A little more than a month ago, a US airstrike in the Farah Province of Afghanistan killed at least 140 innocent civilians. Until this week, US Government and Military officials refused to accept the massive civilian death toll proposed by Afghani officials. Instead, several outlandish scenarios were devised to divert the atrocity of the event onto the supposed cunningness of the Taliban. After a month of government quibble, a Pentagon spokesman has finally admitted error on part of the US.
Geoff Morrell, a Pentagon spokesman, recently stated “There were some problems with some tactics, techniques and procedures or … the way in which close air support was supposed to have been executed in this case.” He also went on to admit that the number of deaths projected by Afghan officials was accurate.
For the US, this is not the first opportunity to learn from our rash policy in Afghanistan. Just last year, a similar US air strike in Azizabad, Afghanistan left 90 civilians dead. In similar fashion the US made an attempt to place the fault at the helm of the Taliban only to later acknowledge the atrocity with the issuing of a directive to reduce similar civilian deaths in the future.
Who would think a directive intended to reduce similar civilian deaths in the future would precede the single worst incident of civilian deaths since we invaded Afghanistan in 2001? Furthermore, these are not isolated incidents. US Airstrikes occur quite frequently in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) and almost always carry civilian death counts higher than the insurgent death counts. Just a few days ago, a US airstrike in Ghor province Afghanistan left 10 civilians dead while the intended target escaped alive.
The recent admittance of fault in the Farah killings paired with this week’s Ghor province airstrike has prompted a review of the the tactics being used. The newly appointed General McChrystal will take lead responsibility on reviewing the tactics that led to the incident. However, skepticism that any change will come from the review is definitely warranted. It is likely that McChrystal will deliver another shallow directive lacking any accountability. After all, investigations carried out in the past have been incapable of preventing similar devastation moving forward.
Ultimately, it is going to take much more than a directive, or a hasty investigation, to get US Afghan policy aligned with US values. The delayed recognition and acceptance by the Pentagon, of its callous military actions, must be replaced by a policy demonstrating restraint and responsibility. Avoiding similar failures in the future would prove that a lesson has finally been learned. A lesson that has been neglected at the expense of innocent civilians’ lives for far too long. Let’s hope for a time where the complete disregard for non-American life, currently demonstrated by US foreign policy, is no longer revealed by the vestiges found in the daily news.
-Colin
June 18th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Reports like these remind me of that scene in Apocalypse Now when the nervous boat crew shoots up that Vietnamese sampan only to find out that the woman was frightened about a puppy. Then they argue about how to give the survivor they just shot medical attention.
We’ve been there since 2001, and govt we established still has little control outside Kabul. Why’s that? I think figuring that out would solve more than haphazardly bombing stuff to snuff out these pissant Taliban guerilla soldiers.
Maybe if we spent more time helping people there instead of using aid dollars as a chance to make money disappear like some kleptocratic ex-Soviet govt, we could make some headway there instead of the stalled status quo.