More Afghans died in 2010 than in any other year of the decade-long war, according to a new report from the United Nations and Afghanistan's human rights commission. That's in spite of 30,000 new U.S. troops in Afghanistan and a strategy predicated on keeping civilians out of harm's way.
But only 16 percent of the 2,777 civilians killed in 2010 died at the hands of the U.S. or its allies. NATO's proportionate responsibility for civilian deaths fell by 26 percent from 2009 -- also in spite of much increased fighting in southern and southwestern Afghanistan. Back in 2008, by contrast, the U.S. and its allies were responsible for 39 percent of civilian deaths.
The Taliban's killings of civilians rose 28 percent from 2009, the study finds. Increased use of homemade bombs, along with suicide attacks, represent 55 percent of those insurgent killings. And the Taliban's assassination campaign -- which the U.S. warns will return in force in the spring -- killed 462 civilians alone, mostly in Helmand Province, where assassinations are up a whopping 588 percent; and Kandahar Province, where they're up 248 percent.
It's this mixed picture that Gen. David Petraeus will present to Congress in two days of testimony next week. His forces are increasingly good at distinguishing insurgents from civilians, but they're not able to stop the insurgents from killing more Afghans. As those civilian deaths have risen, Petraeus' staff has emphasized the numbers of insurgents they capture or kill. "The Taliban have never been under the pressure that they were put under over the course of the last 8 to 10 months," he tells the New York Times' Carlotta Gall in an interview previewing his testimony.
Petraeus has overseen nearly nine months of heavy fighting, including an increase of airstrikes, Special Operations raids, rocket fire and the destruction of empty booby-trapped homes. The return of the air war last year -- a record 33,000 close air support sorties, up 20 percent from 2009 -- coincided with a 2010 drop in civilian deaths from the air by 52 percent. But the U.N. report warns that much of that reduction came before Petraeus arrived in Afghanistan: in the second half of the year, as the air war returned, 102 civilians died from air strikes, nearly a 50 percent rise from the first half of 2010.
Similarly, the "night raids" launched by Special Operations Forces "do not cause a large number of civilian casualties," the U.N. finds. But they're a PR nightmare, as they "continue to generate anger and resentment across Afghan society. The U.N. warns of a "persistent lack of transparency on investigations and accountability for civilian casualties" during the raids. One of the U.S. officers charged with investigating botched raids is now going to lead them: Maj. Gen. Joseph Votel, the incoming commander of the Joint Special Operations Command.
The U.N. report does everything but call the Taliban war criminals, saying their assassinations and "use of civilians as human shields" are "unlawful tactics." But the U.S. and its allies come in for their share of criticism. By fighting in heavily populated areas of Helmand Province, "without the necessary Afghan policing and public protection capacities to follow, contributed to increased civilian harm." Still, NATO got greater buy-in from the locals for subsequent operations in Kandahar, resulting in fewer civilian deaths despite heavier fighting, although the U.N. criticized Petraeus' forces for increased destruction of property, irrigation systems and gardens.
Laughably, the U.N. call on the Taliban to basically reverse its entire tactical course: "Immediately cease targeting civilians"; tear down illegal checkpoints; stop using human shields; etc. By contrast, it calls on NATO to intensify its course, by more uniformly investigating civilian deaths and enforcing edicts designed to keep collateral damage low. Petraeus agreed to do just that after apologizing for a helicopter strike mistake that killed nine Afghan boys.
But the question remains: what will matter most to Afghans? The fact that NATO is killing fewer of them and the Taliban is killing vastly more? Or the overall fact that more of them are dying?
Photo: Flickr/DVIDS
