One in Three Killed By Drones in Pakistan Is a Civilian

By Derrick Crowe

A new report from the New America Foundation states that one of every three people killed in the U.S.'s not-so-secret drone war in Pakistan is a civilian. The report also discloses that none of the strikes in 2009 targeted Bin Laden, and that they have had little impact on the Taliban's ability to plan operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan. To the contrary, the drone strikes serve as a powerful recruiting tool for the Taliban and al Qaeda.

According to New America Foundation's Peter Bergen and Kathren Tiedemann (emphasis mine):

Our study shows that the 114 reported drone strikes in northwest Pakistan from 2004 to the present have killed between 830 and 1,210 individuals, of whom around 550 to 850 were described as militants in reliable press accounts, about two-thirds of the total on average. Thus, the true civilian fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 32 percent.

The authors note that the rapidly escalating use of drones by the Obama Administration far exceeds the rate of use by the Bush Administration, with 2009's 51 strikes exceeding the total number of strikes under the entire Bush Administration.

The report is worth excerpting at length regarding the effect of drone strikes on al Qaeda and the Taliban. In short, they're not working:

None of the reported strikes has appeared to target America's most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden.

...[T]he U.S. drone strikes don't seem to have had any great effect on the Taliban's ability to mount operations in Pakistan or Afghanistan or to deter potential Western recruits, and they no longer have the element of surprise.

...After around 18 months of sustained drone strikes, many of Pakistan's militants have likely moved out of their once safe haven in the FATA and into less dangerous parts of the country, potentially further destabilizing the already rickety state.

...[A]lthough the drone strikes have disrupted militant operations, their unpopularity with the Pakistani public and their value as a recruiting tool for extremist groups may have ultimately increased the appeal of the Taliban and al Qaeda, undermining the Pakistani state. This is more disturbing than almost anything that could happen in Afghanistan, given that Pakistan has dozens of nuclear weapons and about six times the population.

Incredibly, after this litany of negatives, the report's authors conclude that drone strikes are "a critical tool." Their conclusion doesn't seem to follow from their premises. What they seem to mean instead is that "we're all out of other ideas."

Had enough? Become a fan of the Rethink Afghanistan campaign on Facebook and join our fight to bring the Afghanistan war, and the drone strikes, to an end.

33 Civilians Killed by NATO Airstrike in Afghanistan

By Derrick Crowe

On Sunday, NATO forces in Uruzgan province in Afghanistan killed more than thirty civilians, including women and children, when an airstrike was ordered on three minivans.

According to the AP story on the incident:

"'This creates an opportunity for the Taliban to use this against the Afghan government and the Americans,' said Mohammed Hashim Watanwal, a lawmaker from southern Uruzgan province, where the strike took place. 'NATO has said that it will take care to avoid civilian casualties, but they don't follow through.'"

Among the dead were a 3-year-old boy and a 9-year-old girl.

But at least we said we're sorry. I know an "aw, shucks" statement would calm my rage if those had been my kids. Yup. Like a charm.

Had enough? Join us on Facebook.

Civilian Casualties in Marjah "Inevitable" as Largest Military Operation of Afghanistan War Begins

By Derrick Crowe

Military officials say that civilian casualties in Marjah, Afghanistan are "inevitable" as U.S. and allied forces launch Operation Moshtarak, the largest military action since the U.S-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

Thanks in part to conflicting messages from ISAF and in part due to some residents' inability to flee, many civilians remain in Marjah, in the crossfire.

Statements from Brig. Gen. Nicholson, commander of the operation, indicate that he feels he has leeway to use airstrikes in the civilian area, and that he intends to use fast, furious attacks to try to overwhelm the Taliban. The problem: airstrikes in support of troops in contact are the leading cause of U.S.-caused civilian deaths.

In the L.A. Times article on the upcoming operation in Marja, the U.S. commander says all the right words when it comes to the issue of insulating the non-combatants from the carnage:

�[I]n the weeks leading up to the imminent offensive to take the Helmand River Valley town of Marja in southern Afghanistan, the Marines� commander, Brig. Gen. Larry Nicholson, sat with dozens of Afghan tribal elders, drinking endless cups of sweet tea and offering reassurances that his top priority will be the safety of Afghan civilians.

�In counterinsurgency, the people are the prize,� Nicholson said�

...except Nicholson is talking out of both sides of his mouth:

US Second Marine Expeditionary Force commander Larry Nicholson said that the evacuation of most civilians would give commanders leeway to use air-to-ground missiles, declaring that he was �not looking for a fair fight.�

ABC News quotes Nicholson explaining some truly worrisome logic:

Nicholson underscored the point saying a heavy handed approach will reduce the chance for civilian casualties.

�Our feeling is if you go big, strong and fast, you lessen the possibility of civilian casualties as opposed to a slow methodical rolling assault. You go in and you dominate. You overwhelm the enemy,� he said.

Okay, let�s put these two things together. Nicholson is telegraphing he�s letting the air strikes off the chain and that he intends to use rapid, furious attacks in Marja, and somehow that is supposed to lead to reduced civilian casualties. Well, that would be great if we didn�t already know that the single greatest cause of U.S.-caused civilian casualties was airstrikes in support of troops involved in intense firefights.

All of this is very, very bad news for civilians in Marjah. And it's bad news for the troops in the fight as well.

Cross-posted at Rethink Afghanistan.