Hamid Karzai (cc photo: Smithsonian/Jim Wallace)
What do you do when the president of another country says US forces killed civilians there? You get US and other allied officials to anonymously deny it.
At least, that’s what you’d do if you were the New York Times. Under the headline “Karzai Insists US Forces Killed Civilians in a Raid,” reporter Rod Nordland (11/24/13) described a house raid in Afghanistan where, according to Afghan officials, US forces killed civilians. He writes:
American officials reacted with anger and exasperation on Saturday after Mr. Karzai publicly accused American Special Forces troops of killing civilians in a raid on an Afghan home; American officials said it was an Afghan-led raid that killed only insurgents.
But it was apparently the kind of anger that had to be expressed anonymously:
- “‘There is no doubt that these are spurious civilian casualty allegations,’ said a senior Western official here. ‘People are fairly mad at Karzai now; there’s a lot of anger and a lot of disdain.'”
- “‘Unfortunately, some people are using allegations of civilian casualties for political purposes,’ an International Security Assistance Force official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity as a matter of official policy.”
- “A United States official here, also speaking on the condition of anonymity as a matter of policy, said: ‘Misleading statements like this do not help to finalize the bilateral security agreement as soon as possible this year, which is essential to the future of Afghanistan and the confidence of the Afghan people.'”
Of course, there’s a chance these sources are telling the truth, and that it’s Afghan President Hamid Karzai who’s making false claims. But the reliance on so many officials who have very specific criticisms of the Afghan story, but who can’t stand behind them with their own names, is curious.
Nordland reports that Karzai’s spokesperson Aimal Faizi noted that “American officials had always been quick to deny that victims of such raids were civilians.” Which is all the more reason to be skeptical of their account of what happened. That record should obligate reporters to get these sources on the record.
On Thursday, Karzai told a meeting of elders in Kabul that even after fighting together against Taliban for over a decade, there is “no trust” between him and the US government.
“My trust with America is not good. I don’t trust them and they don’t trust me,” Reuters quoted the president as saying.
“During the past 10 years I have fought with them and they have made propaganda against me,” he said.
http://rehmat1.com/2013/11/21/karzai-i-dont-trust-the-us/
At least “speaking on the condition of anonymity as a matter of official policy” is more honest than “speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.” At least readers know it’s the government talking, not someone pretending to be a maverick.
Rod Nordland (first link’s missing the d) is an excellent reporter, but perhaps he can’t overcome what seems to be a suspect New York Times editorial policy (https://twitter.com/DougSchorzman/status/360134172649594880) when the U.S./NATO are alleged to be seriously at fault in Afghanistan…
I tried to leave a comment here a year or so ago, highlighting how U.S. and U.K. media outlets (and AFP) were (and still are) studiously ignoring their OWN reports describing more Panjwai/Kandahar Massacre victims (dead and wounded) than were charged to, or admitted by, SSG Bales. The media’s own never-revisited reporting – by Afghan journalists for the outlets in question – is evidently being ignored mostly because ‘everyone else’ in the media’s obediently adhering to the carefully-controlled U.S. Army (and Karzai government?) narrative about the March 11, 2012 massacre [in a district littered with IED mines, making travel hazardous for all (although one of the key, unexplained original stories, by an Afghan Bloomberg/BusinessWeek reporter, was clearly reported by phone)].
Predictably, the New York Times is one of those media outlets. Its Afghan reporter (who later wrote an important personal account about that day for a NYT blog) named the son (40-year-old “Abdul Hadi”) and described the death of a man killed in the massacre whose death does NOT appear to have been charged to Bales (a fact that only became clear in January, 2013, because the two Army Charge Sheets redact the names of listed victims). In fact, by my count from descriptions in MEDIA reports, up to 29 civilian deaths may have occurred in Panjwai that day – not the 16 charged to Bales (after a 17th count was dropped without explanation). More than a year later Bales finally admitted to 16 murders, and in exchange – to the great surprise of a veteran Bales defense attorney – the Army dropped its effort to sentence Bales to death, while avoiding a court-martial examination of its evidence.
In short, the Panjwai Massacre, too, is a case study in the bias-revealing phenomenon described in Peter’s post. One day, I hope, journalism will admit its failures there, and belatedly give it the attention it deserves.
“At least “speaking on the condition of anonymity as a matter of official policy” is more honest than “speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.” At least readers know it’s the government talking, not someone pretending to be a maverick.”
Thanks for reinforcing the point of this article by posting such a ridiculous statement. BTW I heard a high level US Govt official confirm that the drone war is an experimental tool of the future, on the condition of anonymity. By that he said “the high proportion of civilian to terrorist deaths is easily justified by the fact that (as a result of these strikes)more than likely, the vast majority of these civilians would have become terrorists had they been allowed to become adults in such an environment”.
Yes Karzai is perfectly right to make these claims.
During some 10 -recent- years in Afghanistan, I’ve seen far too many such denials, which either later had to be retracted or never got any further than’ we are investigating’ …
Jeremy Scahill’s “Dirty Wars” looks into such cases, an the basis of excellen independent un-embedded reporting by British journalist Jerome Starkey. Jerome was litterally accused of being a lier by ISAF, in an offiical statemet, which wthey never retracted, even after it had been proven beyond the slightest doubt that it was ISAF which had been lying … !
Wow, military leaders and the corporations that make those drones:
maybe you should, you know, step back and maybe think things through?
Leaving Afghanistan in 2014……….oh we’re not? O.K.. but we can’t keep killing absolute stranger civilians and their familes because that’s not warring, that’s indiscriminate kiiling to justfy buying more drones; it’s an endless and insatiable loop!
I would also like to remind all those people in Congress , where so many want to cut food stamps and any safety net; I am wondering just when you all will decide that its cheaper to drone the poor in the United States rather than to treat them like citizen human beings?
Are there any adults left in the room; adults with a philosophy that might celebrate LIFE?
This whole sequester/ balance the budget scenario is a joke on the People, but a windfall for those who love and profit from war. We are inching ever closer to living in a real life HUNGER GAMES.
So, in this NOVEL America, I suppose that the next step is..”…….darn, we killed one of your kids? Here, take one of ours…well not ours, but you know, one from the…….poor people. Tit for tat, so to speak…as long as its from, you know, the right income level.”
As long as this nation insists on making a horror movie, then get on with it. And please, whenever we kill their children……….please stop with the empty and hollow words from anonymous government voices that are “truly and deeply sorry.” No, I don’t believe that you’re sorry at all!
And so, I end this tirade REEKING with sarcasm, which no doubt, no one in the military industrial complex will understand in the least. To further confuse you: ” We are all Katniss Everdeen now!”
Lies are standard fare in war propaganda by the aggressor. Why would civilians risk further retaliation by U.S. forces by fabricating false claims of night raids and the murder of innocent families? They would have nothing to gain.
Let me make it simple for everybody: Karzai is playing to a domestic audience. He’ll verbally pound the US, but will ultimately accept (secretly welcome) the presence of 15,000 NATO soldiers, for without them he would face a quick coup d’etat. The troops and their private contractors serve to flood the country with enough US dollars to maintain some semblance of limited prosperity, which helps to stabilize Karzai, whose kingly head sports 3 dozen karakuls, priced at $3500.00 apiece..
The US, as the NYT press releases show, are killing insurgents, which is short for non-terrorists who actively oppose the continuing reign of this Western puppet. This is to say that we are killing on behalf of Karzai’s forces in a civil war that they could not win without our help. Our home raids weed out his opponents, whom we rush the Afghan jails, where they face imprisonment, torture, or worse. What happened to South Vietnam in ’75 would happen to Afghanistan the year after we leave. Neither puppet government had a wide base of support, and all the US money, machines, and advice will wilt before the forces of any legitimate popular movement.
Of course, the truth is we are probably slaughtering thousands of civilians. In Vietnam, we burned villages and moved their populations into areas that were pro-government; in Afghanistan, we are doing the same thing on a limited scale, in order to keep the insurgents away from those who might sympathize with their cause. In Vietnam, this was called the Strategic Hamlet Initiative. We are now not so honest as to name our crimes. We are killing en masse to prop up a puppet, though those we kill are civil warriors, not a one of them capable of blowing up skyscrapers in NYC.
There are too many politicians involved, and thus we cannot know whether anyone is winning this war. It seems that a larger supply of actuaries might help clarify the situation, and also determine whether the complaints of the civilians have any merit.
Obama has increased the use of predatory drones from 54 during the 8 years during the Bush administration to over 300 during the first 3 years of the Obama administration. Thousands in Africa and the Middle East have been murdered by US predatory drones..including over 300 children during the first 3 years of Obama’s administration. During this period a US citizen and his 16 year old son were targeted for assassination. With few exceptions the MSM, liberals and progressives remained silent..
I find most of the posts to be removed from what is actually happening over there.Simply yelling about drones or how evil Obama(US) is is really telling.Telling that you are searching for an easy target to blame.The United states has continued to attack what they describe as “targets” in the war against terrorism.Actually looking at the “hit list” shows that the attrition has been amazingly successful..The weapon used(drones) means nothing.Think of this as a bullet fired in Kansas that travels around the world with a terrorists name on it.No matter where he goes it will find him.Problem being….it may kill those around him.So do we give up and stop because these bastards hide among the populace?Maybe.Are we simply shooting those magic bullets at woman and children in day cares?Doubtful.Then why does FAIR make it sound like that is exactly what we are doing?Because FAIR is not privy to any intel at all.At best they are getting second hand tainted reports.Some real reports…And politically motivated reports.I use an example..Israel attacked a building killing eight people including woman and children(according to Arab press)That 2 story building had 3 men on the roof firing rockets for several hours at Israel(according to Israeli press)Here is where it all converges…..It was later ascertained in the Arab press that three men and THIER FAMILIES were killed when that building was destroyed.No mention of the rockets,though the terrorist organization staged a huge funeral for the men.The families were given separate massive funerals as if they had no connection to the faction leaders.So why is Obama still trying to take this war to our enemies?That is the seminal question.And he does not share that top secret intel/reasoning.That innocent people will die is a given.When a huge military power moves to root out a guerilla, or terrorist force it bowls aside every tree to get to the target.It has always been so.And our new smart weapons do a better job…but never perfect.Recently the main bomb builder who designed and built so many IUDs used against us was killed in a drone attack.By all accounts a civilian non aligned was killed.And so it goes
michael e.
Just thinking out loud here. Maybe you should spend more time observing and less time commenting. Do you read your own words before posting? You bash FAIR for not having access to intel, yet you simply repeat what you hear while praising “our” drones and tactics. Maybe one day all these self righteous hypocritical followers of the collateral damage necessity will have to bury their own children because another country has covertly handed down a death sentence to someone they happened to be in the physical proximity of.
Good ole American Exceptionalism? America is exceptional, alright. Good grief