McChrystal Looks to Spin Afghan Civilian Deaths Problem

[laststeamtrain]

McChrystal Looks to Spin Afghan Civilian Deaths Problem

Analysis by Gareth Porter*

WASHINGTON, Jun 17 (IPS) - At his confirmation hearings two weeks ago, Gen. Stanley McChrystal said reducing civilian deaths from air strikes in Afghanistan was "strategically decisive" and declared his "willingness to operate in ways that minimise casualties or damage, even when it makes our task more difficult."
Some McChrystal supporters hope he will rein in the main source of civilian casualties: Special Operations Forces (SOF) units that carry out targeted strikes against suspected "Taliban" on the basis of doubtful intelligence and raids that require air strikes when they get into trouble.

But there are growing indications that his command is preparing to deal with the issue primarily by seeking to shift the blame to the Taliban through more and better propaganda operations and by using more high-tech drone intelligence aircraft to increase battlefield surveillance rather than by curbing the main direct cause of civilian casualties.

U.S. officials at a NATO conference in Brussels last Friday were telling reporters that "public relations" are now considered "crucial" to "turning the tide" in Afghanistan, according to an AFP story on Jun 12.

CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus also referred to the importance of taking the propaganda offensive in a presentation to the pro-military think tank Centre for a New American Security (CNAS) Jun. 11. "When you’re dealing the press," he said, "when you’re dealing the tribal leaders, when you’re dealing with host nations... you got to beat the bad guys to the headlines."

The new emphasis on more aggressive public relations appears to respond to demands from U.S. military commanders in Afghanistan to wrest control of the issue of civilian casualties from the Taliban. In a discussion of that issue at the same conference, Gen. David Barno, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005, said, "We’ve got to be careful about who controls the narrative on civilian casualties."


<more>

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=47261
*

Disgusting.

[Triana]

1. I'm assuming the grim reap - er, McChrystal was confirmed.

I'm disappointed Obama didn't fight his appointment.

[laststeamtrain]

2. He was Obama's choice. He assumed command on Monday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3924110

[Triana]

3. Actually he was Robert Gates's choice. Obama just went along with it.

Robert Gates should have went with bu$h. Why he kept him I have no idea.

[laststeamtrain]

4. That's convenient having Gates to blame. Maybe that's why he's there...n/t.