Posts Tagged ‘AIHRC’
- So, what’s with the mysterious Russian helicopters Canada is reportedly buying, according to the Ottawa Citizen, for “combat missions in Afghanistan”? Could it be another version of offering support to the military fight in a civilianized way, like we’re apparently doing with civilian spy planes?
- Counterinsurgency as oncology – one Canadian general’s assessment of the fight in Afghanistan: “A Canadian two-star general brought in to provide an independent assessment of the state of the war in southern Afghanistan for NATO’s new commander here says the Taliban is being dealt with as if it is a malignancy. “It is a cancer and the cancer is being treated,” said Maj.-Gen. Dave Fraser, who commanded Canadian and coalition forces in Regional Command South during 2006. “Even if this cancer goes into remission — and that is a ways down the road here — you have to make sure it is not hiding somewhere and comes back. “Once you are in that permanent watch category, as someone who has had cancer, people look out for you to make sure it doesn’t come back. We must never assume that this cancer is gone.” “
- Meanwhile, “the tumour” lies speaks to southern tribal elders, who speak to the Canadian Press: “The district governor in Panjwaii says he’s been warned the Taliban intend to continue fighting throughout the winter months and not give NATO forces any rest. Haji Baran, the Noorzai tribal elder who has been the face of the Afghan government in the restive district for three years, says he received the news from contacts in Pakistan. His tribe has a deep, long-standing ties to the insurgency that normally chooses to fight between May and late October. Baran urged Canadian military commanders to be vigilant in the coming weeks. “The fall of Panjwaii is the fall of Kandahar,” he said Sunday, repeating a well-worn line of many in the rural part of the province. “So we have to be careful with that.” …”
- Remember all the video games the CF is buying? It appears they’re headed downrange to the troops in Afghanistan: “…. Defence officials confirm that 500 copies of games such as “Gears of War,” “Call of Duty,” “Mortal Kombat,” and “Assassins Creed” are destined for Canada’s forward operating bases in the war-ravaged country. An estimated 500 to 600 soldiers are stationed at Ma’sum Ghar and Sperwan Ghar, Canada’s main bases outside Kandahar, which works out to a video game for almost every gamer-in-uniform. “It helps in keeping good morale … to bring some relief to people working long hours,” Cmdr. Hubert Genest said in an interview ….”
- On the political front, NDP leader Jack Layton accuses the PM (and the Liberal leader a little bit) of “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire”: “The Conservative can’t be trusted to end the Afghan training mission in 2014, NDP Leader Jack Layton charged Sunday. “I remember when he said 2011 was the absolute limit, the end of the military mission, we are out of there,” Layton told CTV’s Question Period. “And now they are saying 2014. I don’t think anybody believes them.” In 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper asked Parliament to extend the military mission in Afghanistan until 2008. In 2008, he asked MPs to approve extending the mission until 2011. Layton warned at that time the government couldn’t be trusted to end the mission in 2011. Now, the NDP leader says 2014 is an arbitrary deadline that is unlikely to be met because of unpredictable conditions on the ground ….”
- CBC’s Brian Stewart reminds us that Canadian troops training Afghan security forces “inside the wire” doesn’t mean zero risk: “…. To almost every question so far, the prime minister and his team have repeated the mantra that this will be “a non-combat mission” only, suggesting maximum safety. But keep in mind that the Taliban will also have an important say in this …. Rockets and mortars regularly rain down on training camps and Taliban units have grown increasingly bold in striking at highly protected NATO camps and headquarters …. nowhere in Afghanistan can now be assumed to be beyond attack. Even the heavily guarded diplomatic corps of Kabul has been hit this year and is always braced for a possible suicide offensive ….” Also, let’s not forget instances where NATO trainers have been killed by their Afghan security force trainees (examples here, here and here).
- A senior Afghan officer, speaking to QMI/Sun Media’s Mercedes Stephenson, sums it up pretty succinctly when it comes to what will happen when we leave Afghanistan completely: ” “Please,” he implored, “go home and explain to your people what will happen if they leave us alone here with these terrorists. Everything we have worked for will be gone. They will kill us all. “We need Canada to stay.” “
- Blog Watch: Terry Glavin over at Chronicles & Dissent offers an interesting theory regarding why more Canadians are not supporting a Canadian mission in Afghanistan: “…. The best explanation I know about is revealed in an ambitious 20-country opinion poll conducted under the auspices of the University of Maryland’s World Public Opinion initiative, which shows global opinion similarly split, with the following insight: “Among those who believe that the Afghan people want NATO forces to leave, 76 percent say that NATO forces should leave. Among those who believe that the Afghan people want NATO forces to stay, 83 percent say NATO forces should stay.” I don’t have any polling data to prove it, but I would bet a dollar to a dime that most Canadians believe the lie that most Afghans want NATO forces to leave their country. The primary function of Canada’s so-called “anti-war” activists is to make you to believe that lie, and Canada’s punditocracy has encouraged you to believe it. I would also bet a dollar to a dime that if most Canadians knew the truth, which is that the overwhelming majority of Afghans have consistently supported and continue to support NATO’s efforts in their country, Canadian support for a robust Afghan mission would be overwhelmingly favorable …. And then we could move the Canadian debates out of the weeds, to questions that really matter ….”
- While Canada and others are saying aid shouldn’t be flowed through the hands of Afghanistan’s, um, “fiscally leaky” government, an Afghan human rights group says doing anything different will cut into the government’s legitimacy. “The chairperson of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission says that if the Hamid Karzai government doesn’t receive foreign aid from Canada and other countries, it will never achieve legitimacy in the eyes of the Afghan people. Dr. Sima Samar (said) “After all, (Karzai) is elected president …. We want him to complete his term, so we have to find ways to help him and to put him in the right direction.”….” Same same from an international development professor, via the Ottawa Citizen: “…. Because the donors plan, implement and control the budgets of the bulk of the programs, without delegating these responsibilities to Afghans, the latter lose the opportunity to learn the trade ….”
- Liberal Senator Colin Kenny, former chair of the Senate Standing Committee on National Security and Defence, continues to be underwhelmed about how wounded warriors and their families are treated: “…. The New Veterans Charter was a mistake. All parliamentarians are complicit because the charter was passed unanimously. But that doesn’t relieve the government of its obligation to fix the mistake. The Charter does deal more fairly with some people than did the old Pension Plan, such as war widows (or widowers) and their families and soldiers in the highest ranks. But when you look closely at who comes out ahead, that’s about it. Who’s worse off? Just about everybody else. The biggest losers are privates and corporals (those most often wounded on any battlefield), members of the reserves, wounded vets who manage to live to 65, wounded vets with families and wounded vets who don’t live near case workers ….” Meanwhile, here’s one man’s story after losing his legs on operations in Bosnia, via the Kingston Whig-Standard.
- Taliban Propaganda Watch: A quick response to what the NATO bosses decided in Lisbon (links to non-terrorist web site).
This from the Associated Press:
Civilian war deaths in the first seven months of 2010 rose by 6 percent over the same period last year, Afghanistan’s human rights commission said Sunday. The modest increase suggested that U.S. and NATO efforts to hold down civilian casualties were having some success …. The Taliban and their allies were responsible for 68 percent of the at least 1,325 civilian deaths recorded by the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, the organization said in a report. Twenty-three percent were ascribed to NATO or Afghan government forces. Responsibility for the remaining 9 percent could not be determined because they occurred in areas that were too dangerous for a thorough investigation, the commission said ….
The Taliban continues to be responsible for about 70 per cent of the problem of civilian casualties.
Another Afghan human rights report, another one-sided story.
Here’s what the Associated Press had to say about a news release from the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) this week (highlights mine):
The Afghan human rights commission reported Wednesday that 28 civilians have been killed so far in NATO’s offensive on the Taliban stronghold of Marjah, and urged pro-government forces to take greater care in distinguishing between civilians and militants …. military officials say that despite the care taken, the offensive has still been marred by civilian deaths, including a rocket attack last week that hit a house and killed 12 people. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission said in a statement Wednesday that it had confirmed 28 civilians deaths in the Marjah fighting, based on witness reports. Thirteen children were among the dead. About 70 civilians have been wounded, 30 of them children, the commission said. NATO has confirmed at least 16 civilian deaths, while outside observers have reported 19. The commission said witnesses had told them that most of the casualties came from coalition gunfire and rockets. Taliban fighters have been seen using women and children as human shields in the fighting _ stationing them in windows or on roofs of houses from which they fire, according to military commanders and Associated Press reporters on the ground. “We do appreciate the fact that less airpower was used,” commission spokesman Nader Nadery said. “Still, as the operation continues and the number rises, we get more and more concerned.” The commission asked for allied troops to exert greater care in distinguishing civilians from militants. Specifically, NATO forces should “make sure that more of an assessment is carried out, and to as much as possible, avoid using rockets,” Nadery said. The commission’s head is appointed by the president but it operates independently ….
Blue bits point to what NATO should do, and red bits to what the Taliban does/should do. Note the ratio.
Here’s the quote that didn’t make the cut from this news release:
Witnesses suggested the majority of the casualties were caused by (pro-government forces) artillery and rocket-fire. However, AIHRC has also received numerous reports of Anti-Government Elements planting landmines in homes and residential areas, which pose a grave threat to civilians in the area. These mines can continue to harm civilian persons or property for months or even years later. Pro-Government Forces must exert greater care to distinguish between civilians and combatants in their offensive in Marjah. The AIHRC also calls on Anti-Government Elements to observe their responsibilities to civilians by not using civilians as human shields, and not planting mines or other explosive devices in residential areas.
I look forward to MSM coverage of this news release, also issued by the AIHRC:
Attacks on civilians and civilian objects are against human rights and Islamic principles
On Friday February 26, 2010, a number of Afghan civilians and foreigners were injured and killed as a result of suicide attacks on a residential and commercial area of Kabul city. The attack was carried out on the anniversary of the Prophet Mohammad’s birth.
On February 24, 2010, unknown assailants killed Abdul Majid Babai Head of Information and Culture Department of Kandahar Province. According to media reports, Taliban have claimed responsibility for both the incidents.
The AIHRC is seriously concerned about the increase of attacks on civilian persons and properties. These attacks suggest the armed opposition groups remain unconcerned about the lives of civilians. The AIHRC once again seriously calls upon the armed opposition to consider civilian lives and public property during their operations. Afghan and international security forces must also renew efforts to prevent such attacks ….
Or is the world’s media going to ignore the bad guy news release like they did here?
Spotted this blog post this week about how women’s groups are in an uproar over the prospect of potential negotiations with the Taliban and bringing them into the Afghan tent politically.
“If there is a peace jirga or talks at the regional level, we want women’s participation,” (Mary) Akrami (the founder of an organization that assists poor women and girls) said. “We want no compromises on the constitution and women’s rights.”
Kudos for bringing more attention to the issue of the Taliban’s track record.
It would have been nice, though, to have seen this sort of material from analysts and bloggers sooner. It’s not as if there wasn’t grist for the mill:
AFG Human Rights Group Bashes Taliban (on the report MSM didn’t bother to cover, even when under their noses)
Better late than never, I suppose.
Let’s see how Western mainstream media cover this one, shall we?