Pilots war and Taliban war crimes

NY Times:

Every day from the deck of this nuclear-powered aircraft carrier off the coast of Pakistan, two dozen combat planes are catapulted into the sky for the 500-mile trip to southern Afghanistan. There the pilots circle Taliban strongholds like an airborne 911 service and zoom in when American and British troops, spread thin and often panicked, call in airstrikes.

The Navy has been back in these waters providing more air power since August, in large part because the ground reinforcements that commanders have been pleading for have not yet come. From 15,000 feet up, the pilots protect supply lines under increasing attack, fly reconnaissance missions to find what they call “bad guys” over the next hill, and go “kinetic” with bombs that kill three, four or five Taliban fighters at a time. They can always tell when troops who call in airstrikes are under direct fire.

“They’re trying to talk to you at the same time that they’re running and being shot at, so obviously there’s a lot of urgency in their voices,” said Capt. Kevin J. Kovacich, the Roosevelt’s air wing commander.

Captain Kovacich and many of his pilots last dropped bombs in Afghanistan in March 2002, when the American military seemed to have dealt a near fatal blow to the Taliban. Now the United States military is experiencing the limitations of air power in a seven-year war, in which an increasing American reliance on airstrikes against insurgents has kindled growing fury over the civilian casualties that have come with them.

“Those insurgents are wily,” said Cmdr. Fredrick R. Luchtman, the commanding officer of a Roosevelt squadron of F/A-18C Hornets, who also flew missions over Afghanistan in early 2002. “They will meld themselves within the population. They will fire from areas that they know that if we put a bomb there, it’s going to look bad.”

The pilots do not need to be told that civilian deaths soared last year in Afghanistan, the majority from Taliban attacks, but others from airstrikes called in by American and British troops under fire. President Hamid Karzai has so angrily condemned the strikes that in December he was invited to visit the Roosevelt, so that officers could try to persuade him that they took care where they aimed their bombs.

As Vice Adm. William E. Gortney, the commander of United States naval forces in the region, put it: “We don’t drop when we’re unsure.”

The visit, by the Navy’s account at least, went well. Mr. Karzai watched jets take off from the flight deck and was briefed on how the pilots try to minimize “collateral damage.” Afterward, he sent the ship one of his trademark karakul hats and a Christmas card. But for the pilots, tensions remain.

“If it was positively identified as hostile in Iraq, you took it out,” said Commander Luchtman, who also flew missions over Baghdad in 2003. “Here, just because it’s positively identified as hostile, you’ve still got to mitigate the other things around.”

To support ground troops in Afghanistan, the United States flew more than 19,000 combat missions in the country in 2008 — more than ever before, surpassing even the number in Iraq over the same period. But over all, American pilots dropped slightly fewer bombs and other munitions, perhaps as a result of more restrictive rules imposed in September after an uproar about civilian casualties.

“To win the insurgency, we’re not going to bomb our way out of this,” said Col. Harry A. Foster, the chief of the strategy division of the Combined Air and Space Operations Center in Southwest Asia, the command headquarters for the air wars over Iraq and Afghanistan. To that end, pilots on the Roosevelt often engage in a “show of force” — flying as low as 1,000 feet and making a lot of noise to scare the Taliban — and say they drop bombs as a last resort.

There is more. The story was written by Elisabeth Bumiller who I think is among the weaker of the Times group of pretty good war correspondents. What she misses here is what most writers miss when they talk about noncombatant casualties in Afghanistan.

There is no mention of the Taliban war crime of using human shields. The pilots and their commander talk about the problem but no one identifies the Taliban crime as such. I think if the military reported it as such the Times would duly report it, but they also know the law of wars which they will use without prompting if the US is at fault. They should use the same standard for the Taliban. By not doing so they make a gift of propaganda value to the enemy.

Another point on civilian casualties needs to be made. Because the Taliban commit the war crime of camouflaging themselves as civilians, they put all civilians at risk and it is sometimes impossible to sparate the casualties with certainity. It is not like the Taliban carry dog tags either.


Popular posts from this blog

Police body cam video shows a difference story of what happened to George Floyd

The plot against the President

While blocking pipeline for US , Biden backs one for Taliban