‘Friendly fire’: US Airstrike Hits Afghan police officers & MSF appeals for protection

On July 21st, the New York Times reported that an American airstrike in Afghanistan’s southern province of Helmand has killed several members of the Afghan security forces.

The police have been struggling since 2014 as the resurgent Taliban militants have regained territory in the province.

A force of about 300 Marines in Helmand is advising the Afghan forces, and trying to help the Afghan Army to recapture some of the territory lost to the Taliban. The military gains have proved difficult to sustain because the police forces are unable to hold the cleared areas.

Bashir Ahmad Shakir, the chairman of the security committee of the Helmand provincial council, said that as many as 17 police officers, including two front-line commanders, may have been killed. The strike had targeted a checkpoint in the Parchaw area (above) seized by the Taliban on Thursday, recaptured on Friday by Afghan forces and then reoccupied by the Afghan police force. “It is not yet clear how the post was hit, maybe because of wrong coordinates as the post was abandoned yesterday and retaken today,” Mr. Shakir said.

The American strike happened late Friday afternoon in the Gereshk district of Helmand Province. The United States military has carried out 52 strikes in Helmand over the past five days to support Afghan forces who have been the targets of coordinated Taliban attacks in recent days.

A statement by the United States military in Afghanistan expressed regret for the casualties and said “aerial fires” in support of an operation by Afghan forces had “resulted in the deaths of the friendly Afghan forces who were gathered in a compound.”

Today we read that Medecins Sans Frontiers (MSF) reopened a small medical clinic in Kunduz, Afghanistan, on Saturday. It is their first facility there since the American airstrikes that destroyed a hospital in 2015, see reference in Political Concern.

Since the attack by American special forces, which killed 42 patients, medical staff, and caregivers at the MSF trauma center, MSF has been trying to secure assurances from American and Afghan military officials that their medical facilities would be respected and protected.

 

 

 

l

 

Posted in Afghanistan, Airstrikes, Civilian deaths, Friendly fire, US, US government, USA | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

War crimes: Mosul families count their dead as US airstrikes kill thousands of civilians

Award-winning journalist Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent of The Independent, writes from Mosul, recording accusations by local people who assert the US-led coalition has ‘massively’ overused force.

They allege that the intensity of the bombardment from the air was out of all proportion to the number of Isis fighters on the ground

Though they agreed that Isis forced people into houses in combat zones and murdered them if they tried to flee, they added that the sight of a single sniper on a roof would lead to bombing the whole building, killing the sniper and the families living inside.

“There were very few Daesh in our neighbourhood, but they dropped a lot of bombs on them,” says Qais, 47, a resident of the al-Jadida district of Mosul. “We reckon that the airstrikes here killed between 600 and 1,000 people.” He shows pictures on his phone of a house that had stood beside his own before it was hit by a bomb or missile that had reduced it to a heap of smashed-up bricks. “There were no Daesh in the house,” says Qais. But there were seven members of the Abu Imad family living there, of whom five were killed along with two passers-by.

Cockburn reports that a sign that Isis was not present in any numbers is that, while there are bombed out buildings in every street, there are surprisingly few bullet holes in the walls from automatic rifles or machine guns. In cities like Homs in Syria today or Beirut during the civil war, wherever there had been street fighting of any intensity, walls were always pock-marked with bullet holes.

The offensive against Isis in Mosul has left thousands of buildings destroyed. Nobody knows how many civilians died in Mosul because many bodies are still buried under the rubble in 47 degrees heat. Asked to estimate how many people had been killed in his home district of al-Thawra, Saad Amr, a volunteer medic, said: “we don’t know because houses were often full of an unknown number of displaced people from other parts of the city. Some districts are so badly damaged that it is impossible to reach them. We heard that there had been heavy airstrikes on the districts of Zanjily and Sahba and, from a distance, we could see broken roofs with floors hanging down like concrete flaps. But we could not get there in a car because the streets leading to them were choked with broke masonry and burned out cars”.

Amnesty International’s report, The Civilian Catastrophe in West Mosul, says bombardments by Iraqi and US-led coalition forces killed a “huge number” of civilians. On 17 March 2017 a US airstrike on the Mosul al-Jadida neighbourhood killed at least 105 civilians in order to neutralise two Isis snipers. It calls for an investigation by an independent commission into the number of civilian deaths caused by ISIS strategies and US airstrikes.

Today in the Times:

Hopes of finding life in Mosul’s Old City are fading
A small rescue team of underequipped Iraqis, operating without support from the coalition or international disaster response agencies, is struggling to save those few survivors still trapped in the wreckage and raise the bodies for proper burial.

Patrick Cockburn delivered this year’s Nick Lewis Memorial Trust Lecture at Cardiff University: https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/741493-foreign-correspondent-patrick-cockburn-to-deliver-guest-lecture

Read his article here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-baghdadi-mosul-air-strikes-civilians-killed-us-a7836261.html

 

 

 b

Posted in Airstrikes, Civilian deaths, Iraq, Syria, US government, USA | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sikander Ahmed Shah: first objective, halting drone strikes – the second, reparation

For years the legality of using armed drones has been challenged by individuals and organisations – as a search on this website will reveal.

Another analyst, Sikander Ahmed Shah of Lahore University of Management Sciences, Department of Law and Policy reflected in 2011 on the intense anger in Pakistan provoked by US drone strikes in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). He pointed out that in the absence of certain extenuating circumstances, the overwhelming majority of international law experts would find the drone strikes in FATA illegal under international law. They do not qualify as acts of self-defence under customary international law or as defined in Article 51 of the UN Charter and so violate Article 2(4), which upholds the territorial integrity of a state.

In his book, International Law and Drone Strikes in Pakistan: The Legal and Socio-political Aspects (Routledge Research in the Law of Armed Conflicts 2014), paperback 2016, Shah explores the legal and political issues surrounding the use of drones in Pakistan and asks whether the drone strikes by the United States comply with international humanitarian law.

Officially, the government of Pakistan has condemned the US drone strikes as illegal under international law and a violation of its territorial sovereignty, but it had permitted the USA to use the Shamsi Air Base which is thought to have been the US base for drone and associated surveillance flights. Shah asks whether such authorization qualified Pakistan as consenting to drone attacks, with the result that the US had not violated Pakistan’s sovereignty and had not acted unlawfully.

In 2015 he stressed that though working towards halting drone strikes in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas should be the first objective of Pakistan; the government should convince the US to provide ‘reparation’ for the drone strikes in the form of compensation under Article 36 of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility (DASR) for damage to civilian life and property: “(Compensation) will provide the necessary funds for the needs of the affected civilian population, especially women and children. It is high time that the real victims of the war on terror received some form of reparation for the losses they have had to endure”.

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2013-07-22/leaked-pakistani-report-confirms-high-civilian-death-toll-in-cia-drone-strikes

Shah surmises that a transparent and accountable system to determine compensation and enable its swift dispensation to victims of drone strikes might act as a deterrent and lessen the frequency of drone strikes because of the additional economic cost of civilian harm.

He summarises: “Drone strikes seriously challenge fundamental human rights including the right to life, protections against extra-judicial killings, the right to a fair trial and access to justice, the right to assembly, the right to freedom of movement and the right to compensation and redress”. We hope to hear more from him.

Sikander Ahmed Shah is an Assistant Professor in the Lahore University of Management Sciences Department of Law and Policy. He teaches Advanced Public International Law and focuses his research on state sovereignty and territoriality, use of force, self-determination, global terrorism, human rights and humanitarian law, WTO laws and corporate governance.

 

 

 

bbg

Posted in Airstrikes, Armed drones, Civilian deaths, Drone strikes, Human rights, International law, Pakistan, UN, Uncategorized, US, US government | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Saudi allies applaud President Trump as shameful Yemeni killings escalate

Donald Trump bows to receive gold medal yesterday from Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz.

President Trump’s regime has perpetrated more than 80 strikes in Yemen since January and a disastrous Special Forces raid that killed 25 civilians, including 10 children.

In March America’s NBC News reported that U.S. officials say the Trump administration is planning to make it easier for the CIA and military to target terrorists with drone strikes, even if it means tolerating more civilian casualties. The Pentagon no longer would have to show that the targets posed an imminent threat to the U.S. or declare a near certainty that no civilian would be harmed. The military’s declaration that parts of Yemen and Somalia are war zones has already had deadly consequences. Details are given on the The Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s website.

The latest news comes from The Intercept website this week, reporting on a drone strike late in April. In the remote Al Said area of Yemen’s Shabwah province an American drone observed a group of men eating lunch at a security checkpoint. The men did not panic – for many in the region, the sound of American drones in the sky has become part of daily life.

Suspecting that these men were Al Qaeda, the drone unleashed its missiles, and all eight were killed. A 27-year-old grocer said that neither his uncle nor the two young men with him were connected to any militant group and that five others killed left AQAP two years ago.

One man’s nephew heard the explosion from his home nearby and some accounts say that a second missile struck his relatives as they went to help.

Several areas of Yemen are suffering from the food shortagesdisease epidemics and a large number of civilian casualties due to the U.S.-backed Saudi military campaign. But despite growing international outcry, no political solution seems to be in sight, as the Saudi-led alliance has repeatedly committed itself to crushing the Yemeni Houthi rebel movement at all costs.

 

 

 

Posted in Donald Trump, Drone strikes, Human rights, US government, Yemen | Leave a comment

Aerial attacks: ISIS uses coalition tactics – albeit on a smaller scale 

Tim Bradshaw (Financial Times) reports that ISIS has been using low-cost “quadcopters”, assembled using kits instead of buying ‘off-the-shelf’, to drop improvised bombs in Syria and Iraq.

US military officials have become increasingly concerned about ISIS’ use of drones such as the Phantom, designed for consumer photographers and controlled using a smartphone or remote control, costing a few hundred dollars.

After using them for surveillance, ISIS started dropping grenades and improvised explosives on Iraqi forces in Mosul and nearby areas. A unit called “Unmanned Aircraft of the Mujahideen” was  formed in January and released video footage of the attacks on its websites.

The manufacturers allow customers to override or “unlock” some restricted areas, which its website states are “advisory only”. Shenzhen’s DJI, one of several manufacturers whose devices have been used by ISIS, has created new “no fly zones” for its products across Iraq and Syria. It has updated its ‘geofencing’ system, normally used to prevent its customers from flying their drones in restricted areas such as airports, prisons and power plants. These new no-fly zones in the Middle East were introduced to its mobile app in February.

MIT Technology Review (founded at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1899) says that it’s not clear how constructive the move will be.

As described above, the no-fly zones can still be circumvented by tweaking a drone’s software and by building aircraft from scratch, using component parts and rudimentary airframes.

The review also points out that the modifications could affect operations by Iraq’s military, which has started to use modified consumer drones to attack ISIS in recent months.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Airstrikes, Armed drones, Drone strikes, Drones proliferate, Iraq, Pentagon, US, US government, USA | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Friendly fire’ in northern Syria killed 18 allied fighters

This photo from the Kurdish-run Hawar News Agency shows fighters from the predominantly-Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces at a funeral procession in Tal Abyad, Syria, on April 13, 2017, for 18 comrades who were killed by a misdirected airstrike by the U.S.-led coalition. (Hawar News Agency via AP)  

Two days ago, in the Los Angeles Times, Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Contact Reporter, recorded news issued by the U.S. Central Command – that a misdirected airstrike this week killed 18 friendly fighters who were fighting Islamic State alongside the international coalition in northern Syria. Coalition aircraft were given the wrong coordinates by the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces for a strike intended to target militants south of their stronghold in Tabqa.

It is not clear how many friendly fire strikes there have been since the campaign began against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria in 2014.The coalition releases monthly reports of civilian casualties from airstrikes, both those confirmed and under investigation. But friendly fire strikes are tracked internally.

The London-based monitoring group Airwars, which works with the coalition to track airstrike casualties, has found 37 reported friendly fire strikes in Iraq and Syria since 2014. Four have been confirmed by the coalition, including the one in Tabqa, according to Airwars director Chris Wood. The others are:

  • A strike on Dec. 18, 2015, in Fallujah that killed at least nine Iraqi soldiers and injured 32 more.
  • A strike on Sept. 17, 2016, in Al Tharda, Syria that killed at least 15 friendly Syrian forces.
  • A strike on Oct. 5, 2016, south of Mosul that killed 18 friendly Sunni tribal fighters.

“It’s very difficult to know how many more friendly fire events there have been since the coalition does not disclose this information,” Woods said, adding that it’s difficult to track total casualties from the strikes, and their estimates vary widely.

U.S. Army Col. Joe Scrocca, a Baghdad-based spokesman for the coalition, said he was “not aware of those incidents; we do not keep cumulative data on them, so I cannot readily verify their validity.”

More have been reported in Iraq, where there have been 224 to 419 suspected friendly fire casualties from coalition strikes, than in Syria, where there have been 35 to 86, Woods said. 

*

Airwars site adds: latest Coalition report: April 13th – April 14th 2017: 14 new airstrikes

Information updated till December 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Airstrikes, Friendly fire, Iraq, Syria, US government | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Armed drones: how remote-controlled, high-tech weapons are used against the poor

In 2011 David Hookes explored the ethical and legal implications of the growing use of armed, unmanned planes in the ‘war against terrorism’.

The rapidly increasing use of aerial robot weapons in the so-called ‘war against terrorism’ is raising many ethical and legal questions. Drones, known in military-speak as ‘UAVs’ or ‘Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’ come in a range of sizes, from very small surveillance aircraft, which can be carried in a soldier’s rucksack and used to gather battlefield intelligence, to full-scale, armed versions that can carry a sizable payload of missiles and laser-guided bombs.

The use of the latter type of UAV in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere has aroused great concern, since it often entails considerable ‘collateral damage’ – in other words, the killing of innocent civilians in the vicinity of the targeted ‘terrorist’ leaders. The legality of their use in carrying out what are effectively extra-judicial executions, outside any recognisable battlefield, is also a raising serious concern.

Read the article here: https://dronewarfare.wordpress.com/articles-and-papers/armed-drones-how-remote-controlled-high-tech-weapons-are-used-against-the-poor/

 

 

 

Posted in Afghanistan, Armed drones, Civilian deaths, Iraq, Legal action, Pakistan | Tagged , | Leave a comment