Buy Movies & Books |Subscribe|Bookmark|Follow Us

My Account|About Us|Contact Us|Staff|Place an Ad
Home > Columnists >
May 31, 2012

U.N.: Afghan civilian casualties fall

KABUL, Afghanistan (UPI) -- Civilian casualties in Afghanistan fell in the first quarter of 2012, a 21 percent reduction from the same period last year, a U.N. official said Wednesday.

Jan Kubis, the U.N. special representative to Afghanistan, said 579 civilian deaths and 1,216 civilian injuries were recorded from January through April, The New York Times reported.

The United Nations said 9 percent of the casualties were attributed to pro-government forces, which includes international troops and the Afghan security forces. Seventy-nine percent of the casualties were attributed to anti-government forces, including the Taliban, and 12 percent were unattributed.

Last year, the international troops and Afghan forces were responsible for 14 percent of the casualties while the percentage caused by the Taliban was virtually unchanged, the Times said.

"Regrettably, unfortunately the anti-government forces, they don't show any improvement in protection for civilians," Kubis said during a news conference in Kabul, Afghanistan's capital. "They issue statements about protecting civilians, but in practice they use such indiscriminate destructive weapons."

The data released Wednesday indicate the first quarter was the first time a reduction in civilian casualties was recorded since U.N. began tracking such statistics in 2007, the Times said. Human rights officials expressed caution about the sustainability of reduced casualties since the 2012 winter was harsh compared to the relatively mild winter in 2011.

"The downturn in the number of armed clashes and the impact of the harsh weather is much more likely to have impact on Taliban operations than on government or ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] operations," said James Rodehaver, acting head of the U.N.'s human rights office in Kabul.

Comments :


That's an astute answer to a tricky qutesion


Mongrel, there is an old saying with which you may be fiilamar, and it seems to apply to you: There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. You have decided based on your study of the situation that Israel is 100% wrong in this conflict. When Israel became a state, through the legal process the British Mandate the tiny struggling state was immediately attacked. The area at that time was not some little cozy nation that the Jewish people took over; it was land that had been through many various conflicts, most recently as part of the Ottoman Empire (which collapsed after WWI) and then under British control. I have a Palestinian friend who has more issues with the British than with Israelis. In 1948, the land was to be partitioned, and the Jewish people were happy with their share. The Arabs were not. Do you want to look at the treatment of the Jewish people in the Arab countries? It is a history of oppression. Care to check out their treatment by the Europeans pogrom after pogrom. Anyone who defends the mistreatment of a people and then twists the facts to make it seem otherwise, has obviously a hatred towards that people. My advice to such people is: Say that you hate them, be honest, but stop the twisting of facts and situations.


That is very attention-grabbing, You are an overly skilled blogger. I have joined your rss feed and stay up for in search of extra of your fantastic post. Also, I've shared your web site in my social networks my web blog :: What causes painful Achilles tendon?

Your Name:
A value is required.

Comment: A value is required.

Please Enter Security Code:
security code

Top Movies & Books
Local & State:

HIFF Celebrates Third and Possibly Final Year in Middletown

Boys and Girls Club of Wayne

New Scandals Show Obama’s Contempt for the Constitution

The Wayne Public Library

Vila Verde