The video for this story is not available, but you can still read the transcript below.
No image

U.S. Considers Ways to Prevent Civilian Deaths While Battling Afghan Insurgency

Ray Suarez and analysts discuss U.S. and NATO efforts to minimize collateral damage during airstrikes in Afghanistan.

Read the Full Transcript

Notice: Transcripts are machine and human generated and lightly edited for accuracy. They may contain errors.

  • RAY SUAREZ:

    For more, we go to Gen. Dan McNeill, who commanded the NATO force in Afghanistan until his retirement last summer, and Marc Garlasco, a former intelligence and targeting analyst at the Pentagon. He's now the senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch.

    Gentlemen, welcome to you both. Let me begin with a brief explanation from both of you on how a place is targeted, how a target is chosen, and how an air strike is unleashed at it.

    General McNeill?

    GEN. DAN MCNEILL (Ret.), U.S. Army: Ray, first, we should bear in mind that this is an insurgency and, by its very nature, it's in and among the people. The people will have some vulnerability, some exposure to combat when you're prosecuting counterinsurgency operations.

    There are two occasions when aerial munitions are delivered, in my experience, in Afghanistan. The first would be a planned target, which goes through a fairly rigorous process in which you have to consider the identification and make it positive. You have to consider patterns of life, what's around the targets you intend to hit, and then you have to consider the munition and what it is likely to do to things that are not the target but are in that immediate vicinity.

    Secondly, there would be the unexpected encounters, a small unit patrolling, perhaps a PRT somewhere out in the countryside, some place that is perhaps is more stable than some of the others, and they get into a fire fight and they need some help. Using an aerial munition is well within the parameters of the law of armed conflict.

  • RAY SUAREZ:

    Marc Garlasco, you were involved in the kind of work the general just described. What can you add?

  • MARC GARLASCO, Human Rights Watch:

    Well, it's important first that we're intellectually honest here and note that the Taliban are actively targeting civilians, and they kill civilians willfully. We're speaking tonight about mistakes that are made by the U.S. and NATO forces, things that can be improved upon.

    The general is absolutely correct that there are two types of air strikes that go on. And Human Rights Watch produced a report called "Troops in Contact," based upon my on-the-ground research in Afghanistan, in which we determined that, in pre-planned air strikes, the U.S. Air Force has basically removed civilian casualties as a problem in Afghanistan.

    However, in the "Troops in Contact" situation, primarily when special operations forces with low numbers are on the ground, come into contact with the Taliban, al-Qaida, or criminal elements, they do then have a situation where they call in air power at times to save them and civilians do die.

    But it's a very complex issue. And a number of factors play into this, including communications, rules of engagement, and the types of munitions used.