A few years ago a study published in the respected medical
journal stated the death toll of the Iraq war was one million. E-mails that the
BBC was able to procure based on the British Freedom of Information act show
that Blair’s advisors were fairly frustrated at first to hear that the Lancet
study’s method of investigation was unshakeable. The government finally declared
that, even though the method had also been used in other conflict situations,
the Lancet numbers were much higher than those provided by statistics from
other sources, and that this demonstrated how greatly estimates could vary depending
on the method of data collection. From the very small circle of scientists who
had initially expressed fierce criticism, after a while the only thing one
heard was that “there is considerable debate amongst the scientific community
over the accuracy of the figures.” From then on, most of the media would
mention the study, if at all, only with the addendum “controversial.” This
label, however, is simply untrue. This new study by the Nobel Prize-winning
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and other groups
examined the toll from the so-called war on terror in three countries — Iraq,
Afghanistan and Pakistan – confirm the obscenely high deadly toll of the Iraq
war and others since. The figure is approximately 10 times greater than that of
which the public, experts and decision makers are aware. In Afghanistan, the
longest war in NATO’s history, Wikipedia reveals the number of 14,576 domestic and
foreign security forces killed, and between 12,500 and 14,700 civilians killed
(as of 2012). Searching for the number of Al-Qaida and “Taliban” members, it is
stated that no reliable data are possible. This in turn suggests that the other
figures indicated are somehow reliable. But in fact, they are not. This is not
meant as criticism of the diligent Wikipedia writers, rather as a comment on the
general superficiality used to deal with the devastating consequences of the
war.
The U.S.-led Multinational Force (MNA) in Iraq, the NATO
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan and the U.S.
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF-A), also in Afghanistan, have carefully kept a
running total of fatalities they have suffered. However, the military’s only
interest has been in counting “their” bodies: 4,804 MNA soldiers have died in
Iraq between March 2003 and February 2012, the date when the U.S. body counting
stopped. As of early end 2014, 3.485 ISAF and OEF soldiers have lost their
lives in Afghanistan since 2001.
The picture of physically wounded military personnel for both
war theatres is incomplete. Only the U.S. military is identified: (a) 32,223
were wounded during the 2003 Iraq invasion and its aftermath, and (b) until
November 2014 20.040 were wounded in Afghanistan. No figures are known for
mental disorders involving military personnel who have been deployed in Iraq,
Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Officially ignored are casualties, injured or killed,
involving enemy combatants and civilians. This, of course, comes as no surprise. It is
not an oversight but a deliberate omission. The U.S. authorities have kept no
known records of such deaths. This would have destroyed the arguments that
freeing Iraq by military force from a dictatorship, removing Al-Qaeda from
Afghanistan and eliminating safe-havens for terrorists in Pakistan’s tribal areas
has prevented terrorism from reaching the U.S. homeland, improved global
security and advanced human rights, all at “defendable” costs. U.S. journalist
Nir Rosen noted, “the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis are not better off,
… the children who lost their fathers aren’t better off, … the hundreds and
thousands of refugees are not better off.”
The desire of governments to hide the complete picture and
costs of military interventions and wars is nothing new. For the United States,
the history of the Vietnam war is emblematic. The immense toll on Southeast
Asia, including the estimated death of at least two million Vietnamese
non-combatant civilians, and the long-term health and environmental impacts of
herbicides such as Agent Orange, are still not fully recognized by the majority
of the American people. Such historical amnesia can be traced to widespread
cover-up by US authorities and their media minions of the crimes against
humanity committed in “our” name. Similarly, the Vietnam war’s consequent
political destabilization of the region, associated with the rise of the horrific
Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, is reminiscent of the recent "post-war"
destabilization in Iraq and neighbors that has been conducive to the rise of
brutal Caliphate "wannabes" such as ISIS that is now terrorizing the
region. The war in Pakistan is therefore a consequence of the U.S./NATO war in
Afghanistan. It began in 2004 with the massive advance of the Pakistani
military against Al-Qaeda hide-outs and “Taliban” in southern Waziristan. The
initial hope that this could contain the war has turned into its opposite. The
war intensified, terrorist reprisals increased, and the war spread to other
areas of Pakistan.
A politically useful option for U.S. political elites has
been to attribute the on-going violence to internecine conflicts of various
types, including historical religious animosities, as if the resurgence and
brutality of such conflicts is unrelated to the destabilization caused by
decades of outside military intervention. As such, underreporting of the human
toll attributable to ongoing Western interventions, whether deliberate, or
through self-censorship, has been key to removing the "fingerprints"
of responsibility. Today, permanent acceptance of war and occupation is most
easily accomplished by using humanitarian, human rights pretexts for war, such
as “reconstruction,” “stabilization,” “securing human rights” or “democratization.”
After the so-called “global war on terror” was at first justified as a (pre-emptive)
self-defense, even later on the continued occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq
were likewise explained by those alleged goals. While at the beginning such
military interventions were called “humanitarian interventions,” today their
proponents try to classify them as part of the so-called “Responsibility to
Protect” which Western states try to enshrine as a new norm in international
law. According to first estimates, the war in Libya in 2011, where NATO
intervened in support of insurrectionary forces, has cost at least 50,000
Libyan lives. Even though the intervention was justified by the claim of
“protecting the civilian population.” Unfortunately, the justification of
military interventions in order to “fight terror” is still part and parcel of
the political debate, even though there is enough evidence that a substantial
part of terrorism is engendered by military, intelligence, and economic
interventions of the very same countries that consequently make use of the
pretext of terror to politically legitimize their military and geo-strategic expeditions.
The total body count in the three main war zones Iraq,
Afghanistan and Pakistan during 12 years of ‘war on terrorism’. comes to the
conclusion that the war has, directly or indirectly, killed around 1 million
people in Iraq, 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, i.e. a total of
around 1.3 million. Not included in this figure are further war zones such as
Yemen. The figure is approximately 10 times greater than that of which the
public, experts and decision makers are aware of and propagated by the media
and major NGOs. And this is only a conservative estimate. The total number of
deaths in the three countries named above could also be in excess of 2 million,
whereas a figure below 1 million is extremely unlikely.
Aside from the number of the victims of a conflict, it is of
course also important to know who is responsible for them and to what extent. A
priori, of course, those who started the war also carry the main responsibility
for all victims. Since the assault on Iraq unequivocally constituted an
aggression in violation of international law, the U.S. and its allies are also
responsible for all its consequences. United States military forces have killed
more innocent foreign civilians than the forces of any other country since the
end of World War II, an uncomfortable truth for a nation whose people
overwhelmingly consider themselves liberators, even as their government has
supported countless brutal dictatorships
1 comment:
The Yemen conflict escalates with Saudi Arabia conducting air-raids
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2015/03/saudi-ambassador-announces-military-operation-yemen-150325234138956.html
Post a Comment