Civilian Casualties in Afghanistan

Civilian casualties in the "War on Terror".



Civilian Casualties in Afghanistan
By Dru Oja Jay

Bombing

During the past three months of the "War on Terror", the mainstream media
has [1]avoided reporting on civilian casualties, and some prominant
journalists have gone as far as to say that deaths of non-combattants are
[2]"not news". When reporting on civilian casualties has been done, wording
like "at least dozens" is used, reports are framed as Taliban propaganda, or
dismissed as "not independently verified".

According to rather conservative estimates based on available evidence,
however, the real civilian death toll is in the thousands. A [3]meticulously
documented accounting of news reports and eyewitness accounts places the
number of civilian casualties at 3,767 -- over 60 per day since US attacks
commenced eight and a half weeks ago. Marc Herold, a professor at the
University of New Hampshire, arrived at the estimate by tabulating numbers
from news reports and corroborated eyewitness accounts. The estimate, Herold
writes, is almost definitely conservative: "data is simply unavailable in
many cases, e.g., no data available for November 3, 4, 11 and 13, and for
the effects of massive carpet-bombing by B-52s after October 30th."
Additionally, the Muslim practice of immediate burial before nightfall means
that if the bombing of a village (for example) is not reported on
immediately, accurate estimates of casualties can be nearly impossible.

Deaths constitute only a part of the destruction dealt by bombs. A UN
official in Afghanistan recently estimated that 60-100 Afghans are maimed by
bombs weekly. The use of [4]cluster bombs has been condemned by the UN and
several human rights groups because the soda can-sized "bomblets" are
painted bright yellow, and are mistaken for toys or food packages by
children. Further, bomblets often do not explode on impact, effectively
turning large areas into minefields.

Most recently, American bombing in Tora Bora has resulted in [5]heavy
civilian casualties, according to claims by the pro-American, anti-Taliban
forces currently in control of the region, where Osama Bin Laden is said to
be hiding. As before, such reports are largely dismissed as "not
independently verified", or are simply ignored because they de-emphasize the
Pentagon's oft-cited efforts to "minimize" civilian casualties.

Starvation

Even before US attacks began, Afghanistan was suffering the worst [6]drought
in decades, and hundreds of aid workers were distributing food and medical
supplies in preparation for the winter. When attacks started, aid workers
fled the country, effectively shutting down distribution efforts. While the
current condition of the Afghani population is unclear, [7]September,
[8]October and November saw a number of warnings from humanitarian groups
that an estimated 1 million Afghanis would starve if aid were not delivered
before later November. Other [9]reports from humanitarian agencies have
stated that as many as 300,000 civilians and refugees are currently not
getting adequate nourishment. Yet [10]others note that refugees who fled
from the attacks have little in the way of shelter, and are currently
extremely succeptible to illness in the harsh Afghan winter.

[11]Reports on the successes of humanitarian aid efforts are [12]vague, or
[13]pessimistic when discussing consequences; it is not clear how likely
agencies are to be successful in avoiding the frequently mentioned imminent
million deaths from starvation. Not unsuprisingly, the [14]poor of
Afghanistan will be the hardest hit, thanks to rising food prices.
[15]Reports citing specific successes abound, and [16]most reports keep an
optimistic tone, without discussing the overall implications of aid
agencies' lack of access, past and present. Rarely, if ever, do reports
mention the possibility of US responsibility for the newly aggravated
crisis. More often, coverage [17]emphasizes the "psychologically shattering"
nature of bombings in a military context, without discussing the
implications of "shattering" civilians.

Even if agencies are successful in delivering aid quickly enough to stave
off starvating in the majority of those in serious risk, it is essential
that both the successes and failures of these efforts, and the role of the
attacks in escalating the crisis continue to be examined more closely. As
for civilian casualties from bombings, any increase in discussion or
analysis of these in the press, mainstream or otherwise, would surely be
welcomed by those currently "shattered" military and civilian alike.

 References:
   1. http://www.fair.org/activism/afghanistan-casualties.html
   2. http://www.fair.org/activism/fox-civilian-casualties.html
   3. http://www.cursor.org/stories/civilian_deaths.htm
   4. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1026-06.htm
   5. http://www.iht.com/articles/40678.html
   6. http://www.oxfam.org.uk/atwork/emerg/afghan0901.htm
   7. http://www.interaction.org/newswire/news789.html
   8. http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2001/10/01102001123754.asp
   9. http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2001/10/01102001123754.asp
  10. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1700000/1700196.stm
  11. http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/vLCE/Afghanistan?OpenDocument&StartKey=Afghanistan&Expandview
  12. http://www.macleans.ca/xta-doc/2001/11/05/World/59298.shtml
  13. http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA2FJ1LPSC.html
  14. http://www.africaonline.com/site/Articles/1,10,40874.jsp
  15. http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/vLCE/Afghanistan?OpenDocument&StartKey=Afghanistan&Expandview
  16. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/World/Afghanistan/
  17. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49390-2001Dec15.html



--
Posted on Monkeyfist at http://monkeyfist.com/articles/800