend work for three days.

McClatchy reports that the US military denied there were civilian casualties in the Maysan operation. But it also quotes a member of Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army as saying the US military's stated purpose – to stop members of the Mahdi Army involved in smuggling weapons from Iran – was based on false pretenses, and that at least half of the casualties were civilians.

Ahmed Shaybani, a Sadr official who was released from U.S. detention in March in hopes that he would be a moderate voice in the movement, condemned the raids. He denied that anyone was involved in smuggling Iranian weapons and said local men had fought off invading "Iraqi forces and occupation troops." They were celebrating their victory in the streets when U.S. aircraft hit the crowd, he said. Shaybani put the death toll at 34. He said only 16 were Mahdi Army militiamen

Civilian casualties mount in Afghanistan as airpower use increases

There is less concern about civilian casualties than NATO and US casualties since many countries face internal opposition to deployment in Afghanistan. However, the move to lessen troop casulaties may be self-defeating as increased civilian casualties increases support for the insurgents especially in a tribal society where revenge is a point of honor. The result may be more NATO and US casualties. The other alternative to keep a low profile and out of harm's way just gives the insurgents leave to take over control of territory.


As US, NATO forces turn to airpower, civilian casualties mount by Jim Mannion
Sun May 20, 2:03 AM ET



WASHINGTON (AFP) - With reinforcements often a long helicopter ride away, US and NATO troops in Afghanistan are turning to air power when they get into trouble. A disturbing result, analysts say, has been mounting civilian casualties.

ADVERTISEMENT

Over the past month, Afghan officials reported 50 civilians killed in US air strikes in fighting in the western province in Herat, and another 21 in south central Helmand province.

They followed a string of similar incidents last year as fighting intensified between NATO and Taliban forces, many of them involving air strikes called in by troops in the heat of battle.

"Every time that happens someone walks away .. with a bad feeling either to NATO or the United States or its coalition members. That's what we don't want to happen," General Bantz Craddock, NATO's supreme allied commander, told reporters Friday.

The deaths have sparked public outrage at a time when NATO is facing a major challenge from the Taliban, creating a dilemma for commanders over whether the gains offered by air strikes are worth the loss in public support.

Some analysts say too few troops on the ground, coupled with allied sensitivities about using ground forces and taking casualties, have made air power an irresistible option.

"The problem is when you don't have enough forces on the ground, and when those forces -- especially with the variety of NATO countries -- are restricted and there are deep concerns about casualties, air power is all you have left," said Seth Jones, an analyst at the Rand Corporation, a think tank with ties to the US Air Force.

"This is the paradox I think that NATO is in. It has to in many cases resort to air power in a major way," he said.

Craddock told reporters that the lack of helicopters and troops promised by NATO allies last year at a summit in Riga also contributes to the problem.

"It's not so much the lack of ground troops," he said. "It's the ability to get from point A to point B to alleviate a problem in extremis."

"You've got a patrol out there in Afghanistan, you bump into something and come under fire. I don't care how many battalions you've got, the question is do you have these rotary helicopter assets to move a reaction force quickly to bail out forces under fire," he said.

"Other than that there is close air support," he said.

Close air support missions averaged 44 a day this month with an assortment of US, British and French fighter aircraft watching over convoys, dropping flares and occasionally dipping into strafe or bomb insurgent positions, according to air force reports.

US special forces called in unusually heavy aerial support in fighting April 27 through April 30 in the remote Zerkoh Valley of Afghanistan's western Herat province.

Air force B-1B bombers and F-15E fighters dropped 2,000 pound and 500 pound satellite-guided bombs on Taliban positions and on at least one compound that had been used as a firing position, according to air force summaries.

A US military press release said an AC-130 gunship also was used to kill a large number of fighters. It put the total Taliban dead in two days of fighting at 136.

Later, though, Afghan and UN officials said the bodies of 50 civilians were recovered, and differing accounts have emerged over whether US forces engaged Taliban fighters or armed villagers fighting off foreign intruders.

The US military has provided no explanation of what happened, or acknowledged any civilians were killed in the fighting. Officials said the commander on the scene used "appropriate level of force" to protect his unit.

The rules under which a commander is required to operate are classified, so it is not known what restrictions are placed on them.

Military officials say they go to great lengths, using surveillance aircraft and "eyes on the ground" to positively identify their targets, and hold back if they cannot.

But, said Craddock, "this is imperfect science."

"At the end of the day, the decision to launch the ordnance is a human decision," he said.

"The technology only gets you closer to the intended point of view, that you see what it is you're shooting at and hit what you see. The decision to do that is a human decision. That is what we're up against."

He said General Dan McNeil, the American general who commands ISAF, has conducted a preliminary review of civilian deaths incidents and found that the rules were followed in most cases.

"Then it becomes a decision that we have to go out and look at as to gains and loss," Craddock said. "Loss of popular support versus gains of taking out one, two, three of the bad guys."

"That's where we're going to have to put our focus here. And it won't be changing ROEs (rules of engagement), it will be changing tactics, techniques and procedures."

Karzai decries civilian deaths from international operations

As I have noted in previous posts these actions are likely causing NATO forces to lose the support of the citizens and increase recruits and support for the Taliban. The US and NATO reports often ignore or deny that there are civilian casualties as is the case here. Of course Karzai is more or less impotent as far as stopping the attacks are concerned. I am sure he does not get to authorise them. It is the military that decides when and how to attack. In fact Karzai depends upon a US contractor to provide him with personal security.

Afghan president decries civilian deaths By ALISA TANG, Associated Press Writer
Wed May 2, 1:45 PM ET



KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghans can no longer accept or understand civilian deaths from international military operations, President Hamid Karzai said Wednesday after officials said 51 villagers were killed during a U.S.-led offensive against the Taliban in western Afghanistan.



Despite claims that women and children were among the dead, the U.S. military maintained it had no reports of civilian casualties. But rising public anger was evident as students staged a fourth day of anti-American protests in an eastern city over civilian deaths.

Karzai met with NATO, U.S. and European Union officials, telling them that "civilian deaths and arbitrary decisions to search people's houses have reached an unacceptable level, and Afghans cannot put up with it any longer," according to a statement from his office.

During an earlier news conference, Karzai said Afghans had reached their limit after the years of conflict since the Taliban's ouster in late 2001.

"The intention is very good in these operations to fight terrorism. Sometimes mistakes have been made as well, but five years on, it is very difficult for us to continue to accept civilian casualties," Karzai told reporters.

"We can no longer accept civilian casualties the way they occur," he added. "It is not understandable anymore."

The U.S.-led coalition said the military operation in western Herat province was conducted between Friday and Sunday by U.S. and Afghan troops in the Zerkoh Valley and killed 136 suspected Taliban militants — the deadliest fighting in Afghanistan since January.

The bloodshed sparked angry anti-U.S. protests earlier this week by villagers. Mohammad Homayoun Azizi, chief of Herat's provincial council, said two council members who visited the area along with Afghan police and intelligence officers reported that 51 civilians were killed.

Azizi said the bodies were buried in three locations and included women and children. The dead included 12 relatives of a man named Jamal Mirzai, he said.

A man being treated in a hospital Wednesday said he was wounded by an airstrike that did not hit any insurgents. "There were no Taliban. Ten of my relatives have been killed, including two of my cousins," said the man, who gave only his first name, Mohammed.

Osman Kalali, a lawmaker who was part of the investigative delegation, said they did not see any Taliban or other militants among the dead. "The casualties were women, children, this kind of people," he said.

Civilian deaths have deepened Afghans' distrust of international forces and of the U.S.-backed government as they try to combat a resurgent Taliban — itself accused by human rights groups of indiscriminate attacks that often kill noncombatants.

"We do everything we can to prevent civilian casualties in our operations, and we have no reports of civilian casualties in that operation" in Herat, said a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition, Maj. Chris Belcher.