Getting Away With Murder?

Last year Spencer Ackerman writing in the blog Danger Room documented the escalation of air power (and bombings) under General Petraeus.

It is not a new tactic. In fact, it has been an on and off campaign over the years. The reason it is cyclical - and has been reduced at times - is Afghan anger over civilian deaths that accompany massive indiscriminate power. To revisit the policy says something about immunity and a disregard for Afghan lives.

“The air war over Afghanistan has reached a post-invasion high. Unfortunately for the U.S., Afghan anger over air strikes is soaring as well.

No group of people is going to be enthusiastic about a foreign power dropping bombs on their countrymen, as the Pakistanis can attest. But a new poll from the Washington Post, ABC News and the BBC finds that 73 percent of Afghans say that U.S. air strikes are “unacceptable.” That’s an increase from the last survey, which found 66 percent opposition to the U.S. air war last December.”

Two years ago Amnesty International also addressed the issue of immunity and civilian casualties in a report called Getting Away With Murder? The Impunity of International Forces in Afghanistan. Update 1: There are now more US troops in Afghanistan, and a greater reliance on armed drones, helicopter gunships, and warplanes. Update 2: There remains little accountability by foreign forces in Afghanistan. Here is what the report found in 2009.

“There is now a persistent perception among many Afghans that international forces in Afghanistan do not sufficiently consider the wellbeing of ordinary Afghans—a perception successfully reinforced by the propaganda effort of the Taliban and other anti-government forces."

A Friday Roundtable - Death in Afghanistan

Kathy Kelly looks at the human cost - in Afghanistan with lives lost and here with lost opportunity.

“Recent polls suggest that while a majority of U.S. people disapprove of the war in Afghanistan, many on grounds of its horrible economic cost, only 3% took the war into account when voting in the 2010 midterm elections. The issue of the economy weighed heavily on voters, but the war and its cost, though clear to them and clearly related to the economy in their thinking, was a far less pressing concern.

U.S. people, if they do read or hear of it, may be shocked at the apparent unconcern of the crews of two U.S. helicopter gunships, which attacked and killed nine children on a mountainside in Afghanistan’s Kunar province, shooting them “one after another” this past Tuesday March 1st.”

Stephen M Walt (Hearts Minds and Gunships: What are we really doing in Afghanistan?) notes that winning hearts and minds sounds good on paper and puts a ‘humanitarian’ veneer on our troop presence. But it is a policy that is not politically neutral.

“[Using the military to protect] a local population often requires interfering with their daily lives in sometimes onerous and bothersome ways, whether through the construction of massive concrete barriers (as in Baghdad), or "strategic hamlets" (as in Vietnam), or through intrusive search missions in local villages. Even when we are in fact improving the security of the local population, that may not be how the people we are supposedly protecting perceive it. In the Pech Valley, at least, the local population mostly wanted us to get out and leave them alone.”

Nowhere to Turn: The Failure to Protect Civilians in Afghanistan.

Oxfam International with 28 aid agencies working in Afghanistan released this report in November. The goal was to influence the NATO summit that was to take place in Lisbon. The paper argues that military solutions don’t work, and that the protection of Afghans is better achieved with a comprehensive and transparent political solution. The challenges are daunting.

"2010 is the deadliest year for Afghan civilians since 2001. According to UNAMA Human Rights, there were 1,271 civilian deaths in the first six months of 2010 - an increase of 21% on the same period last year."

Nine Afghan Boys Killed by Helicopter Gunships

Alissa Rubin writing in the New York Times gives graphic detail about the killing of nine Afghan boys by NATO helicopter gunships. It is a story about rockets and the use of overwhelming violence. It is a story about poverty and anger towards the United States and its NATO allies. It is a story about the impact of war.

Extensive drone surveillance and all of the other spying available to the U.S. military didn’t stop these bombers from killing nine children they believed to be enemies.

Earlier, the Washington Post reported that more than 200 Afghans were killed in a two week period of February - calling it the deadliest period for civilians since the war began.

What Does the US Spend on 'National Security'?

$1.2 Trillion/Year

Get the facts behind this number by reading this helpful tutorial. Chris Hellman of the National Priorities Project documents and reveals the many aspects of government spending (some open – others obscured) that are labeled as national security. The total is $1.2 trillion per year. It is a number nobody wants you to know.

Reference Guide:

What is the difference between a million, a billion and a trillion?

• A stack of hundred dollar bills that equals one MILLION dollars would be four inches high.

• A stack of hundred dollar bills that equals one BILLION dollars would be thirty feet taller than the Statue of Liberty.

• A stack of hundred dollar bills that equals one TRILLION dollars would be 63 miles high. In comparison, jet planes fly around 7 to 8 miles above the earth.

Put another way.

A country with a gross domestic product of $1.2 trillion would have the 15th largest economy in the world, ranking between Canada and Indonesia, and ahead of Australia, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and Saudi Arabia.

The Hidden War

Sari Kouvo reviews steps being taken in Afghanistan to explore transitional justice and the healing process that can come about through truth and reconciliation.

"While most policymakers in the West and in Afghanistan have been talking this year about the prospect of negotiations with the Taliban, transitional justice, an important element of any comprehensive peace process, has received much less attention. Transitional justice -- the process of dealing with legacies of past war crimes and human rights violations -- has always been an awkward subject for the Afghan government and for some of its more powerful international partners, which are implicated in previous injustices. However, some Afghan and international organizations have carefully laid the groundwork for a transitional justice agenda."

A broader survey of this issue is in the current issue of the International Journal of Transitional Justice. When Truth Commissions Improve Human Rights.

Most studies of truth commissions assert their positive role in improving human rights. A first wave of research made these claims based on qualitative analysis of a single truth commission or a small number of cases. Thirty years of experience with truth commissions and dozens of examples allow cross-national statistical studies to assess these findings. Two recent studies undertake that project. Their findings, which are summarized in this article, challenge the prevailing view that truth commissions foster human rights, showing instead that commissions, when used alone, tend to have a negative impact on human rights. Truth commissions have a positive impact, however, when used in combination with trials and amnesties. This article extends the question of whether truth commissions improve human rights to how, when and why they succeed or fail in doing so.

I Wish To Live Without Wars

A powerful message of solidarity from young Afghans working with Our Journey to Smile.

The video pays homage to the struggles for freedom in Tunisia and Egypt and the hope it has inspired across the region. They also request our help, to draw attention to the People Day of Peace in Afghanistan - New Years Day.

I Wish To Live Without Wars
The Peoples Day of Peace
Afghan New Years Day
21 March 2011

Afghans for Peace

The growing use of "night raids" by NATO-led and Afghan forces to kill or capture insurgents is one of the most controversial strategies in the Afghan war.

Here are testimonials of survivors.