U.S. Airstrikes in Afghanistan Raise Debate

DAN SAGALYN, NewsHour with Jim Lehrer: This past August, special operations ground forces in Western Afghanistan went on a mission to capture or kill a so-called high-value individual. As U.S. soldiers approached their target, they came under fire and called in close air support. When the dust settled, the U.S. claimed it had killed 30 to 35 militants and five to seven civilians. But the Afghan government, human rights groups and villagers all said the number of civilians killed was closer to 90.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai criticized the attack.

AFGHAN PRESIDENT HAMID KARZAI: We cannot tolerate civilian casualties. Not even one.

DAN SAGALYN: Two weeks after the incident, with pressure mounting, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, ordered a new investigation.

Late last week, Central Command, the headquarters of U.S. forces in the Middle East, released its findings. It revised the number of civilians killed from five to seven to up to 33, including three women and 12 children. The number of militants killed was also revised downward from 30 to 22.

MARK GARLASCO of Human Rights Watch: Clearly there are a number of problems with the way that the U.S. is using air power in Afghanistan.

DAN SAGALYN: To Mark Garlasco, who helped plan sir strikes at the Defense Intelligence Agency, this incident shows there are major problems with the way the U.S. is fighting in Afghanistan.

MARK GARLASCO: You know, we've seen time and again where they're having situations where they're using just such overwhelming force, using 2,000-pound bombs, using aerial artillery in villages where civilians are. And it just shouldn't be a surprise when civilians are dying because of the way that airpower is being deployed. It's very heavy-handed.

DAN SAGALYN: But Maj. Joseph Kloppel, a spokesman at Central Command said the investigation shows U.S. forces are operating properly.

MAJ. JOSEPH KLOPPEL: Well, the main findings of the report are that one, that the coalition forces operating there operated completely within the law of war, the rules of engagement. That they acted upon credible and multiple intelligence sources.

DAN SAGALYN: But Mark Garlasco says the killings of innocent civilians would not have occurred if U.S. military forces collaborated better with NATO allies also operating in Afghanistan.

MARK GARLASCO: The main problem that we're seeing with air power now is that you have two wars going on. You have the U.S. counterterrorism mission that's coming out of Bagram Air Force Base. That's a U.S.-only mission with separate rules of engagement from the stability operations that NATO is running.

DAN SAGALYN: Combined Joint Task Force 101 has 18,000 soldiers and is led by a two-star general, while another 14,000 U.S. troops are led by a four-star general in a part of the NATO command structure.

MARK GARLASCO: And I've had a number of times when I've spoken to British officers on the ground, who said, "You know, you had U.S. special forces come into my territory, they ran into the Taliban, got into a firefight, called in air power. If they would have liaised with us beforehand, we could have told them where the enemy was and could have stopped all this before it ever happened."

DAN SAGALYN: Major Kloppel disagrees.

MAJ. JOSEPH KLOPPEL: That's an inaccurate and over-generalized assumption about how operations are conducted there. They're actually very closely coordinated, they're coordinated at all levels. And to sit there and kind of generalize these things, the counterterrorism does this and it's not tied into what the other areas as far as stability, you know, infrastructure building and security for the population is just simply false. It's just the opposite, they are closely coordinated and they're tied into what everyone is doing actually.

DAN SAGALYN: Meanwhile, Major Kloppel says the U.S. government goes out of its way to avoid hitting civilians, and that it's the Taliban that uses them as human shields.

MAJ. JOSEPH KLOPPEL: We take every measure to ensure that we do everything possible to ensure that there aren't civilians casualties. The forces we are fighting do just the opposite. They use civilians as shields whenever possible. They kill civilians through their tactics, whether it be the way they, daily tactics, suicide bombings. They do not take into account civilians.

DAN SAGALYN: But Mark Garlasco says the Pentagon has a track record of not adequately investigating civilian casualties and blaming the enemy.

MARK GARLASCO: Is shielding an issue? Yes, absolutely it's an issue and it happens. But to say it happens in every single case is inaccurate. To constantly blame the other guy or to just say no, you know, these numbers are incorrect, no one was killed, or it's all propaganda. It just goes to show that they are not taking civilian casualties seriously enough.

DAN SAGALYN: For the Online NewsHour, I'm Dan Sagalyn.