In response to accusations of civilian casualties, NATO will issue
statements usually claiming there is "no evidence to substantiate the claim."
Or, they will claim the dead are all insurgents, at first. Or, they will cite
the fact that they were after a Taliban or militant commander in the area and
they were fired at and returned fire. Or, in some cases, NATO does all of these
things to dampen the intensity of backlashes against killings of civilians;
they create confusion, disorder, and doubt that they were responsible for any
dead civilians.
With a protocol in place to consistently create doubt that civilians were killed by attacks by NATO on "militants," it's no wonder that the Afghani people protest NATO (and U.S.) troops in Afghanistan.
Fortunately for NATO, the Afghani people oppose the Taliban just as much as NATO. The Taliban (or what remains of the Taliban) is finding it has to be just as concerned about civilian casualties as NATO and U.S. forces are, which calls into question any claims by NATO that the Taliban or insurgents are using civilians as human shields into question.
Also, NATO commanders can label anyone resisting foreign occupation "Taliban". When NATO suggests insurgents are involved, it's entirely possible that these "insurgents" are Afghanis who have been radicalized as a result of NATO's negligence, incompetence, and brutal campaigns in the country.
The reality is that NATO (and the U.S.) is waging military occupation. Inevitably civilian casualties will occur. Actions will run counter to what the Afghani people want (in fact, polls often show more than half to two-thirds of the population want foreign troops out of their country now). And, this will all happen under the guise of training Afghan security forces so Afghanis can one day run their own country.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
