US losing the moral high ground

Chris Sands 
Last Updated: September 04. 2008 11:44PM UAE / September 4. 2008 7:44PM GMT
TheNational, Abu Dhabi

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20080904/FOREIGN/780631199/1011

As Ramadan approached, the wheels of the propaganda machine were quick to
turn. The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) operating
in Afghanistan pledged to remain “honourable and respectful” throughout the
month. Meanwhile, its US counterpart revealed that it had freed three
detainees early in keeping with the spirit of the occasion.

Then the bad news arrived. First came reports that foreign and local troops
had stormed a house in Kabul, killing a man, his wife and two children.
Next, ISAF admitted four children had died in the south-eastern province of
Paktika after being hit by its artillery.

The question Afghans are asking is “Why do they do these things?” and,
increasingly, there appears to be no obvious answer. Even Hamid Karzai, the
country’s president, struggles to explain the reasons his allies make so
many mistakes that cost innocent lives.

This has been an issue from the beginning but now, almost seven years since
the war started, it is creating a rift that no longer has time to be
repaired.

Although the 2001-invasion is usually touted as a great success, the
devastation caused was substantial. One independent survey estimated that
about 4,000 civilians were killed in the early stages of the bombing
campaign.

The US often relied on faulty intelligence in those days, unwittingly
carrying out the vendettas of tribal leaders who wanted their rivals
eliminated. Rather than commit large numbers of troops, it used massive air
power against a country that was already in ruins.

Little has changed since then, and it is this failure to learn from the past
that makes Afghans angry.

Six years ago, US-forces bombed a wedding party in Uruzgan, leaving scores
of innocent people dead. This summer, they repeated the mistake, only in a
different province. In both cases most of those killed were said to be
women and children.

When incidents such as these occur, the response is almost always the same.
A denial is quickly issued by Nato or the Americans. Then, having caused an
uproar, they accept some responsibility but dispute the death toll.

They also like to compare their own actions with the Taliban’s, pointing out
the different motives and tactics of the opposing sides. One statement
issued by an ISAF spokesman in May had the long-winded title “An asymmetric
confrontation in the field of values and ethics”.

It said: “The unethical behaviour of the insurgents can be seen in the way
they conduct their attacks. Hiding behind civilians and intentionally
putting them in harm’s way shows their intent to blur the lines between the
innocent Afghan and the insurgent fighter.”

The statement added that ISAF shows “respect of human values” and
uses “appropriate force”.

All of which is of no consequence to the relatives of people who lose their
lives because of mistakes or errors of judgement. The Nato and US-led
coalitions are meant to be operating on the moral high ground, but each
time they shed innocent blood it suggests they are not.

Now, when there are claims and counter-claims, the general public will
believe the highest death toll. Last month the United Nations
found “convincing evidence” that 90 civilians, including 60 children, died
after an air strike in Herat province.

That is the number Afghans will remember for generations to come, not the
American’s rebuttal that between five and seven innocent people were
killed.

Of just as much importance are the less well-publicised tragedies. On a
regular basis cars are shot up in what ISAF calls “escalation of force”
incidents.

German troops killed two children and a woman in Kunduz province late last
month. The “reckless actions of the vehicle driver”, who failed to stop at
a checkpoint, were blamed.

Each civilian casualty creates new enemies for the foreign soldiers and the
Afghan government. Aside from the personal heartbreak of the victims’
families, the broader impact must not be underestimated.

ISAF and the US-led coalition have both denied any involvement in the Kabul
raid that heralded the coming of Ramadan. But it is already too late.
Protesters have taken to the streets, and the damage has been done.
-- 
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free

Robin T Cox wrote:
> US losing the moral high ground
>
Doesn't "losing the moral high ground" imply that you had it to begin with?

-- 
Peter <X-Files fan>

In message , Trust No One® 
 writes
>Robin T Cox wrote:
>> US losing the moral high ground
>>
>Doesn't "losing the moral high ground" imply that you had it to begin with?

They lost the moral high ground with half the world over a decade ago. 
Hence the AQ retaliation strikes. The third one being 9/11.  By 2003/4 
the US had lost any moral high ground it had with the rest of the world.

SO I don see how it can now be "loosing" the moral high ground. It is 
long gone.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote ...

> In message , Trust No One®
>  writes
> >Robin T Cox wrote:
> >> US losing the moral high ground
> >>
> >Doesn't "losing the moral high ground" imply that you had it to begin
with?
>
> They lost the moral high ground with half the world over a decade ago.
> Hence the AQ retaliation strikes. The third one being 9/11.  By 2003/4
> the US had lost any moral high ground it had with the rest of the world.
>
> SO I don see how it can now be "loosing" the moral high ground. It is
> long gone.

More a sign perhaps that people are finally waking up to the fact. What
moral authority the US had has indeed long gone. Only the Adminstration,
those brown-nosing it and Americans with their heads up their arses or
living in blissful ignorance haven't accepted that.