Patrick Cockburn: Who killed 120 civilians? The US says it's not a story
Letter from Herat: Whatever the truth about the latest Afghan atrocity, in Bala Baluk, it will be slow to emerge
Herat is cut off from the rest of the planet. This was once one of the great cities of the world, an imperial capital drawing its wealth from trade along the Silk Road with Iran, the rest of Afghanistan and central Asia. Above the 800-year-old mosque in the city centre are minarets covered in blue and green mosaics which soar above one of the most magnificent monuments of the Islamic world.
But today Herat is cut off even from the rest of Afghanistan. I flew there because it was too dangerous to come by road. We turned right out of the battered-looking airport because, had we turned left down the main road towards Kandahar, we would soon have been in Taliban-controlled territory. The road going east to Bamyan and Kabul is risky for the same reasons.
Herat itself is peaceful compared to the rest of Afghanistan. There are police in their dark grey uniforms and forage hats checking cars, but they are relaxed and don't look as if they are expecting trouble. There are more new buildings than in Kabul, but on many construction sites work seems to have stopped.
I met Obaidullah Sidiqi, a local businessman, at a picnic lunch in a well-watered orchard, full of mulberry and apple trees and honeysuckle, which he owns not far from the airport road. An attractive aspect of Afghanistan never mentioned in war reporting is the Afghan love of flowers. Even in front-line positions soldiers dig small trenches, fill them with water and plant geraniums.
Mr Sidiqi, after 16 years in construction, part of it for the Save the Children Fund and partly on his own account, explained that business in Herat faces unique difficulties. For instance, last year he had contracts under way which he could only visit in disguise. One was for the construction of a school in Shindand district in the south of Herat province, a Pashtun area where the Taliban are strong. Mr Sidiqi, like most people in Herat, is a Tajik. Overall, the Taliban rebellion is confined to the Pashtun, the community to which 42 per cent of Afghans belong, while in the past the Tajiks, who make up 27 per cent of the population, have been the core of the anti-Taliban opposition.
"I wanted to see how work was going at the school, but I did not dare go as myself," Mr Sidiqi told me. "So I grew my beard longer and pretended to be one of my drivers." He also had to go disguised to visit a road his company is building in Badghis province to the north-east of Herat, again in an area where the Taliban are strong. In fact, not all the danger comes from the Taliban – though it is always blamed on them – as there are plenty of bandit gangs in the mountains.
Overall, Mr Sidiqi said this year was better than last, though he did not sound completely confident that it was going to stay that way. He said that 200 local factories had shut, and Iran, where so many Afghans used to go to work, was issuing very few visas. Within Afghanistan there was pervasive corruption with the award of a contract usually determined by the size of the bribe offered to the officials in charge.
I was sympathetic to Mr Sidiqi's difficulties in moving around the country except by plane, because I faced the same problem. I had gone to Herat because last Monday US aircraft had attacked several villages in the Bala Baluk district of Farah province, which is immediately to the south of Herat. The local governor and surviving villagers said that more than 120 civilians had been killed. The US military denied that anything like that number had died and, if they had, it was the Taliban who had done it by hurling grenades into houses.
The problem was that Bala Baluk is in a Pashtun area where the Taliban are reputed to be strong. Back in Kabul Pashtuns told me that it was unfair to equate them with the Taliban, but in reality there are few Taliban who are not Pashtun. It was too dangerous to go directly to Bala Baluk, so the next best thing was to find a survivor or an eyewitness. I thought that some of the worst injured might be in Herat hospital, as the best in the area. But there turned out to be only 14 wounded and these were in Farah hospital. This could have meant that there were fewer dead than the Afghans were saying, or that the bombardment was so intense that all had been killed.
I did not meet survivors but I did talk to a reliable witness, a radio reporter called Farooq Faizy, who had gone to Bala Baluk soon after the attack happened. He said that police and soldiers nearby were frightened of the Taliban and told him it was too dangerous to go on, but he spoke to some village elders, telling them: "Talk to us and we will tell the world." He says he was none too sure who was in control of the three villages – Gerani, Gangabad and Khoujaha – that had been hit and he was careful about what he said. But he did take some 70 or 80 photographs and they bore out the villagers' story: there were craters everywhere; the villages had been plastered with bombs; bodies had been torn to shreds by the blasts; there were mass graves; there were no signs of damage from bullets, rockets or grenades.
I suspected that the US military's claim that the Taliban had run through the village hurling grenades, supposedly because they had not been paid their cut of profits from the opium poppy crop, was just a delaying tactic. Usually the US military delays admission of guilt until a story has gone cold and the media is no longer interested. "First say 'no story'," runs an old PR adage, "and then say 'old story'." By the end of the week the US was admitting that the grenade-throwing Taliban story was "thinly sourced".
Another thesis was that fighting had taken place 500 metres from the villages, and the Taliban had retreated through them, leading to the airstrikes. Farooq Faizy said he had seen signs of fighting in the shape of two burned-out Afghan army or police vehicles and a destroyed US Humvee, but they were seven or eight kilometres away from the site of the bombing. He had taken photographs of them showing the destroyed Afghan vehicles – Ford pick-ups with a machine gun mount over the bonnet. It seemed likely that this was the fight that had led to the Afghan army and their US advisers asking for air support. What the Americans never explain in Afghanistan or Iraq is why they are using weapons designed for world war three against villages that have not left the Middle Ages – which makes heavy civilian casualties inevitable.
Back in Herat, Mr Sidiqi was none too sympathetic about what had happened to the people of Bala Baluk. Like many Afghans, he felt that it was the weakness of the government, not the strength of the Taliban, which was the problem. Furthermore he felt, and this is surely true, that "neither Pakistan nor Iran wants a strong Afghanistan".
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited





Comments
See the photos here, how powerful the bombs are, Taliban does not have such powerful weapons:
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/rawagal
Also when civilians were killed, people brought two truckloads of dead bodies to the center of Farah to protest to the governor. they were mostly children, a short clip of one of the trucks have been filmed by mobile phone and posted on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyowNt9M
It is a class one war crime and must be properly investigated.
This does not make it right to bomb them or even use heavily weapons of any shape or form on them as this causes heavily casualties, which is counter productive.
The US trainers and Aghanistan army should of surrounded the villages and cleared them building by building, street by street. or starved the Taliban out.
Unfortuantly the NatO/US trainers and commanders have probably been told by there respected leader ships to avoide troops casualties, as the media always publicise this as a Taleban victory and use it as a recruiting tool and they loose support among the public. So they have become over reliant of air power to do the job. This is also partially down to few troops deployed over to much larger ground over the past 8 years.
This incident, and I am sure we will not hear this in the media, is sounding more like a set up by the Taliban. They attack Afghan troops with US trainers. Lure them to the near by villages, which have all been secured by them before hand, and held the local population prisoner and human shields. They fled into these villages, fired from roof tops an held civilians out of site of the US grounds troops. US thinking there were no civilians simply ordered the Taliban positions destroyed from the air. In there mind following orders to keep US casualties to a minimal. If this was the case then it a blatant PR stunt by the Taliban, which although obviouse once investigated, which takes time, it will still be spread around the world by western media as fact that the us kill 100 Afghans. An very useful as a training and recruit and moral boosting tool.
It is an utter tragedy that this action will cause so much suffering and death. But the blame for ALL of it lies fairly and squarely with the Taliban - and no-one else.
Combined with the taliban's legitimacy in providing regional protection against banditry and how opium farmers would have to pay the same bribes to the Afghan government to grow the same crops, such disregard for ROEs should be viewed not in the frame of 'trendy-lefties' media firepower potential, but in the frame of the delegitimization of government.
If you have the optimism to believe in an end that 'will ultimately save many more lives', you must distance yourself from the politics game of left-right domestic politics and like Petraeus focus on building legitimacy IN AFGHANISTAN.
The Taliban have proudly rammed the above saying down the throats of the rest of us for years. This saying is an admission by the Taliban of one thing - and one thing ONLY. It is an admission that the life of Taliban are worth LESS than the lives of European and Americian servicemen and women. These words are from their mouths not mine. The life of a European or an American serviceperson are worth more than any Taliban (or groups of Taliban) simply because their lives mean more to them.
It is often implicit within human discourse that all lives are considered to be equal. They are not. For example, the life of Robert Mugabe (a disgusting despot) could not, in any way, shape or form, be considered to be worth the same as Nelson Mandela (a universal hero to many of us). So let's stop talking about moral equivalence here. There is a moral imperative, in my view, to minimise Western casualties by maximising the use of technology to destroy the Taliban. Instead of fighting them hand to hand, we should simply bomb the building they are in. Their use of human shields should not influence military decisions - that is the unfortunate reality of war. And as the Islamist cowards hide in centres of population just let's hope that many people can escape before the fighting really starts.
You are talk about moral imperatives however it is a fundamental principle of the justice in the conduct of warfare that there must be a distinction between combatants and non-combatants.
Without this distinction then one completely inverts any moral justification for the war.
If the US/NATO military adhere to a strict code of conduct and take the morally necessary risks then responsibility for the deaths of the Taliban's human shields will fall only on the Taliban.
Your proposed alternative, putting the 'Western' soldiers first ahead of everyone and blurring the line between combatant and non-combatant effectively legitimises the use of human shields.
But this is what I am proposing. If the Taliban had any humanity left in them then they would ensure that they did not prosecute their war or gather with non-combatants. They do the opposite, hoping (and in some cases they are right to hope) that this tactic would utterly prevent ANY bombing. Many people that post on these pages are like Orwellian sheep. They blame EVERYTHING on the US and Europe. They would not bomb ANYONE no matter how necessary it was to save the lives of innocent people (i.e. by killing Taliban). This to me is a sickening morally-corrupt pacifism. The lives of US and EU soldiers ARE worth more than any Taleban - and actions by the military when all things are weighed up should reflect this. Of course, the only true thing that would guarantee the legitimisation of human shields is if we NEVER bombed enemy positions when we knew there were many Taleban located there. Now that would INCREASE the use of human shield - perhaps exponentially and put yet more lives at risk.
Furthermore, which Mr. Cockburn is reporting here? Is he the same one who stated unequivocally the day before that US bombs had killed 147 Afghan civilians, not 120? Is Mr. Cockburn suffering from amnesia? Why should we care what his Mr. Sidiqi told him over lunch when we already know from Mr. Cockburn himself that villagers brought truckloads of bodies to the governor's house in Herat and that there were riots?
This is a very strange article that seems to water down the US war crime that Cockburn himself reported on, while blaming the US military - rightfully - for doing just that.
I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla.
In short they have no idea how many then killed, but if it was more than 2 it weren't them. Nice... There's no point in focussing on this particular episode - i.e. whose bombs killed how many? The truth is that in general, the Americans get away with their strategy in afpak (dropping bombs from drones etc), because the wider world couldn't give a damn about scores of random wogs being killed with each pass. And it's also worth noting that in the main, this story has been spun from the POV of the negative PR generated for the americans, and NOT from the POV of innocent bystanders being blown up. Even the term, 'collateral damage'...it draws the focus firmly away from the density of human suffering that would surely be poured over in almost pornographic detail, were these non-muslim victims of an islamist's bomb. It really gives the game away - they're just not interested in dead wogs.
"The Churchill gang hid among the population of London, misusing the millions of citizens as a human shield. The Germans were compelled to send thier Luftwaffe and reluctantly reduce the city to ruins."
This is how history would have been written if Germany had have won WW2 and how those modern day Zionazis describe their own atrocities.
This report comes from a respected and hard working journalist, not a poorly educated armchair "expert"
You use the word paranoia. Well, even a cursory look through the newspapers which covered the many trials of so-called 'home-grown' terrorists (trained in Pakistan, by the way, by the Taliban) should make you feel rather silly for accusing me of being paranoid. I refer you to one particular case where the judge said that the the terrorists planned murder "on an unprecedented scale". Again there are many more instances I could cite.
Democracy has suffered before from the effects of your type of reasoning and compassion and empathy that you so easily deploy. When Neville Chamberlain waved the peace treaty with Hitler and said this is "peace in our time" many people saw it for what it was - a worthless piece of paper. History has shown us appeasement does not work. What is at stake here is democracy and European enlightenment. The compassion shown by you and others like you place these precious things at stake. It is a distinct reality that the millions of people who died in WWII could have died in vain because of the reasoning and compassion you employ for mass murderers. It is better to deal with the Taliban now whilst their focus is in Pakistan before their poison really does take hold in the UK or before a nuclear blast occurs over Westminster.
People like you are spineless when it comes to the very real threats that face us. You have not learnt by history. And your compassion and empathy for murderers will be our undoing.
How many times have you been to any of the countries in the region?Oh, I forgot everyone is either a Taleban or a future member.
Look once again at this article, it is about indiscriminate killing.Not yet on par with Hitler, not yet.Spineless?Sounds like the kind of comics you'd read.As for Judges opinions, maybe he thinks Bush/Cheney are "fragrant".
And the blame for their deaths lies squarely with the Taliban. Why Bring up Bush/Cheney? Both of them are despicable for drawing us into an unjustified war with Iraq. But their actions in Afghanistan were just - if you remember what happened on 9/11. I don't understand why you brought this up. I have been to Pakistan TWICE!!!
World War II Casualties, 1939?45
Personnel1 M.killed M.wounded Prisoners Civilian dead
The Allies
Australia 680,000 23,250 39,750 26,250 -
Belgium 800,000 7,750 14,500 N/A 75,000 2
Brazil 200,000 1000 4,250 - -
Canada 780,000 37,500 53,250 9,750 -
China 5,000,000 1,324,500 3 1,762,000 N/A 4
Czechoslovakia 180,000 6,750 8,000 - 310,000 5
Denmark 15,000 4,250 N/A - -
Estonia - - - - 140,000
France 5,000,000 205,750 390,000 765,000 300,000
Greece 150,000 16,250 50,000 N/A 337,000 7
India 2,394,000 24,250 64,250 79,500 -
Latvia - - - - 120,000
Lithuania - - - - 170,000
The Netherlands 500,000 13,750 2,750 N/A 236,250 8
New Zealand 157,000 12,250 19,250 8,500 -
Norway 25,000 4,750 N/A N/A 5,500 9
Poland 1,000,000 320,000 530,000 - 6,028,000 10
South Africa 140,000 8,750 14,250 14,500 -
United Kingdom 4,683,000 264,500 277,000 172,500 6 60,500
United States 16,353,750 405,500 671,750 105,000 -
USSR 20,000,00020 13,600,000 5,000,000 N/A 7,720,000
Yugoslavia 3,741,000 305,000 425,000 - 1,355,000 11
The Axis Powers
Austria 800,000 380,000 800,000 N/A 145,000 12
Finland 250,000 79,000 250,000 - -
Germany 10,000,000 3,300,000 10,000,000 630,000 13 3,063,000 14
Hungary 350,000 147,500 350,000 - 280,000 15
Italy 4,500,000 262,500 4,500,000 1,478,000 93,000 16
Japan N/A 1,140,500 N/A 11,600 17 953,000 18
Romania 600,000 300,000 600,000 N/A 145,000 19
1) Peak strength of armed forces during World War II.
2) Includes approximately 25,000 Jews.
3) Estimates vary for Chinese military killed.
4) Estimates for Chinese civilian dead vary very widely, from 700,000 to 10,000,000.
5) Includes approximately 250,000 Jews.
6) 7,250 British prisoners of war died while in German captivity; 12,500 died while in Japanese captivity.
7) Includes approximately 260,000 deaths due to starvation.
8) Includes approximately 104,000 Jews, 25,000 civilian underground workers, and 15,000 deaths due to starvation.
9) Includes approximately 2,000 resistance fighters and 750 Norwegians serving in the German army.
10) Includes approximately 3,200,000 Jews.
11) Includes approximately 55,000 Jews.
12) Includes approximately 60,000 Jews.
13) Excluding those in the USSR.
14) Includes approximately 170,000 Jews.
15) Includes approximately 200,000 Jews.
16) Includes approximately 8,000 Jews.
17) Excluding those in the USSR.
18) Includes approximately 668,000 killed in air raids on home islands.
19) Includes approximately 60,000 Jews.
20) Official Soviet reports at the time stated that 20 million soldiers and civilians perished in the war, but it was later revealed that a more realistic figure for Soviet losses was between 27 million and 28 million.
(N/A = not available. - = not applicable.)
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Of course, the world no longer believes the US version of the events after the US air strikes because the accounts by eyewitnesses, well-respected foreign reporters like Mr. Fisk and yourself, et al., and the evidence on the ground after the air strikes have proven the US wrong every time.
The Taleban, born to a hardened, ferocious fraternity of Pashtuns described so eloquently by Churchill as 'The strong aboriginal propensity to kill, inherent in all human beings, has in these valleys been preserved in unexampled strength and vigour. That religion, which above all others was founded and propagated by the sword--the tenets and principles of which are instinct with incentives to slaughter and which in three continents has produced fighting breeds of men--stimulates a wild and merciless fanaticism'
If they were not daunted by Russian gunships, they will not concede to F16s and drones. The barren hostile environment is their trump card, allowing them to evade any further 'Shock and Awe' tactics
But they have one further hope. Time is on the side the Taleban (formerly Mujahadeen) , who were, (like Saddam Hussein when he was fighting Iran),were western allies and lionized by America as heroic freedom fighters when taking on the Russian. This American high tech war is bleeding the economy even further.Chrysler and GM, the iconic powerhouse iof USA are going bankrupt- the main Wall Street banks are on life support. The government is funding these wars with borrowed Chinese money. This is totally unsustainable. Pakistan is regarded as an American puppet state, again bankrolled by the precarious American economy. each month 500,000 Americans lose their jobs. Every US state is facing economic hardship. Just like their former super power enemy Russia, America is going banrupt.
The war against the Taleban is a punitive expedition like the old frontier wars and described by Chuchill in his on experience in 'The Malakand Field Force'. It cannot be won.
After all what does it matter if 300,000 people have died as a result of the genocidal behaviour of the Sudanese? The deaths of 120 people (the figure by the way may have been inflated) matters more because they can be laid at the feet of the Americans.
Wait, I'll do it for them. Damn you Amerikkka!!! Why didn't you go to Darfur to protect innocent civilians from the evil Sudanese government and their Janjaweed thugs!!!
Oh wait, the Sudanese Government and the Janjaweed are muslims, so it's a nono to speak ill of them...
So THAT'S WHY left-wingers do not really talk about Darfur...they don't know who to make a villain out of!