Afghanistan Mission: NATO Response to UN Special Rapporteur Press Statement
In response to the 15 May 2008 Press Statement of the UN Special Rapporteur on his mission to Afghanistan, NATO issued the following statement on 16 May 2008:
- “NATO-ISAF have noted the press statement by Philip Alston and recognise these are preliminary findings. We find much of the substance and the overall tone of the statement inaccurate and unsubstantiated.
- We hope and expect that these inaccuracies will be addressed in a thorough and professional manner in the preparation of the final report to the United Nations Council on Human Rights. NATO is prepared to assist in the provision of accurate information to this end.
- Overall we are concerned that the rapporteur focussed so little on the actions of the Taleban which, across the board, represent a major abuse of human rights at every level. Not only do they not respect the Laws of Armed Conflict, they reject them.
- The report makes very strong allegations, far stronger than can be justified given the shortness of the visit and the level of research. It would appear that although ISAF was consulted as a part of this exercise, the detailed information provided was not taken into account in the rapporteur’s statement.
- The statement contains casual allegations and ambiguous language that falls well below the standards required of such an important endeavour.
- For example the quote, ‘The level of complacency in response to these killings is staggeringly high.’ is wrong in substance, takes no account of an extensive investigatory process by ISAF/OEF, and ascribes motivations without substantiation.
- The comment stating there is ‘no evidence that the international forces…commit widespread intentional killings in violation of human rights…’ implies that they do commit some intentional killings. Such casual accusations are irresponsible, given the absence of evidence and the seriousness of the allegation.
- Such casual unsupported accusations are repeated in comments like, ‘In many cases, these attacks appear to have been lawful…’ In reality, all air strikes follow strict Rules of Engagement and are within the Laws of Armed Conflict, and if there is any question of them not being lawful they do not happen.
- The suggestion that international military forces have killed 200 civilians uses a figure that we reject and is far too high. We note it is an assertion unsupported by sourcing or evidence and substantially at odds with all credible estimates.
- We are open to practical suggestions on improving transparency but due account needs to be taken of the sheer difficulty of the process of following up such incidents, which occur in an active insurgency where ascertaining facts and gathering evidence is difficult. Accusations that ISAF has killed civilians, very often come from an opponent who uses misinformation as a part of his standard tactics.
- We are surprised and disappointed at the comments that the ‘majority of suicide attacks appear to target legitimate military objectives’ even with the caveat that ‘many’ are still unlawful because they are indiscriminate. They are all unlawful because they are all indiscriminate, and also involve combatants disguising themselves as civilians. Furthermore, we completely reject any moral equivalence between the United Nations mandated ISAF mission in support of the sovereign and legitimate Afghan Government and the illegitimate and illegal acts of anti-government forces.
- We are also concerned at suggestions that international organisations should make contact with the Taleban. Such contacts are against the stated wishes of the sovereign Afghan Government. The statement that ‘taking account of information provided by such sources would permit a more nuanced understanding of abuses committed by the Taliban and other armed groups’ seems to imply that abuses should be understood rather than condemned.
- In the conclusion the rapporteur states that international forces ‘should respect the principles of accountability and transparency.’ NATO-ISAF rejects any implication that we do not do so already. Our forces are accountable in accordance with the standards of our nations, and in strict adherence to our own RoEs and the Laws of Armed Conflict. NATO has implemented regular reporting from ISAF to the North Atlantic Council on any credible allegation of our forces’ involvement in civilian casualties.”
Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008 | Permalink
|
About the Project
The Project on Extrajudicial Executions was established by
Philip Alston to support his work as the United Nations Special
Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Executions. His mandate from the United Nations
is to respond effectively to cases of extrajudicial killings around the world.
The Project is directed by William
Abresch and is part of the Center for Human Rights and Global
Justice at the New York
University School of Law.
Archived News
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
|