Small Wars Journal

Afghan Civilian Deaths Decline

Fri, 08/28/2009 - 7:15am
Afghan Civilian Deaths Decline Under New US Tactics - Laura King, Los Angeles Times.

Western troops have killed far fewer Afghan civilians since the top US general imposed strict new rules of engagement aimed at addressing one of the most contentious issues of the conflict, according to newly declassified US military figures.

However, the data cover a relatively short period of eight weeks, and make it clear that civilians are still dying in large numbers, a pattern blamed in part on the Taliban's campaign of violence surrounding last week's national elections. The toll on civilians has angered Afghanistan's government and poisoned public opinion against the presence of American and allied troops. The Obama administration has made reducing such deaths a top priority for the US military.

The period since the new rules took effect have also coincided with some of the heaviest losses of the war for Western forces. But military spokesmen deny any link, saying record fatalities were caused by the summer's troop buildup and an accompanying push into areas controlled by the Taliban, rather than any greater hazard to troops posed by the new rules...

More at The Los Angeles Times.

Comments

Michael - I think they are in Afghanistan - and eventually did in Iraq. You are right concerning civilian casualties as a metric, but I would not be so quick to assume that "they" don't get it. They do. - Dave

I would be very pleased if one of the most important metrics of success were the number of Afghan civilians who die in war. This goes for Iraq as well. Our media, for an understandable reason, focuses on our soldier's deaths more than any other number. But, if we are waging a counter-insurgency, or a foreign internal defense, then the number of US dead is unneccessary, only the number of Afghan or Iraqi dead.