Gates Sorry For Afghan Civilian Deaths

Defense Secretary Expresses "Personal Regret" For Recent U.S. Airstrikes

(CBS/AP)  Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Wednesday expressed "personal regret" for recent U.S. airstrikes that killed Afghan civilians, and pledged more accurate targeting in future.

Gates' unusual apology is evidence of what a major point of contention civilian casualties have become with the Afghan government, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin. And the civilian casualties point to a fundamental problem facing the U.S. in Afghanistan - not enough troops. The shortage of troops forces commanders to rely on air strikes in going after the Taliban and al Qaeda, and air strikes invariably produce civilian casualties.

After meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and other senior government officials, Gates said at a news conference, "As I told them, I offer all Afghans my sincere condolences and personal regret for the recent loss of innocent life as a result of coalition airstrikes."

Meanwhile, the commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, says he now needs a total of four more combat brigades - roughly 15,000 troops - in order to cover the terrain. One of those brigades is due to arrive in January, a second could get there in May, but it will depend on further withdrawals from Iraq, Martin reports. It could be 2010 before the fourth brigade gets there, so the problem of not enough troops is not going to be solved any time soon.

Gates said the U.S. military takes extraordinary precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but added, "It is clear that we have to work even harder." He told Afghan officials that he would discuss the issue with American commanders and pilots on Wednesday.

Later, Gates flew to Bagram, the main U.S. base in Afghanistan, and received a briefing on procedures for using air power. "As I told President Karzai this morning, we are very concerned about this," Gates told reporters after the briefing. "It's a very high priority for us."

He agreed to an Afghan government proposal to create a permanent joint investigative group to probe any incident involving civilian casualties, rather than assigning investigators to individual cases as they arrive, according to Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell.

"The danger is that we'll be here longer and we'll expend more resources and experience more human suffering than if we had more resources placed against this campaign sooner," McKiernan told reporters traveling with Gates.

He also said he knows he can only get more combat forces if troops are diverted from Iraq. The Army brigade arriving in Afghanistan in January was initially scheduled to go to Iraq, and it includes about 3,700 soldiers.

McKiernan said his Washington bosses had "validated" his request for the three additional brigades - or at least 10,000 more troops - and said he believes it is a question of when, not if, he will get those reinforcements. There currently are about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are headed in opposite directions: Violence is down substantially in Iraq and U.S. troop levels are declining, while the fighting is heating up in Afghanistan and more U.S. troops are needed.

McKiernan said that while he does not believe the U.S. is losing the war there, "we are winning slower in some places than others."

There have been a series of attacks in Afghanistan that resulted in civilian deaths - most notably the highly publicized allegations that a U.S. attack on an Afghan village compound on Aug. 22 killed as many as 90 Afghan civilians, including women and children. The U.S. military has disputed the allegation but also has opened a new investigation considering emerging evidence.

Another fundamental problem that is not going to be solved any time soon is the safe havens in Pakistan. The U.S. has stepped up its cross border strikes, mainly using unmanned drones, and that has provoked howls of protest from Pakistan and even threats to open fire on any American troops who cross the border.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, paid a hasty visit to Pakistan on Tuesday in an effort to repair the damage. Afterwards, the American embassy in Islamabad put out a statement promising that the U.S. would respect Pakistani sovereignty. What it didn't say - but which is also true - is the U.S. will continue to protect its troops in Afghanistan and that means going after the sanctuaries in Pakistan, Martin reports. In other words, the U.S. respects Pakistani sovereignty but will continue to violate it. Just as the U.S. regrets civilian casualties but cannot - no matter how hard it tries - avoid them.

[babooph]

My kid apologized after being caught in a big lie.He did not have a powerful propaganda system to cover up though,so he lies a lot less than the White House bunch.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Afterwards, the American embassy in Islamabad put out a statement promising that the U.S. would respect Pakistani sovereignty."

So if American soldiers are caught violating Pakistan''s sovereignty, then Pakistan now has the right to fire upon them, as their incursions cannot be supported if the US respects Pakistan''s sovereignty.

Of course they always had that right under international law.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by willymack4

Your memory is also defective, you seem to forget that even McNamara finally admitted that Vietnam, as is Iraq, and as is Afghanistan, are military campaigns based on lies, US soldiers have no right or valid reason to even be there visiting death upon those people, and the people of those countries have the right to defend themselves from US hostility.

[shoebox119]

Gee, sorry about that, Afghan civilians... we didn''t mean to bomb a few more of you innocent folks. But you do understand we are on a very serious mission. We must find Osama bin Laden before our November 4th election so the Republican party can stay in power.

[willymack]

Where do you and your friends shoot up?

[willymack]

Innocent People get killed in war. Unfortunately our enemies know that our press ridicules our government and incites idiots like you guys to yell and scream, so they deliberately mix with civilians to protect themselves. They do not care if they use innocents to hide behind.

I witnessed the VC doing it in Vietnam. VC would snipe and run. Americans would die. Villagers caught betweend two armed forces would lie about the presence of sappers and snipers, tunnels and booby traps.

After you see 8 or ten of your friends get killed you open fire at anything that fires at you and civilians are casualties. Do any of you idiots remember the minute men and the red coats? Nah, you are all computer geeks or pot heads.

[hhmby420]

The friend of our enemy is our enemy.

[jackobyte]

7 years in and you still have to work at not killing civilians? By the time you get around to it there wont be any left. Give me a break! or better give the Afganis a break.

[hermitdave]

Gates isn''t sorry enough to admit the Afghan crusade was illegal and the country had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

[stn_sage]

As many times as U.S. forces have ''mis-targeted'' and killed civilians, I don''t believe all these events were mistakes!

I think the military has gone to a policy of kill anything that moves and let God sort them out above!

Being sorry is nice, but it doesn''t make up for murdering someones'' relative(s)! Neither does passing out money to them afterwards!

It would be best if they''d not make these repetitive mistakes in the first place! Get it right!