US promise to reduce Afghan civilian deaths has no credibility

An analyst tells Press TV that the US air strike policy has not changed and the US promises with regard to Afghanistan enjoy very slight credibility.

The commander of US-led forces in Afghanistan General Joseph Dunford has said he would comply with President Hamid Karzai’s recent decree banning Afghan security forces from seeking assistance from foreign troops in conducting air raids. General Joseph Dunford made the statement following a NATO air raid in eastern Afghanistan that claimed the lives of 10 civilians, including women and children, late Wednesday.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Gareth Porter, an investigative journalist from Washington, to further discuss the issue of US war in Afghanistan.

A rough transcription of the interview with Gareth Porter follows.

Press TV: Now, before I dive deeper into this, do you think this promise on the part of General Dunford is in a way an admission that these air strikes have caused civilian deaths?

Porter: Well, of course, yes. This is clear that the US command has no choice but to admit that this happened.

And of course, this is only the latest of an endless series of incidents involving US air strikes which have killed civilians, going back many years all the way back to the beginning of the use of US air power there.

So, I mean this is a very familiar issue. Nothing much has changed over the years. And I must say that the credibility of US promises with regard to this issue is very slight indeed in Afghanistan.

Press TV: Exactly. I like to pick up on that. Do you think this promise on the part of General Dunford is basically an understanding that these air strikes are causing civilian deaths and more destruction to Afghanistan, or is it a way for the US to placate Afghan civilians as well as politicians in order to get that green light, in order to stay beyond 2014 with immunity for their soldiers?

Porter: I think it is both. I think it is true that the US command understands the need to placate and manage, if you will, the political problem that it has with regard to both use of air powers as well as night raids by US special operations forces in Afghanistan, both of which are immensely unpopular. Of course, night raids much more so than the air strikes.

But the other part of this that you mentioned, I think that there is definitely a widespread understanding that certainly at midlevels of the US command that the air strikes have been terribly damaging politically to the US cause there.

But it has not really caused any fundamental change in the US policy that has been going back for the last five to seven years.

I think there was a time in 2004, 2005, when the US commander took a fairly hard line on air strikes although he did not stop from completely by any means but after he was replaced, the policy has been quite consistent in having relatively slight limitations on the use of air strikes whenever there is any chance that US ground troops might suffer casualties without…

Press TV: Right, let me just jump in there. Speaking of which, this is with regards to NATO air strikes. But what about the drones that the US says CIA agency uses time and time again on Afghan soil as well as in neighboring Pakistan, that has not been stopped now, has it?

Porter: Well, of course, there is no discussion of limiting use of drones in Afghanistan, much less across the borders.

So that clearly is off the table, if you will, in terms of discussion between the United States and Afghanistan. But certainly, you know, to come back to the US policy on air strikes, there is a long tradition here of the US command being absolutely unwilling to be honest and straightforward in its handling of this issue of air strikes.

And I remember writing a story back in 2009 about perhaps the worst air strike of the war which was in Farah Province in May of 2009, when between a hundred and a hundred and fifty civilians were killed in a single air strike. And the US command made the absurd claim that these were essentially Taliban being killed and then they retreated from that and said that the civilians were killed because the Taliban caused it. They forced the civilians to remain and ultimately, after several months, there was a more thorough investigation which showed that they have been lying…