US surges apologies for civilian deaths

New tactic for U.S., NATO in Afghanistan: say sorry Reuters:

Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:00pm BST
By Peter Graff

KABUL (Reuters) - After years of alienating Afghans by being slow to acknowledge killing civilians, U.S. troops are trying a new tactic: say sorry fast.

Commanders acknowledge that soaring civilian death tolls from U.S. and NATO strikes over the past year have cost them the vital support of ordinary Afghans -- and a perception that they were reluctant to take responsibility made the situation worse.

In an effort to blunt the damage, they have put in place new drills in recent months -- responding more quickly, coordinating their investigations with Afghan authorities, apologizing publicly and offering compensation.

But with civilian casualties still mounting as fighting increases, it remains to be seen whether the new approach will blunt the fury of an Afghan public wary of foreign troops...

Read rest of article

Afghan President calls on NATO general to explain civilian deaths | World | Deutsche Welle | 19.04.2009

Afghan President calls on NATO general to explain civilian deaths World Deutsche Welle 19.04.2009:

"For the second time in three days, Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai has called on the country's top NATO general to explain civilian casualties caused by international forces."

"...In the past week, international forces have already been forced to apologize for the killings of Afghans in the Khost and Kunar provinces. In both cases, the military initially said they had been targeting militants. Within days, they had confessed to killing civilians and issued public
apologies."

Read rest of article

International Aid Agencies Worry About Surge

EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Afghanistan: International Aid Agencies Wary of US-Backed Security Surge

...[In] an unprecedented move, a group of influential aid agencies joined hands to urge for an immediate halt to some of the specific civilian-military policies. In all, 11 organizations called for a de-linking of aid delivery from military goals, changes in the operational strategies of the international military forces, phasing out the strategy of distributing aid through the PRTs and halting two specific new security policies that they say will put Afghan communities at greater risk.

While humanitarian and development agencies have expressed concern about the civilian population from time to time, this concern previously tended to be expressed in general terms. Never before have NGOs gotten so specific. The NGOs who have come together to formulate a common position are all widely respected and with long-term track records in Afghanistan, including Oxfam, Care, Action Aid and Save the Children...

...Among the military measures that these organizations are wary of are the Afghan Social Outreach Program (ASOP) and the Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF), both sometimes referred to as "empowerment programs..."

Read rest of article

A Regional Approach to Afghanistan

A Regional Approach to Afghanistan



Barnett Rubin, Director of Studies and a Senior Fellow at the Center on International Cooperation at New York University (Feb 23, 2009 at Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs

Making the Case Against Escalation

Peace Action West's Groundswell blog has developed five articles responding to common arguments from thoughtful Democrats and progressives who are unsure about opposing President Obama's plan for Afghanistan.

Part one about whether more troops create more security is here.

Part two on women's rights is here.

Part three on the terrorist threat is here.

Part four on supporting President Obama is here.

Part five on the US obligation to Afghanistan is here

Ten Things You Can Do to Oppose the War in Afghanistan

Ten Things You Can Do to Oppose the War in Afghanistan:
from The Nation 4/8/09

"The war in Afghanistan is a quagmire bordering on a catastrophe. With a current price tag of $2 billion a month, this drawn-out conflict took the lives of 155 American soldiers and 2,118 Afghan civilians last year--the bloodiest year of the war to date. Western airstrikes alone killed 522 civilians, fueling hostility toward the United States and causing more Afghans to join and support the Taliban insurgency that has spread into Pakistan. President Obama has escalated our military presence by committing an additional 17,000 US troops and 4,000 trainers to work with Afghan security forces. Where is the public outcry? The Nation and Z.P. Heller, editorial director of Brave New Films, have put together a list of things you can do to oppose the war."

Read rest of article

Afghanistan: For Your Reading Pleasure

From the Dreyfuss Report, The Nation:

"Having spent a while reading about Afghanistan, I've collected some resources for anyone who'd like to learn a little more about that godforsaken country and about what various strategists think ought to be done. Pretty much everything I've listed below is useful to read, even if you don't agree with all of the conclusions that analysts come up with."

"A good place to start is The Forgotten Front, published more than a year ago by the Center for American Progress. Written by Caroline P. Wadhams, an extremely bright young analyst, and Lawrence Korb, a veteran defense expert, it's a primer about the war. Many progressives won't like their conclusion that the United States needs to send more troops. (At the time, when the US had 25,000 troops in country, CAP recommended adding 20,000 more. Currently, there are 36,000 US forces, and President Obama has ordered the deployment of 17,000 more.) And CAP puts too much emphasis on NATO, saying, "A failure in Afghanistan would throw NATO's relevance into doubt" -- as if the war were about NATO, not Afghanistan. But "The Forgotten Front," even though it is somewhat overtaken by events, is a very useful guide to the issues in the war, complete with maps, charts and graphs."

Read rest of article

Enlisting Anthopologists for Counterinsurgency Campaigns

The Press and Human Terrain Systems: Counterinsurgency's Free Ride by David Price, Counterpunch, April 7, 2009

Like a mad scientist’s slime monster that will not die in a 1950s B Movie, the Human Terrain System’s counterinsurgency teams not only somehow remains alive in the face of extensive devastating criticism, but the program’s existence remains firmly publicly boosted by a seemingly endless series of uncritical mainstream news and features stories that frame the program as America’s last best hope to win the hearts and minds of the occupied peoples of Iraq and increasingly Afghanistan...

The Human Terrain program embeds social scientists, such as anthropologists, with troops operating in battle theatre settings as members of Human Terrain Teams. These teams are part of counterinsurgency operations designed provide military personnel with cultural information that will help inform troop activities in areas of occupation.

Read rest of article

Noam Chomsky on Afghanistan Escalation

Noam Chomsky on US Expansion of Afghan Occupation, the Uses of NATO, and What Obama Should Do in Israel-Palestine

We speak to Noam Chomsky, prolific author and Institute Professor Emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. As NATO leaders gather for a sixtieth anniversary summit in France, Chomsky says, “The obvious question is, why bother celebrating NATO at all? In fact, why does it exist?” Chomsky also analyzes the Obama administration’s escalation of the Afghanistan occupation and reacts to the new Netanyahu government in Israel. [includes rush transcript]

Cross-posted from: http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/3/noam