Civilian deaths in Afghan conflict increase 15 percent to 2,777

[News_Editor]

Civilian deaths in Afghan conflict increase 15 percent to 2,777

2011-03-09 21:37:51 GMT+7 (ICT)

KABUL, AFGHANISTAN (BNO NEWS) -- Conflicted-related civilian deaths in Afghanistan increased 15 percent to 2,777 in 2010 compared to the previous year, according to an annual report released on Wednesday and conducted by he United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission.

According to the report, anti-government elements were linked to 2,080 civilian deaths (75 percent of all civilian deaths), up 28 percent from 2009, while pro-government forces were linked to 440 civilian deaths (16 percent), down 26 percent from 2009.

In addition, 9 percent of civilian deaths in 2010 could not be attributed to any party to the conflict.

Meanwhile, suicide attacks and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) killed the most Afghan civilians in the conflict in 2010, taking 1,141 lives, which represents 55 percent of civilian deaths attributed to anti-government elements.

In the most alarming trend, 462 civilians were assassinated by anti-government elements, up 105 percent from 2009.

The report also showed that half of civilian assassinations took place in southern Afghanistan, with a 588 percent increase in 2010 in Helmand province and a 248 percent increase in Kandahar province.

Among tactics used by pro-government forces, aerial attacks continued to have the highest human cost in 2010, killing 171 civilians, which is 39 percent of total civilian deaths linked to pro-government forces.

However, in spite of a significant increase in the use of air assets by pro-government forces in 2010, the proportion of pro-government forces-attributed civilian deaths caused by aerial attacks fell sharply by 52 percent compared to 2009.





"Assassinations affect Afghan society and violate human rights in ways that go far beyond the body count," said Nader Nadery, Commissioner of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission.

"Assassinations deter civilians from exercising their basic human rights to life and security, and violate their freedoms of expression, political participation, to work and get an education," Nadery added. "This suppression of rights has severe political, economic and social consequences as it slows governance and development."




-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-03-09

[beechguy]

Take note, the anti-government forces have increased their role in civilian casualties by 28% from 2009, to a total of 75%. All though IED's, and suicide bombers killed 55%, 492 civilians were intentionally assasinated, up 105%.

Where's all that moral outrage about civilian casualties, or are you guys(you know who you are) just waiting for ISAF to have another accident before posting?

Edited March 10, 2011 by beechguy

[koheesti]

Afghanistan is continuing the trend set in Iraq. Since around 2006 the insurgents there have been responsible for the vast majority of civilian deaths. Not that the people who pretend to lament civilian deaths noticed. It makes me wonder if civilian deaths are less of an outrage if they are caused by their own people?

[Hawaiian]

Killing of civilians by anti-government forces are intentional, while those by NATO forces are not. Yes, where are those outraged posters? Double standards?

[koheesti]

Perhaps those who save their outrage for the unintentional civilian deaths sympathize with those targeting civilians. Not necessarily cheering the deaths, but they "understand" why it needs to be done since they have been invaded and occupied. It's a sacrifice that must be made if they are to be free to well, kill their own civilians anyway but in a more open and free way.

[Steely Dan]

For those 'oppressed' by Nato occupation perhaps there is hope as those kind Iranians are trying to smuggle more sophisticated weapons to the Taliban to aid them in their campaign to keep Afghanistan in the dark ages.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12694266

The foreign secretary has condemned Tehran's "completely unacceptable" behaviour after British Special Forces seized a shipment of suspected Iranian arms intended for the Taliban.

The 48 rockets are understood to have been intercepted in Nimruz Province, in southern Afghanistan, on 5 February.

UK officials say technical analysis showed they had come from Iran.

[Hawaiian]

Perhaps those who save their outrage for the unintentional civilian deaths sympathize with those targeting civilians. Not necessarily cheering the deaths, but they "understand" why it needs to be done since they have been invaded and occupied. It's a sacrifice that must be made if they are to be free to well, kill their own civilians anyway but in a more open and free way.

I rather doubt that the victims and families of "more open and free way" killings think their lives should be sacrificed. These so-called insurgents were committing these atrocities prior to being invaded and occupied. Tribal rivalries and accompanying violence has been a way of life for many centuries, long before the British, Russians and Americans came.

[koheesti]

Perhaps those who save their outrage for the unintentional civilian deaths sympathize with those targeting civilians. Not necessarily cheering the deaths, but they "understand" why it needs to be done since they have been invaded and occupied. It's a sacrifice that must be made if they are to be free to well, kill their own civilians anyway but in a more open and free way.

I rather doubt that the victims and families of "more open and free way" killings think their lives should be sacrificed. These so-called insurgents were committing these atrocities prior to being invaded and occupied. Tribal rivalries and accompanying violence has been a way of life for many centuries, long before the British, Russians and Americans came.

I also don't think the victims and their families think their lives should be sacrificed. But the anti-NATO/USA posters safe at home probably do.

[coma]

If one has been to war he will know all to well that any death is a terrible, terrible event. Be it women, children, men, combatants, non combatants. Killed by enemy fire or friendly fire. It is all horrible. ISAF is trying to defeat violence with more and more violence. Obviously casualties, be they civilian or not are naturally going to increase. One needs to ask the question. Is all this killing really worth it ?

"Wake me up when September ends".

[beechguy]

If one has been to war he will know all to well that any death is a terrible, terrible event. Be it women, children, men, combatants, non combatants. Killed by enemy fire or friendly fire. It is all horrible. ISAF is trying to defeat violence with more and more violence. Obviously casualties, be they civilian or not are naturally going to increase. One needs to ask the question. Is all this killing really worth it ?

"Wake me up when September ends".

The killing of innocent civilians was already going on before the ISAF ever got there, why would you think it would end if they quit or leave? Or did you not notice that the anti-government forces were intentionally targeting civilians?

[metisdead]

An inflammatory reply to a post has been removed.

Another reply to a post has been removed as the act of replying to the post altered the quoted text.

30) Do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes, added emoticons, or altered wording.

[koheesti]

If the Taleban and allies want the Western "invaders and occupiers" out of Afghanistan - why do they target their own civilians?

[bangkokeddy]

For those 'oppressed' by Nato occupation perhaps there is hope as those kind Iranians are trying to smuggle more sophisticated weapons to the Taliban to aid them in their campaign to keep Afghanistan in the dark ages.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12694266

The foreign secretary has condemned Tehran's "completely unacceptable" behaviour after British Special Forces seized a shipment of suspected Iranian arms intended for the Taliban.

The 48 rockets are understood to have been intercepted in Nimruz Province, in southern Afghanistan, on 5 February.

UK officials say technical analysis showed they had come from Iran.

Iran (Tehran) doesn't support the Taliban. That are Sunni extremists. They are enemies.

[Ulysses G.]

They are enemies.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Iran hates the West more than any Sunni.

[bangkokeddy]

They are enemies.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Iran hates the West more than any Sunni.

The issue is that the Sunni extremists hate the Iran.

Iran were once at the brink of war with the Taliban after Shias in Afghanistan were target of massacres and Iranian diplomats killed by the Taliban (1998). Iran supported the northern alliance to kick the Taliban out. Iran suffered and suffers from terrorist attacks by Sunni extremists.

Some of these 'insurgents' in Iran might be support the Taliban in Afghanistan and had send these rockets, but not Tehran.

[chuckd]

They are enemies.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Iran hates the West more than any Sunni.

The issue is that the Sunni extremists hate the Iran.

Iran were once at the brink of war with the Taliban after Shias in Afghanistan were target of massacres and Iranian diplomats killed by the Taliban (1998). Iran supported the northern alliance to kick the Taliban out. Iran suffered and suffers from terrorist attacks by Sunni extremists.

Some of these 'insurgents' in Iran might be support the Taliban in Afghanistan and had send these rockets, but not Tehran.

Do you have a source for your statement that Tehran does not support the Taliban or is this conjecture on your part?

[koheesti]

Wasn't part of that "Sunni extremist" bin Laden's family living in Tehran?

[bonobo]

They are enemies.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Iran hates the West more than any Sunni.

The issue is that the Sunni extremists hate the Iran.

Iran were once at the brink of war with the Taliban after Shias in Afghanistan were target of massacres and Iranian diplomats killed by the Taliban (1998). Iran supported the northern alliance to kick the Taliban out. Iran suffered and suffers from terrorist attacks by Sunni extremists.

Some of these 'insurgents' in Iran might be support the Taliban in Afghanistan and had send these rockets, but not Tehran.

Do you have a source for your statement that Tehran does not support the Taliban or is this conjecture on your part?

I too would like to know if this is conjecture or fact, but even as conjecture, I think this is an interesting point and worth examining. I am not asserting that it is true, but I would like to know more on this train of thought as I hadn't considered it before.

[bangkokeddy]

Wasn't part of that "Sunni extremist" bin Laden's family living in Tehran?

Not all members of the bin Laden family are extremist like Osama.

Osama bin Laden's son slams Qaida, says family doing well in Iran

RIYADH: Osama bin Laden's son Omar said on Saturday that al-Qaida's North Africa branch should keep out of his family's affairs, after it accused Iran of mistreating his siblings stranded in Tehran.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/Osama-bin-Ladens-son-slams-Qaida-says-family-doing-well-in-Iran-/articleshow/5707317.cms

[geriatrickid]

Iran's problem with the Taliban isn't political. It's opium.

The taliban is a major trafficer of opium and that opium is being sold into Iran despite promises by the Taliban not to do so.

Iran has a major drug crisis in its border areas and it is one that most westerners do not understand. The opium trade does not however detract from elements of the Iranian government particularly the hard core zealots from selling arms to the Taliban. There is a large part of the Iranian government that wants the Taliban drug trade stopped but the people that shoot Iranian protestors, that torture Iranians and that brutally impose sharia law pay them no heed.

[bangkokeddy]

I would like to know more on this train of thought as I hadn't considered it before.

Iran and Afghanistan

Like the United States, Iran seeks a stable Afghanistan free of the Taliban and al Qaeda, which it considers a strategic menace. It also supports the government of President Hamid Karzai, contributes to Afghanistan's reconstruction and fights against its narcotics trafficking.

...

Iran and the Taliban

Amid the chaos, the Taliban, an obscure group of young Pushtun religious students, rose to power. Their ideology was a strange combination of Wahhabism and Deobandism. Iran was astonishingly slow to recognize the Taliban's dazzling rise and the pivotal support provided by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In 1995, Herat fell to the Taliban, and a year later, they overthrew President Rabbani-a major defeat for Iran and a clear victory for Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

Iran, unlike Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, refused to recognize the Taliban, and sought to return Rabbani to power. It participated in the U.N. "Six Plus Two" talks on Afghanistan's future, but Iran's strategic investment was to generously support the Northern Alliance made up of Tajiks, Uzbeks and Shiite fighters. India and Russia supported the alliance, but Iran was its principle source of military assistance.

Broken relations

Iranian support for the Northern Alliance, the Taliban's most formidable rival, created serious animosity between Tehran and Kabul. They severed diplomatic relations in 1997. Iran accused the Taliban of being "narco-terrorists," whose antediluvian ideology and draconian laws made Afghanistan a huge prison. Iran's relations with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia also deteriorated.

Iran provided key support for the Northern Alliance when the Taliban tried to capture its interim capital at Mazar-e Sharif. The Taliban initially was pushed back. But with Pakistani support, the Taliban ultimately prevailed, killing more than 2,000 people. They also kidnapped and killed eight Iranian diplomats and one journalist, which led Iran and Afghanistan dangerously close to war. Tehran massed some 200,000 troops on its eastern border, but the threat only made the Taliban more belligerent. They raided Iran's cultural center in Mazar-e Sharif and set its library ablaze. Thereafter, Tehran increased support for the Northern Alliance while the Taliban ruled most of Afghanistan.

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/iran-and-afghanistan

Iran has a strategic stake in Afghanistan that has not changed in the last nine years. Tehran's overriding interest is to prevent Afghanistan (with its long and lawless border with Iran) from being used as a platform from which to attack or undermine the Islamic Republic or to weaken Iran's standing as a regional power.

To prevent Afghanistan from being used as an anti-Iranian platform, the Islamic Republic has worked, over many years, to form relationships with Afghan players who could keep Iran's Afghan enemies (principally the Taliban but also other anti-Shiite and anti-Persian groups) and their external supporters (principally Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, two of Iran's most important regional antagonists) in check. To this end, Iran has worked to strengthen and unite Afghanistan's Shiite Hazara and other Dari/Persian-speaking communities (which together comprise about 45 percent of the population) as a counterweight to anti-Iranian, pro-Saudi, and pro-Pakistani elements among Afghan Pashtuns (roughly 42 percent of the population). The Hazara and other Dari/Persian-speaking communities were, of course, the core of the Northern Alliance that fought the Taliban during the 1990s, and were supported by India and Russia as well as Iran.

...

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/06/afpak_behind_the_lines_iran_in_afghanistan_and_pakistan

[chuckd]

I would like to know more on this train of thought as I hadn't considered it before.

Iran and Afghanistan

Like the United States, Iran seeks a stable Afghanistan free of the Taliban and al Qaeda, which it considers a strategic menace. It also supports the government of President Hamid Karzai, contributes to Afghanistan's reconstruction and fights against its narcotics trafficking.

...

Iran and the Taliban

Amid the chaos, the Taliban, an obscure group of young Pushtun religious students, rose to power. Their ideology was a strange combination of Wahhabism and Deobandism. Iran was astonishingly slow to recognize the Taliban's dazzling rise and the pivotal support provided by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In 1995, Herat fell to the Taliban, and a year later, they overthrew President Rabbani-a major defeat for Iran and a clear victory for Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

Iran, unlike Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, refused to recognize the Taliban, and sought to return Rabbani to power. It participated in the U.N. "Six Plus Two" talks on Afghanistan's future, but Iran's strategic investment was to generously support the Northern Alliance made up of Tajiks, Uzbeks and Shiite fighters. India and Russia supported the alliance, but Iran was its principle source of military assistance.

Broken relations

Iranian support for the Northern Alliance, the Taliban's most formidable rival, created serious animosity between Tehran and Kabul. They severed diplomatic relations in 1997. Iran accused the Taliban of being "narco-terrorists," whose antediluvian ideology and draconian laws made Afghanistan a huge prison. Iran's relations with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia also deteriorated.

Iran provided key support for the Northern Alliance when the Taliban tried to capture its interim capital at Mazar-e Sharif. The Taliban initially was pushed back. But with Pakistani support, the Taliban ultimately prevailed, killing more than 2,000 people. They also kidnapped and killed eight Iranian diplomats and one journalist, which led Iran and Afghanistan dangerously close to war. Tehran massed some 200,000 troops on its eastern border, but the threat only made the Taliban more belligerent. They raided Iran's cultural center in Mazar-e Sharif and set its library ablaze. Thereafter, Tehran increased support for the Northern Alliance while the Taliban ruled most of Afghanistan.

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/iran-and-afghanistan

Iran has a strategic stake in Afghanistan that has not changed in the last nine years. Tehran's overriding interest is to prevent Afghanistan (with its long and lawless border with Iran) from being used as a platform from which to attack or undermine the Islamic Republic or to weaken Iran's standing as a regional power.

To prevent Afghanistan from being used as an anti-Iranian platform, the Islamic Republic has worked, over many years, to form relationships with Afghan players who could keep Iran's Afghan enemies (principally the Taliban but also other anti-Shiite and anti-Persian groups) and their external supporters (principally Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, two of Iran's most important regional antagonists) in check. To this end, Iran has worked to strengthen and unite Afghanistan's Shiite Hazara and other Dari/Persian-speaking communities (which together comprise about 45 percent of the population) as a counterweight to anti-Iranian, pro-Saudi, and pro-Pakistani elements among Afghan Pashtuns (roughly 42 percent of the population). The Hazara and other Dari/Persian-speaking communities were, of course, the core of the Northern Alliance that fought the Taliban during the 1990s, and were supported by India and Russia as well as Iran.

...

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/06/afpak_behind_the_lines_iran_in_afghanistan_and_pakistan

From your first link... Please note paragraph 4.

Your own link has proven the statement you made about Iran not supporting the Taliban has proven to be purely conjecture.

Iran and Afghanistan

Mohsen Milani

Like the United States, Iran seeks a stable Afghanistan free of the Taliban and al Qaeda, which it considers a strategic menace. It also supports the government of President Hamid Karzai, contributes to Afghanistan's reconstruction and fights against its narcotics trafficking.

Yet Iran's policies toward Afghanistan are linked to its fierce strategic competition with the United States for a dominant role in the Islamic world.

Having gained strategic depth in Afghanistan, Iran has developed asymmetrical capability to disrupt U.S. operations or retaliate against American troops, should Iran's nuclear facilities be attacked.

Iran has called on foreign forces to leave Afghanistan, and has reportedly provided limited military support to anti-American forces as the Taliban.

Iran has created a sphere of influence and a security buffer zone in the Herat region, the industrial heart of Afghanistan and its most secure region. Most of Iran's pledged reconstruction assistance, estimated at $660 million, is in Herat.

Iran is now among the top five exporters and importers of goods to and fr

[bangkokeddy]

I would like to know more on this train of thought as I hadn't considered it before.

Iran and Afghanistan

Like the United States, Iran seeks a stable Afghanistan free of the Taliban and al Qaeda, which it considers a strategic menace. It also supports the government of President Hamid Karzai, contributes to Afghanistan's reconstruction and fights against its narcotics trafficking.

...

Iran and the Taliban

Amid the chaos, the Taliban, an obscure group of young Pushtun religious students, rose to power. Their ideology was a strange combination of Wahhabism and Deobandism. Iran was astonishingly slow to recognize the Taliban's dazzling rise and the pivotal support provided by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In 1995, Herat fell to the Taliban, and a year later, they overthrew President Rabbani-a major defeat for Iran and a clear victory for Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

Iran, unlike Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, refused to recognize the Taliban, and sought to return Rabbani to power. It participated in the U.N. "Six Plus Two" talks on Afghanistan's future, but Iran's strategic investment was to generously support the Northern Alliance made up of Tajiks, Uzbeks and Shiite fighters. India and Russia supported the alliance, but Iran was its principle source of military assistance.

Broken relations

Iranian support for the Northern Alliance, the Taliban's most formidable rival, created serious animosity between Tehran and Kabul. They severed diplomatic relations in 1997. Iran accused the Taliban of being "narco-terrorists," whose antediluvian ideology and draconian laws made Afghanistan a huge prison. Iran's relations with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia also deteriorated.

Iran provided key support for the Northern Alliance when the Taliban tried to capture its interim capital at Mazar-e Sharif. The Taliban initially was pushed back. But with Pakistani support, the Taliban ultimately prevailed, killing more than 2,000 people. They also kidnapped and killed eight Iranian diplomats and one journalist, which led Iran and Afghanistan dangerously close to war. Tehran massed some 200,000 troops on its eastern border, but the threat only made the Taliban more belligerent. They raided Iran's cultural center in Mazar-e Sharif and set its library ablaze. Thereafter, Tehran increased support for the Northern Alliance while the Taliban ruled most of Afghanistan.

http://iranprimer.usip.org/resource/iran-and-afghanistan

Iran has a strategic stake in Afghanistan that has not changed in the last nine years. Tehran's overriding interest is to prevent Afghanistan (with its long and lawless border with Iran) from being used as a platform from which to attack or undermine the Islamic Republic or to weaken Iran's standing as a regional power.

To prevent Afghanistan from being used as an anti-Iranian platform, the Islamic Republic has worked, over many years, to form relationships with Afghan players who could keep Iran's Afghan enemies (principally the Taliban but also other anti-Shiite and anti-Persian groups) and their external supporters (principally Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, two of Iran's most important regional antagonists) in check. To this end, Iran has worked to strengthen and unite Afghanistan's Shiite Hazara and other Dari/Persian-speaking communities (which together comprise about 45 percent of the population) as a counterweight to anti-Iranian, pro-Saudi, and pro-Pakistani elements among Afghan Pashtuns (roughly 42 percent of the population). The Hazara and other Dari/Persian-speaking communities were, of course, the core of the Northern Alliance that fought the Taliban during the 1990s, and were supported by India and Russia as well as Iran.

...

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/06/afpak_behind_the_lines_iran_in_afghanistan_and_pakistan

From your first link... Please note paragraph 4.

Your own link has proven the statement you made about Iran not supporting the Taliban has proven to be purely conjecture.

Iran and Afghanistan

Mohsen Milani

Like the United States, Iran seeks a stable Afghanistan free of the Taliban and al Qaeda, which it considers a strategic menace. It also supports the government of President Hamid Karzai, contributes to Afghanistan's reconstruction and fights against its narcotics trafficking.

Yet Iran's policies toward Afghanistan are linked to its fierce strategic competition with the United States for a dominant role in the Islamic world.

Having gained strategic depth in Afghanistan, Iran has developed asymmetrical capability to disrupt U.S. operations or retaliate against American troops, should Iran's nuclear facilities be attacked.

Iran has called on foreign forces to leave Afghanistan, and has reportedly provided limited military support to anti-American forces as the Taliban.

Iran has created a sphere of influence and a security buffer zone in the Herat region, the industrial heart of Afghanistan and its most secure region. Most of Iran's pledged reconstruction assistance, estimated at $660 million, is in Herat.

Iran is now among the top five exporters and importers of goods to and fr

Did you read the whole train of thoughts or were you just looking for the remarks that there are reports of limited support?

Should i post some statements by Ahmadinejad instead?

Tehran doesn't fight a full proxy war with the help of the taliban or al Qaeda against the US. They have other interests that are more important for them.

Do you think the "train of thought" in both papers is wrong and not worth to consider?

The SAS seized a shipment of 48 rockets? that is the proof?

The SAS, in IRAQ they were running around with wigs, faked bears, faked tan, killing one policeman and wounded another but got caught and arrested.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4264614.stm

[Ulysses G.]

Should i post some statements by Ahmadinejad instead?

Isn't he the one who claims that Iran is not trying to develop nuclear weapons? Who could doubt his honesty?

[chuckd]

Did you read the whole train of thoughts or were you just looking for the remarks that there are reports of limited support?

Should i post some statements by Ahmadinejad instead?

Tehran doesn't fight a full proxy war with the help of the taliban or al Qaeda against the US. They have other interests that are more important for them.

Do you think the "train of thought" in both papers is wrong and not worth to consider?

The SAS seized a shipment of 48 rockets? that is the proof?

The SAS, in IRAQ they were running around with wigs, faked bears, faked tan, killing one policeman and wounded another but got caught and arrested.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4264614.stm

Of course I read the entire article. How do you think I found the sentence that refutes your earlier statement?

______________________________________________________

For the record, this is your statement from post number 15 of this thread:

"Some of these 'insurgents' in Iran might be support the Taliban in Afghanistan and had send these rockets, but not Tehran."

______________________________________________________

I then asked you this question in post number 16:

"Do you have a source for your statement that Tehran does not support the Taliban or is this conjecture on your part?"

______________________________________________________

The link YOU provided makes this statement:

"Iran has called on foreign forces to leave Afghanistan, and has reportedly provided limited military support to anti-American forces as the Taliban."

_____________________________________________________

You are now disputing your own source material and have yet to prove that what you claimed in post number 15 is not conjecture on your part.

You may post anything you desire from Ahmadinejad. Nobody will believe him either.