Who's really killing Afghan civilians?

A letter in the Globe and Mail:

Allied warplanes not main cause

That Afghan civilian deaths are "mainly caused by allied warplanes dropping bombs," is not supported by the evidence or broader opinion (Afghan Casualties To Rise, New U.S. Commander Says - June 2). According to UN figures, only 39 per cent of 2,119 civilian casualties in 2008 were attributed to pro-government forces, while 55 per cent were attributed to anti-government forces.

As well, bombing casualties makes up only a portion of that 39 per cent, and are the occasional result of accident or errors in planning.

Alain Pellerin

Executive director,
Conference Of Defence Associations

From the UN report itself (p. 5):

...
6. Air-strikes remain responsible for the largest percentage of civilian deaths attributed to progovernment forces. UNAMA recorded 552 civilian casualties of this nature in 2008. This constitutes 64% of the 828 non-combatant deaths attributed to actions by pro-government forces in 2008, and 26% of all civilians killed, as a result of armed conflict in 2008...

And from a NY Times story:

...
The United Nations report found that the Taliban and other insurgents caused the majority of the civilian deaths, primarily through suicide bombers and roadside bombs, many aimed at killing as many civilians as possible.

Taliban fighters routinely attacked American and other pro-government forces in densely populated areas, the report said, apparently in the hope of provoking a response that would kill even more civilians.

But the report also found that Afghan government forces and those of the American-led coalition killed 828 people last year, up sharply from the previous year. Most of those were killed in airstrikes and raids on villages, which are often conducted at night...

Oh, those Globeites. More on airstrikes here (Update), here, and here.

Update: From BruceR at Flit:

Wanker watch: Paul Koring

Exhibit A:

"But Afghan civilian deaths, mainly caused by allied warplanes dropping bombs at the behest of beleaguered ground troops, also reached record levels and fomented bitter resentment among ordinary Afghans against foreign troops."

As has already been pointed out in the Globe's letters pages and elsewhere, this isn't close to a true statement (ie, 20% does not equal "mainly"). The impression from his frequent missteps such as this is that Koring has a clear bias against the Afghan mission, and possibly the Canadian military generally, which he seems to regard as primarily a waste of public funds that might be better used on hair products for elderly men, or something.

For the record: I was in Kandahar Province 7.5 months. While I was there I heard of exactly one incident in the province of the death of a group of civilians by aerial attack. It was reported on at the time (Credit to the press where it's due: I have yet to hear of an incident involving the death of a civilian due to some Westerner's action that was not). The incident did not involve Canadian forces, but because it happened in our province it did make our jobs more difficult.

In the same period I knew of well over 100 violent deaths of Afghan civilians in Kandahar Province due to insurgents, singly and in groups. Those deaths came in assassinations, kidnappings, ambushes and IED strikes. Most of those were not reported in the Western media.

Oh, those Globeites.