Incredible. Just imagine a headline in WWII: Civilian risks cut down on airstrikes in Germany. B http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/23/asia/afghan.php Civilian risks cut down on airstrikes in Afghanistan By Thom Shanker
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 Dawn was breaking over Afghanistan one day this month as U.S. Air Force surveillance planes locked in on a top-ranking insurgent commander as he traveled in secret around Kandahar, the spiritual home of the Taliban. But as attack aircraft were summoned overhead to strike, according to a recounting of the mission by air force commanders, the Taliban leader entered a building. Intelligence specialists scrambled to determine whether civilians were inside. Weapons experts calculated what bomb could destroy the structure with the least damage. It had taken the U.S. military many days to identify, track and target the senior Taliban officer. But the risk of civilian deaths was deemed too high. Air force commanders, working with military lawyers, aborted the mission. The Taliban leader escaped. "We miss the opportunity, but the beauty of what we do is, we will get them eventually," said Lieutenant General Gary North, commander of U.S. and allied air forces in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. "We will continue to track them. Eventually, we will get to the point where we can achieve - within the constraints of which we operate, which by the way the enemy does not operate under - and we will get them." In interviews at the air operations headquarters in Southwest Asia, U.S. and allied commanders said that even as orders for air attacks in Afghanistan had increased significantly this year, their ability to strike top insurgent leaders from the air was severely restricted by rules intended to minimize civilian casualties. The rules that govern dropping bombs and firing missiles are far more restrictive now in Afghanistan than in Iraq, senior Pentagon and military officials say. The rules of engagement were reviewed and tightened in 2007 after a spate of civilian casualties, under General Dan McNeill, then the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, and reviewed and revised again in April, officials said. U.S. commanders acknowledge that civilian casualties undermine support for the NATO-led stability mission exactly at a time when the Taliban is experiencing a potent resurgence across the country. They say Afghan officials, including President Hamid Karzai, routinely complain about civilian deaths in meetings with Americans. Military officers also acknowledge that their control over airstrikes is reduced when crews scramble to help NATO contingents under attack. But air commanders say they have a commitment to support ground forces in trouble. Only last weekend, nine Afghan police officers were killed in western Afghanistan when Afghan and U.S. forces called in airstrikes on the officers, thinking they were militants. According to the United Nations, 698 civilians were killed in the first six months this year, compared with 430 in the same period last year. The UN report said nearly two-thirds of the deaths this year resulted from actions by the Taliban and other insurgents. The remainder were attributed to actions by Afghan government, U.S. or allied forces. But in interviews at the air base, U.S. and allied commanders expressed frustration about the obstacles they faced. They described what they said were missed opportunities and told how Taliban leaders, who live and operate among the population, have learned to exploit the restrictions. "There are frustrations, without a doubt," said a British officer, Air Commodore Simon Dobb, director of the combined air operations center. "But we understand what Clausewitz said, that war is an extension of policy. We are acutely aware of the sensitivities toward collateral damage," the military term for civilians killed or injured. A reporter for The New York Times was given access to the Combined Air and Space Operations Center under a written agreement that neither the name of the base nor its location be published, in deference to the host nation's concerns. Over recent weeks, a wave of deadly Taliban attacks illustrated just how thinly U.S. and NATO troops were stretched across Afghanistan, prompting Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to pledge to find additional forces for the mission. In the meantime, orders for airstrikes in Afghanistan have increased in recent months, as U.S. and allied warplanes attack Taliban hide-outs and swoop in to assist allied and Afghan forces under fire. According to statistics compiled by the air operations center, during the first six months of this year, 1,853 munitions were dropped by air over Afghanistan - more than twice the 754 dropped in Iraq during the same period. In June alone, 646 bombs and missiles were used in Afghanistan, the second highest monthly total since the end of major combat operations in 2002. Air force lawyers vet all the airstrikes approved by the operational air commanders. Senior Pentagon officials said the more-stringent rules of engagement now in effect for Afghanistan specified the acceptable levels of risk to civilians for a priority attack. They said these more-stringent rules required a significantly lower risk of civilian casualties than was acceptable in Iraq. Missions in Afghanistan that are judged vital but highly risky to civilians may now require approval by the overall regional commander and, in some instances, even by the defense secretary himself, according to Pentagon and military officials. "In their deliberate targeting, the Air Force has all but eliminated civilian casualties in Afghanistan," said Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst with Human Rights Watch. "They have very effective collateral damage mitigation procedures." The greater risk of civilian casualties, Garlasco said, comes in unplanned targeting, when U.S. and allied troops come under attack unexpectedly and call for airstrikes for urgent help. NATO soldier killed A NATO soldier died after being ambushed in southern Afghanistan, while U.S.-led coalition troops killed several militants near the capital, officials said Wednesday, The Associated Press and Reuters reported from Kabul. The militants fired on a NATO patrol in Kajaki district of Helmand Province on Tuesday, a statement from the alliance said. The soldier was initially wounded and later died, it said. NATO did not release the nationality of the dead soldier. Most of the troops in Kajaki are British. More than 2,600 people have died in insurgency-related violence this year in Afghanistan, according to an Associated Press tally of official figures. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
