Harry acted like Jackal in Afghan war: Analyst

Political analyst Mohammad Daoud Abedi says British Prince Harry’s ‘hunting Afghans from the air’ during his Afghan mission in the southern province of Helmand bears no resemblance to the way a member of a royal family ought to act.

The comment comes as Prince Harry, the third-in-line to the UK’s throne, has acknowledged and justified killing Afghan people during his most recent deployment in the war-torn nation.

The 28 year-old prince has just finished his five-month second tour of duty in Afghanistan. He said he fired at Afghans from an Apache attack helicopter.

Harry revealed this in an interview before he left Afghanistan on Monday. He was seeking to justify his hostility towards Afghans while on duty in the southern province of Helmand.

The prince is back home after a five-month tour of Afghanistan as an Apache pilot gunner.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Mohammad Daoud Abedi, the chairman of the Afghan Nation Peace Council in London to further discuss the issue. What follows is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Many thanks for joining us here Mr. Abedi. Now a British prince laughing and smiling into a camera boasting as if killing Afghans is some sort of an accomplishment. What do you make of that?

Abedi: Bismillah arrahmane rahim [In the name of God the compassionate, the merciful]. Thank you for having me again in your show. Well, Prince Harry is a Jackal. He is planning to hunt Afghans from the air but he was about to be hunted himself in the military base in Helmand when the Mojahedin attacked the base he was looking for a hole to hide. So this is not the way a prince should act. A prince should be really different.

He is acting like a prince but unfortunately he is not a prince because hunting the poor Afghans from the airplane is not a man’s way to behave in order for Prince Harry to say things like that he can hunt Afghans from the air. If he really is a prince he should face the Afghans face to face and fight them and he must be defeated as his grandfathers have been defeated three times in Afghanistan. We defeated them three times. Last time they were defeated there were at least 16,000 people in … of Afghanistan.

Only those who were wounded in Afghanistan had the British flag on their wounds. So maybe Prince Harry was one of those guys that was wearing the British flag on his wounds and that…

Press TV: Mr. Abedi let me just cut in there well you see the way the media specifically has responded to Prince Harry’s adventures in Afghanistan and the way he is a public figure for most Britons and people across the world. He is seen as a celebrity some children even trying to emulate what he does. Do you think this is the media’s way as well as the royal family’s way of glorifying the war and the atrocities that are being committed in Afghanistan?

Abedi: Actually there are three things in the deployment of Harry to Afghanistan. One, they would like his resume to look good in the future that he was the guy that fought one of the hardest wars, actually the fourth Afghan England war. So they want to have that in his resume.

The second thing is that the Brits have not had a strong ruler in the Afghan war so far from 2001 until now. They’ve been just following now warmongers of the United States working like a puppet just like Tony Blair was working in the foreign ministry of the United States so they are fighting a war that they had no role in it and in the end they didn’t gain anything.

First reason they send him there is one resume; the second is to give a lot of morale to those soldiers that have been defeated in Afghanistan showing that you are going to win this war and you should fight harder. These are one of the reasons that is there. Other than that there are hundreds of other pilots in the UK why didn’t they send him there?