Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Afghan Civilians "Suffering Horribly" - Red Cross


How can this be? We keep hearing from the Harpies and Hillier just how much better off the Afghan people are these days, thanks to us of course. It seems that the International Committee of the Red Cross disagrees. In fact the ICRC says that Afghan civilians are suffering horribly and that the humanitarian situation is much worse than it was even a year ago. From The Guardian:

"'Civilians suffer horribly from mounting threats to their security, such as increasing numbers of roadside bombs and suicide attacks, and regular aerial bombing raids,' said Pierre Krähenbühl, the director of operations at the ICRC.

"The updated assessment comes amid growing fears in the US and Britain that Nato forces have lost the initiative against the Taliban, which has gained momentum, particularly in the south.
Some 50,000 foreign troops led by the US and Nato are in Afghanistan, propping up the government of Hamid Karzai in Kabul, which is increasingly beset by allegations of corruption and incompetence.

"The ICRC said the local population was suffering particularly badly in the south of the country, where fighting has been heaviest and where most British troops are based. Some 6,000 British troops have been in Afghanistan since the present conflict began in November 2001.

"'Thousands of people have fled their homes and are continuing to move in search of safer areas. The general lack of security affects people living in rural and urban areas alike,' the ICRC said.

"The Red Cross warned that the situation could deteriorate further.

"Reto Stocker, the head of the ICRC in Kabul said, 'There is always a risk that in the coming months the parties will worsen the humanitarian situation as they push hard to strengthen their negotiating positions; and, soon enough, the cycle of natural disasters could also recommence.'
Meanwhile the Associated Press reports on a "friendly fire" incident between Afghan police and US forces that led to air strikes and the deaths of seven policemen. Apparently the US soldiers were on a night operation but hadn't notified the Afghan authorities. The police, who seem to bear the brunt of the fighting aganst the Taliban, took the soldiers to be Taliban and opened fire. The Americans returned fire and then called in the air support.
''I thought they were Taliban, and we shouted at them to stop, but they came closer and they opened fire,'' said Khan Mohammad, one of the policemen at the post. ''I'm very angry. We are here to protect the Afghan government and help serve the Afghan government, but the Americans have come to kill us.''
And in Kandahar another Canadian soldier has died, felled by a roadside bomb. Two others were wounded.

4 comments:

  1. It really doesn't matter to most people in Canada and sure as hell, the USA could give a .... for any country Republican's decide to invade. On the up side of the thing though, I wonder what country Vegas has as odds-on-fave for the next Republican President to invade? (those Republicans! They do like to get there jollies, don't they?)

    ReplyDelete
  2. For a good review of the Afghan situation check out:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann06052007.html

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  3. I love the ICRC....its very easy to criticize and not offer any solutions....

    I wonder what they would say if NATO and the yanks pulled out and a resurgent Taliban started slaughtering civilians.....

    And I would love to know how much they were defending ordinary Afghans when the Taliban were using soccer stadiums for execution rings.....

    Truth is indeed the first casualty of war and the right, the left, and the NGO's are all just as guilty....

    ReplyDelete
  4. There's nothing new in the ICRC claims except a "Western" assessment of the same things President Karzai has been complaining about for over a year. To discount the Red Cross criticisms is to brand Karzai himself a liar. That leaves your dismissal of the ICRC pretty shakey.

    ReplyDelete