iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

US Drone Crew Blamed For Afghan Civilian Deaths

ROBERT H. REID   05/29/10 06:52 PM ET   AP

Drones Afghanistan

KABUL, Afghanistan — U.S. military investigators found that "inaccurate and unprofessional" reporting by U.S. operators of a Predator drone was responsible for a missile strike that killed 23 Afghan civilians in February, according to a report released Saturday.

Release of the scathing report is part of a U.S. effort to counter rising public anger over civilian deaths, which threatens to undermine the campaign against the Taliban at a critical juncture in the nearly nine-year war. Twelve other civilians including a woman and three children were wounded in the missile strike, the report said.

Four American officers – two described as senior – received career-damaging reprimands, the U.S. command said in a statement. The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, called on the Air Force to investigate the actions of the Predator crew.

"Our most important mission here is to protect the Afghan people," said McChrystal, who had apologized to President Hamid Karzai shortly after the attack. "Inadvertently killing or injuring civilians is heartbreaking and undermines their trust and confidence in our mission. We will do all we can to regain that trust."

The attack also underscores the risks of using unmanned aircraft to fire on insurgents, not only in Afghanistan but also in neighboring Pakistan. Drone strikes against insurgent sanctuaries in border areas of Pakistan have fueled anti-Americanism among the 175 million Pakistanis.

The deadly attack occurred Feb. 21 after the unmanned aircraft, controlled by a crew at Creech Air Force Base, Nevada, spotted three vehicles on a main road in Uruzgan province about seven miles (12 kilometers) from where U.S. Special Forces and Afghan soldiers were tracking insurgents, the U.S. report said.

Suspecting the convoy contained fighters, the ground commander ordered an airstrike, and U.S. helicopters fired missiles at the vehicles, the report said.

But the attack order was based on inaccurate information from the Predator crew and a flawed analysis of the situation by U.S. commanders, according to the author of the report, Army Maj. Gen. Timothy McHale.

Poorly functioning command posts "failed to provide the ground force commander with the evidence and analysis that the vehicles were not a hostile threat and the inaccurate and unprofessional reporting of the Predator crew ... deprived the ground force commander of vital information," McHale wrote.

"Information that the convoy was anything other than an attacking force was ignored or downplayed by the Predator crew," it said.

After the first salvo, the helicopter crews stopped firing because they saw brightly colored clothing in the convoy – a strong indication that women were present. A video shot from the drone showed women and children present.

McHale criticized commanders for failing to report "ample evidence" of civilian casualties for nearly 12 hours after the attack, while they tried for confirmation.

A U.S. Forces spokesman, Rear Admiral Gregory Smith, said the only people the drone operators could see in the convoy were in the back of a pickup truck. Smith said the Predator crew should have reported the possibility of civilians in the two cars.

"They did not report the ambiguity of what they were seeing," Smith said. "They weren't clearly seeing a heavily armed threat."

Human rights activists welcomed the report as a sign that NATO was being more open about admitting mistakes.

"But transparency and public accountability for the conduct of troops are still the exception rather than the rule," said Erica Gaston, a lawyer who works on civilian casualties issues for the New York-based Open Society Institute.

Accidental killing of civilians by NATO forces has become a major source of friction between the Afghan government and its international partners, even though the United Nations says the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths are caused by the Taliban and their allies.

The issue has taken on new urgency as NATO prepares for a major operation to secure Kandahar, the largest city in the south and the Taliban's birthplace and stronghold. NATO commanders believe securing the city is key to turning back the Taliban in the south, the major theater of the war.

But opposition to the planned operation is running high in Kandahar. That has forced NATO commanders to plan the operation carefully to minimize civilian casualties – even if that adds risks facing U.S. and allied forces.

The U.N. says at least 2,412 civilians were killed in 2009 – a 14 percent increase over the previous year. NATO and Afghan government forces were responsible for 25 percent of the deaths, the U.N. said in January report. Of those, about 60 percent were due to airstrikes, the U.N. said.

Since assuming command last year, McChrystal has sharply curbed the use of airpower if civilians are at risk. The new policy has reduced the number of civilian deaths attributed to the coalition but has not entirely assuaged public anger.

Also Saturday, the governor of the remote northeastern province of Nuristan said government forces abandoned the main town in the Barg-e-Matal district after a major assault by Taliban militants, many of them coming in from nearby Pakistan.

Gov. Jamaluddin Badar described the move as a "strategic withdrawal" to prevent civilian casualties after a nearly weeklong assault by hundreds of Taliban fighters.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in a telephone message to reporters that insurgents had taken complete control of the district, captured three police vehicles and forced security forces to flee checkpoints along the main roads.

Taliban strength grew in the Nuristan area after U.S. troops abandoned an outpost where eight American soldiers were killed in a fierce attack last October.

___

Associated Press writers Heidi Vogt, Rahim Faiez and Rohan Sullivan contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

KABUL, Afghanistan — U.S. military investigators found that "inaccurate and unprofessional" reporting by U.S. operators of a Predator drone was responsible for a missile strike that killed 23 Af...
KABUL, Afghanistan — U.S. military investigators found that "inaccurate and unprofessional" reporting by U.S. operators of a Predator drone was responsible for a missile strike that killed 23 Af...
Filed by Nick Graham  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 412
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
photo
Erzsebet Gilbert
author, expat, traveler
03:01 AM on 05/31/2010
And people excuse these kinds of war crimes by insisting that drones "save American lives," claiming that more soldiers would die in a ground attack. What is being articulated implicitly here is that civilian lives don't matter to us, not when they are foreign and different from us. So, pray tell me, how many Afghan grandmothers are equal to one American soldier?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
flabingo
07:28 PM on 05/31/2010
Israel kills nine people who we will assume were innocents, 2400 civilians are killed in Afghanistan in 2009. There is international outcry about Israel. But McCrystal said he will try to do better next year.Why don't we just write a check for the 4 billion dollar poppy crop each year and bring our men and women back home.
02:28 AM on 05/31/2010
WAR
It's a dying business
Too late the hero.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:19 AM on 05/31/2010
It must be galling to be murdered by someone who had to stand up afterward to dust Cheetos off his shirt.
photo
Erzsebet Gilbert
author, expat, traveler
02:59 AM on 05/31/2010
Killing somebody through the push of a button... It's a video game, so easy when the soldier doesn't have to look at the innocent blood, murder with anesthesia.
12:07 AM on 05/31/2010
Number of killed civilians isn’t as relevant as HOW we behave. Honor is penultimate in Afghanistan. A transgression might be 2000 years old but until it is avenged or addressed they feel the humiliation of it today as harshly as the day it happened. Afghanistan INVENTED the grudge. They LITERALLY would rather DIE than be disrespected.

Knowing this, we do what? Sweep into homes at night, yank children from beds, grind heels into backs, ruin possessions, and take loved ones to "secret hiding places." And, as happens 95% of the time, when we find nothing in homes, and weeks later when, after beating, humiliating, and treating them like sub-humans, we release the loved ones were innocent bystanders, WE DO THIS AS THOUGH IT IS OUR RIGHT. NO EXPLANATIONS REQUIRED. Why? In Afghanistan they believe, maybe rightly, because don't we respect them enough even to bother.

When innocents, say pregnant women, die? We pretend IT DIDN’T EVEN HAPPEN and dig our bullets out of bodies. The fathers of these women knelt in the street and begged for nothing but that just one who had slain their daughters tell them they were sorry. Too much for us to do, but here’s a check and a brand new goat for you! THAT is the kind of pain that we have so carelessly caused and which will inspire violence against us FOR GENERATIONS. God knows, I don’t condone it, but I do understand why and how we have made them suffer.
07:31 PM on 05/30/2010
The two Gulf Wars -- I like to call them Bush War I and Bush War II -- were undertaken with a volunteer army. Cheney and his ilk learned from Vietnam that drafting young men from all levels of society was a sure way to engender outrage and protest. Sending those with few alternatives for a paycheck is much more elegant.

Drone aircraft warfare may be this administration's next step along similar lines. Kill, but don't be killed. Rely on the perception that these are precision weapons to assure all those who are not in the line of fire that every precaution is being taken to spare the lives of the innocent. If there is collateral damage, it ain't our fault. Best practices, and all that.

I had hoped that the Obama administration would take a more nuanced approach to the problem of terrorism and rogue states. Unfortunately, it seems that the President is served by people like Rahm Emmanuel whose interests and expertise are mostly concerned with the matter of re-election, and not with the policies necessary to address the real problems in the world.

Perhaps the could launch a drone strike on BP headquarters. No innocent parties there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Raymond Strand
03:55 PM on 05/30/2010
If anything we should be encouraging more drone attacks. 3.53% of people killed in these attacks are civilians. Now imagine if instead of Invading Iraq and Afghanistan we just flew drones from Air bases in Pakistan to take out Al Qaida and the Taliban leadership? If you're against drone attacks then the only other alternative to achieve the same mission is with an air strike, long range missiles, special forces on the ground, or smart bombs.

http://washingtonindependent.com/85945/new-study-suggests-drone-strikes-dont-kill-as-many-pakistani-civilians-as-claimed

Given the drones high rate of success and relative low civilian death count they seem to be the best option. If someone can show another way we could kill our enemies while protecting our forces without killing large numbers of civilians I'm sure the Pentagon would be interested.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:07 PM on 05/30/2010
You should post the findings of a neocon think-tank (great oxymoron, BTW) in the comedy section.

Anyone interested in REALITY, please read this:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16758
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Raymond Strand
05:46 PM on 05/30/2010
So you're disputing a Peer Reviewed Paper with Pakistani Authorities claim based on a Pakistani Newspaper. Which are well known throughout their world for their Conspiracy mongering. Take a look at the Pakistani media's information about the Time Square bomber. Apparently he's either an agent of India or the CIA.

This isn't the finding of some Neo-Con Think Tank you dunce. Williams' study was done apart form the one by the New America Foundation. Their results were relatively similar leading to the conclusion that based on their methodology the number of Civilian deaths were low and that the majority of the deaths were Terrorist or Suspected terrorists.

And if you look at both studies the New America Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann study shows a higher Civilian Death toll than Williams. The Bergen Study shows 20% Civilian deaths compared to the 2.53% in Williams. That's because the New America study counts the unknown or inconclusive in Williams study or about 17% as Civilians.

The very fact you can't produce a well researched argument goes to prove you're not very interested in facts. I'd be ready to believe a source that says 90% of the casualties from these drones are Civilians. Go ahead and produce one I'll be waiting.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:24 AM on 05/31/2010
The families of the people we murder will certainly appreciate how carefully we did it. Should we make extra room in the barracks for all the fruit baskets they'll send?
09:29 AM on 05/30/2010
This is a technology that is going to become increasingly ubiquitous as time goes on. We are setting the precedents for their use. How comfortable are we going to be when more and more countries begin using them to perform assassinations and extra-judicial killings?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:35 AM on 05/31/2010
There's a guy somewhere who starts his day with a healthy jog around the park, a little breakfast and then rolls off on a bicycle to go to work. Within fifteen minutes he arrives at an office park where he walks into his office and, sitting
down at his computer, pops a little pill to help him deal with the stresses of his busy day. He logs into his computer and is soon staring at his screen through the optics of a predator drone hovering in the airspace over Afghanistan, waiting for the order to make his first kill of the day. Maybe he'll get some pizza for lunch.
08:17 AM on 05/30/2010
Gross negligence in the killing of 23 people gets one a letter of reprimand? What is the military standard? How many innocent civilians does one have to kill before there is an actual courts-martial? Is 100 the threshold? What about 1,000. The article says the careers of these people are over. Not even this is true because the next commander can pull the reprimands from the personnel files of the military members once the publicity stops and their careers will go on like before. Why are these responsible parties still flying missions over Afghanistan? This is an cosmetic action, nothing more.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
muck-raker
give me liberty or give me death
08:58 AM on 05/30/2010
afghanlives, you said "What is military standard"
Truthout has spoken with several soldiers who shared equally horrific stories of the slaughtering of innocent Iraqis by US occupation forces.
"I remember one woman walking by," said Jason Washburn, a corporal in the US Marines who served three tours in Iraq. He told the audience at the Winter Soldier hearings that took place March 13-16, 2008, in Silver Spring, Maryland, "She was carrying a huge bag, and she looked like she was heading toward us, so we lit her up with the Mark 19, which is an automatic grenade launcher, and when the dust settled, we realized that the bag was full of groceries. She had been trying to bring us food and we blew her to pieces."
The hearings provided a platform for veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan to share the reality of their occupation experiences with the media in the US.
Washburn testified on a panel that discussed the rules of engagement (ROE) in Iraq, and how lax they were, to the point of being virtually nonexistent.

http://www.truthout.org/iraq-war-vet-we-were-told-just-shoot-people-and-officers-would-take-care-us58378
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paula Ann
11:15 AM on 05/30/2010
in honor of Dennis Hopper:

the horror, the horror
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:51 AM on 05/31/2010
No sense in ruining troop morale by acknowledging the truth. Just lock and load and take your Xanax soldier, we're moving out!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:00 AM on 05/30/2010
Wasn't that collateral damage...........
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:53 AM on 05/31/2010
Just the ashes of another village we were able to save.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:37 AM on 05/30/2010
How "brave" they are, "fighting for our freedom" and all.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:51 AM on 05/30/2010
"Four American officers – two described as senior – received career-damaging reprimands"

They kiIIed 23 innocent people and they're basically getting a slap on the wrist. We know that "American justice" is an oxymoron (while no charges will ever be filed against the CEO of BP for the greatest ecological disaster the Atlantic Ocean has ever seen, a black kid steals a can of coke three times and he goes to prison for 20 years...) But the mother of all oxymorons has to be "American military justice."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Acharn
01:52 AM on 05/30/2010
Actually, the military justice system is arguably better than the civilian system in most states. The attorneys alternate between prosecuting and defending, so you don't get the problem with overzealous prosecutors that you see in many jurisdictions. True, there are still problems with "command influence," but over the years the Judge Advocate General branch has worked hard to reduce that, and most senior commanders know better than to be too blatant. The civilian system has similar problems with "prominent" and "influential" people and newspapers influencing the jury members, as well as the judges. Overall, though, I would say that the phrase "American justice system" has become a term without meaning. The American government has abandoned all pretense to following the rule of law, and Obama is working hard to make sure we can never return to a system with due process for all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eljefefx
09:10 AM on 05/30/2010
I have learned in the past few months that it is useless to try and present an argument against anything Amanda says. She is far too mired in her own opinion to ever consider the possibility that her comments (full of hyperbole and gross insults) could in fact be wrong.
11:09 PM on 05/29/2010
When are Americans going to realize this shit happens all the time?
11:22 PM on 05/29/2010
just say oops and move on
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:43 AM on 05/30/2010
The morons are flagging you... LOL
Because these idiots believe that the US never does any harm.
10:37 PM on 05/29/2010
At what point does the American public say ENOUGH!, At what point does the American taxpayer just stop, no money, no wars,.At what point does the American public say enough of you thieving, lying. career, politicians, put every one of them out of office by the next election, every single one, make some new rules, term limits, no more power house senior politicians, foot their own medical insurance, forced Social security, outlaw the bribery,Lobby, two terms and your out, no more unapproved by civilians pay raises, no employment for any company that does government contracts for 20 years after the two terms are up. That's just a good start. If these folks are so eager to SERVE, then let them SERVE, not rule.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
adrianrf
Another job-creating immigrant
06:36 AM on 05/30/2010
I'm with you on a lot of that stuff — what taxpayer isn't?

but you're lashing out against one wrong thing, and missing the most important one.

no thanks, I do NOT want to see the few honest fighters we've got [Alan Grayson, Ron Wyden, Dan Merkeley, Anthony Weiner, Russ Feingold come instantly to mind] booted out by mindless term limits. baby/bath water…

term limits also have a broader adverse impact than that:
— your 20-year ban on employment with companies that have any government contracts just isn't going fly. you have no idea what a nightmare even trying to track that would be; and it's far too broad a brush
— and then tightening term limits will simply **increase** the motivation for politicians to do bigger favors faster for the specific corporations which they expect to get cushy jobs from later.

the **huge** target you missed: getting our disastrous elections "system" repaired.
we MUST utterly reform campaign financing, to get the obscene amounts of money out of the process; and also apply one consistent set of national standards for *holding* the elections cleanly and fairly. we STILL can't count votes reliably!

between voter suppression and intimidation; voter list abuse ("caging" the vote); selective availability of polling places and ballots to favor one demographic over another;
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
adrianrf
Another job-creating immigrant
06:37 AM on 05/30/2010
(cont)

…there's a lot more crap to shovel out of our stables.
10:20 PM on 05/29/2010
as long as no Americans were injured
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:07 AM on 05/31/2010
And don't forget kittens and puppies and bunnies with wiggly noses.
10:01 PM on 05/29/2010
Now they're blaming each other. If another country had done this we would probably be calling it a war crime.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Raymond Strand
03:56 PM on 05/30/2010
You seriously need to look up the definition of a War Crime. They're not actively targeting Civilians and they're taking necessary precautions to avoid Civilian casualties. That's not a war crime.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
adrianrf
Another job-creating immigrant
04:14 PM on 05/30/2010
so you acknowledge that the famous WikiLeaks video shows warcrimes in progress?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:15 PM on 05/30/2010
"They're not actively targeting Civilians and they're taking necessary precautions to avoid Civilian casualties."

Yeah, right...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16758