KABUL, Afghanistan, June 29, 2008

Afghan Civilian Deaths Up 62%, U.N. Says

Increasing Violence Frustrates Humanitarian Efforts To Help Starving Afghans

  •  (AP / CBS)

  • Play CBS Video Video U.S. Losing Afghan Drug War

    The U.S. is fighting a losing battle against the heroin trade in Afghanistan, which largely benefits the Taliban. And as Armen Keteyian reports, terrorists aren't this drug war's only beneficiaries.

  • Video Corruption Plagues Afghanistan

    Hopes for socioeconomic progress have been diminished in Afghanistan, as U.S.-led coalition forces witnessed their deadliest month in the war-torn region. Mark Phillips reports from London.

  • Video A View From The Fields

    "Only On The Web": Military contractor Eric Sherepita explains how Afghanistan's lucrative heroin trade helps finance global terrorism and why U.S. efforts to dismantle it have been ineffective.

  • Fast Facts Afghanistan

    Learn about the people, economy and history.

(AP)  The number of civilians killed in fighting between insurgents and security forces in Afghanistan has soared by nearly two-thirds in the first half of this year, to almost 700 people, a senior U.N. official said Sunday.

The figures are a grim reminder of how the nearly seven-year war has failed to stabilize the country and suggest that ordinary civilians are bearing a heavy toll, particularly from stepped-up militant attacks.

John Holmes, the world body's humanitarian affairs chief, said the insecurity was making it increasingly difficult to deliver emergency aid to dirt-poor Afghans hit by the global food crisis.

"The humanitarian situation is clearly affected and made worse by the ongoing conflict in different parts of the country," Holmes told reporters in Kabul during a visit.

"Most of those casualties are caused by the insurgents, who seem to have no regard for civilian life, but there are also still significant numbers caused by the international military forces," he said.

Holmes said U.N. figures show that 698 civilians have died as a result of the fighting in the first half of this year. That compares to 430 in the first six months of 2007, a rise of 62 percent.

Anti-government militants caused 422 of the recorded civilian casualties - 60 percent - while government or foreign troops killed 255 people, according to the U.N. numbers. The cause of 21 other deaths was unclear.

Holmes said the proportion of civilian casualties caused by security forces had dropped from nearly half last year and clashes had become less dangerous to ordinary Afghans.

"It is clear that the international military forces are making every effort to minimize civilian casualties and recognize the damage this does and want to deal with that," he said.

"Nevertheless these problems are still there, and we need to deal with them and make sure that the safety of civilians comes first and international humanitarian law is respected by everybody."

NATO's reaction to the U.N. figures was cool.

"The U.N. Human Rights rapporteur made an accusation (in May) that we had killed 200, and I said then that those numbers were far, far higher than we would recognize, and that is still the case," said Mark Laity, a spokesman for the alliance in Kabul.

He provided no alternative figures.

Afghan leaders including President Hamid Karzai have accused NATO and the U.S.-led coalition of recklessly endangering civilians by using excessive force, including airstrikes, in residential areas.

Foreign commanders insist they take all reasonable precautions to avoid killing innocents and say militants routinely fire on them from houses and flee into villages.

Holmes said he came to Afghanistan because the humanitarian situation was "serious and is getting worse."

Drought in parts of northern and western Afghanistan has exacerbated food shortages caused by rising global prices for staples such as wheat and rice.

Holmes said the U.N. was providing food aid to 2.5 million people but would soon join the government in appealing to international donors for more funds to expand the program.

He said U.N. agencies and aid groups were finding it hard to reach vulnerable communities because of the risk that its staff would be attacked and said the world body would try to negotiate "days of tranquility or humanitarian corridors" with militants so that aid could get through safely.

U.N. food convoys have suffered 11 armed attacks this year, including one on Sunday in which several trucks were burned, and lost a total of 340 tons of food, he said.


© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 26 Comments
by feelfree4u July 1, 2008 2:40 AM EDT

tcandrews62,

Re: "If a nation goes to war, there has to be a purpose, execution plan, and something stating what establishes a win!"

We agree on this point.
Reply to this comment
by TommyCraig July 1, 2008 2:27 AM EDT
"Absurd. "Terrorism" is a tactic. It is not possible to wage a "war" against it, much less win one".
Posted by FeelFree4U at 11:00 PM : Jun 30, 2008

FeelFree4u,
I agree. When the President made the statement that we were at war with terrorism, I was quite confused. If a nation goes to war, there has to be a purpose, execution plan, and something stating what establishes a win!
I do support the war effort in Afganistan. But there needs to be a complete plan. Iraq should not have been attacked without the purpose, execution, and win plan.
Communication needs to be established to end the war.
If at war, the enemies will must be crushed! Much like that of what the North did to the South, the air corp did to Germany, and the Anola Gay did to Japan. They must never again venture war against the world.
Reply to this comment
by feelfree4u July 1, 2008 2:12 AM EDT

Re: "Afghan Civilian Deaths Up 62%, U.N. Says"

It''s truly sickening and disgraceful what we have done to the people of Afghanistan, in the name of "freedom" and "justice".


"...and the big fool says to push on..."
Reply to this comment
by feelfree4u July 1, 2008 2:00 AM EDT

Re: "The real War on Terrorism"

Absurd. "Terrorism" is a tactic. It is not possible to wage a "war" against it, much less win one.

The terrorists that we had best keep our focus on, are those who have seized power here in the U.S.

All other threats pale by comparison.
Reply to this comment
by mcvet July 1, 2008 12:17 AM EDT
Death, destruction, savagery, carnage=Savage, barbarian, Muslim extremism! The NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF UNREST IN THE MODERN WORLD!, A CANCER ON THE PLANET!, A CANCER ON ALL CIVILIZED SOCIETIES!

Posted by notblue at 10:11 AM : Jun 30, 2008
+ report abuse

Now swastika breath YOU attacked me as being a "Liberal" and unreasonable when I pointed out that that Slimy piece of Trash YOU call a President allowed them to get away while he invaded a Country that HAD none of them in it... A country that did NOTHING TO US. I do wish YOU''d make up your mind...what little there is of it. Sieg Heil Bush!!
Reply to this comment
by mcvet July 1, 2008 12:16 AM EDT
Folks this one is coming apart REAL fast on us! AL Queda was allowed to escape into a safe haven and rebuild. Now we are in a real pickle because of Bush and the Republican Party! Republican''s should change their party name to FAILURE!! Sieg Heil McSame!!
Reply to this comment
by j-whitman June 30, 2008 10:00 PM EDT
Good, an Afhganistan topic. I''m glad it''s not totally forgotten.

Here''s a good 5 pg article on how the GOP has failed in that Forgotten War. -- The real War on Terrorism


Amid U.S. Policy Disputes, Qaeda Grows in Pakistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/washington/30tribal.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1214866631-KVuBwcWyQLXJbsyQa3Efzw



Reply to this comment
by captalistpig June 30, 2008 9:28 PM EDT
Soooo...that''s who wrote the news item for CBS??
Reply to this comment
by noloyalisti June 30, 2008 8:42 PM EDT
Insurgents are a frightened right wing nut term that means those that don''t want an fascist power like American to steal their stuff. And they certainly don''t want violent Christians to be in charge.
Reply to this comment
by captalistpig June 30, 2008 8:15 PM EDT
-""Most of those casualties are caused by the insurgents, who seem to have no regard for civilian life"-

Read carefully
Reply to this comment
by noloyalisti June 30, 2008 8:09 PM EDT
This is the other failed neo con war for oil. These people kicked the Soviets the heck out and we are next. We will never win anything there or in Iraq, nor do we deserve to.
Reply to this comment
by notblue June 30, 2008 1:11 PM EDT
Death, destruction, savagery, carnage=Savage, barbarian, Muslim extremism! The NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF UNREST IN THE MODERN WORLD!, A CANCER ON THE PLANET!, A CANCER ON ALL CIVILIZED SOCIETIES!
Reply to this comment
by liberalme June 30, 2008 12:19 PM EDT
And tne White House will still not give the go ahead when we have Bin Laden in out sites---wonder why not? We went into Iraq with distorted information!
Reply to this comment
by kretos-2009 June 30, 2008 8:11 AM EDT
*** those who are responsible killings ! *** bush first ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by juwboy June 30, 2008 7:47 AM EDT
FeelFreek4U, a subhuman Arab, posing as a patriotic American.

Eat pork and die, b!tch!!!
Reply to this comment
by sistatee-2009 June 30, 2008 5:25 AM EDT
A pittance to pay for protecting the sea-I-aa''s drug business.
Reply to this comment
by feelfree4u June 30, 2008 4:57 AM EDT

Following the events of 9/11/01, Taliban officials offered to hand over CIA asset, Osama bin Laden, to face charges. Their only condition was that U.S. officials present evidence of Osama''s involvement in these attacks. The Bush regime declined, because they had no such evidence, and because they intended to attack the people of Afghanistan in any case.

Knowing that massive casualties in Afghanistan would sap U.S. public support for the invasion, the Bush regime chose to use the warlords of the region as proxy fighters. Large rewards offered by the U.S. led to innocent people being handed over to be tortured by U.S. agents in Afghanistan, Guantanimo Bay, and elsewhere.

Thanks to the ivasion, Afghanistan is now the center of global opium production, and former Unocal executive, Hamid Karzai, has been installed as the puppet ruler of the country.

No matter how many soldiers are killed and maimed in Afghanistan, no matter how many Afghan wedding parties are bombed by U.S. planes, no matter how many civilians are tortured and slaughtered by U.S. agents, and despite the futility and pointlessness of this self defeating military misadventure, many Americans continue to champion the war of aggression against Afghanistan as a noble cause. Billions upon billions of dollars in U.S. treasure continue to be transferred to war profiteers and druglords as a result, while to blood of U.S. soldiers continues to be needlessly spilled.
Reply to this comment
by feelfree4u June 30, 2008 4:52 AM EDT

Many cite Afghanistan as the gravestone of the former Soviet Union- the final nail in the coffin, as they were ultimately forced to withdraw, unable to successfully maintain a military occupation of the country. The U.S. now not only faces a humiliating military defeat in Afghanistan, but a crippling multi-tiered defeat in Iraq, on the economic, military, and moral fronts.

It appears that many of my fellow Americans still think that waging wars of aggression is an intelligent and effective way of solving problems, and that it is possible to introduce democracy at the point of a gun. Most Americans, of course, do not share in the sacrifices and costs of pursuing such a policy, as we still have an all-volunteer military, for the most part, and since we are borrowing the money from countries like China to finance the shameful debacle. The bill has yet to be paid, and we are already straining just to pay the interest.

Maybe one day, Americans will wake up en mass, and realize that our greatest enemies are the religious and business interests that have infested our system, State-sanctioned terrorist organizations like the CIA and the Mossad, our own comfort and docility, and our lack of courage to demand something better.

That day could be today.
Reply to this comment
by feelfree4u June 30, 2008 4:50 AM EDT

Test...
Reply to this comment
by fixhist June 30, 2008 1:34 AM EDT
Say NO for another Billions worth of Kleenex.

Why American forces get pennies in return for pain,agony & stress, like contribution of $1200 in return from $30,000 grant for education?

What educating a Veteran can do good,when all service industry jobs are gone off-shore & Auto Industry is in decline.

Don''t get fooled by fictitious spending figures in Budget 2009. Get your facts right at "wartaxboycott ORG"
Reply to this comment
See all 26 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Can the Postal Service be Saved?

    (282 recent comments)

Exclusive Webshow

The road ahead in Afghanistan, and the crucial decision Obama faces.
Watch Now

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: