David Corn

The international coalition in Afghanistan is losing public support, one fallen civilian at a time. Twenty billion US dollars in military expenditures each month and billions more in support operations and humanitarian aid still leaves the many civilians harmed by international troops with nothing. Since the initial US invasion in 2001, the lack of a clear, coordinated strategy to address civilian losses has been a leading source of anger and resentment toward military forces. A new BBC/ABC poll shows a 12 percentage point drop in Afghan support for the international presence since 2007 and a drop of 15 points from 2006. A once welcoming picture of the population has turned into scenes of frequent, widespread and sometimes violent protests over civilian deaths and a perceived lack of concern by international forces.

It adds:

Billions of dollars are spent to win, keep and rebuild Afghan communities, but it only takes seeing one family maltreated and ignored by military forces for a community to turn against the international effort. Victim assistance is equally critical on humanitarian grounds. In 2007 and 2008, an estimated 3,641 civilians were killed by parties to the conflict in Afghanistan. For every civilian killed, as many or more are injured, lose their homes or livelihoods. For countless Afghan families living on the margins, the loss of a breadwinner, high medical or funeral costs, or the financial burden of supporting disabled or dependent relatives can make even basic survival difficult. For each family struggling to recover from losses, there are multiplying ripple effects on Afghanistan's continuing development and stabilization.

Compensating civilian victims, CIVIC contends, must be a crucial component of any US policy. The report notes that a "significant number of civilian survivors of combat operations receive no help from international forces, and those that do often find it is too little, too late." It maintains that the US government, other nations with troops in Afghanistan, and the Afghan government must address civilian casualties with compensation programs that are "more proactive, fully funded, and better coordinated if they intend--as they should--to reach out to all civilians directly harmed or affected by the conflict."

In the past, Pentagon policy reviews of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not focused on civilian casualties. As the Obama administration moves ahead with its own Afghanistan review, it ought to consider how to better handle civilian casualties--and what it can do to lessen them.

ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE FOR DETROIT? With the news that the auto bail out will cost $39 billion, not $25 billion (and will that price tag really not get bigger?), Kevin Drum argues that the Obama administration ought to save GM but pull the plug on Chrysler. It's a compelling case. But, as he concedes, politics, not policy will probably dictate whether or not this happens. And Chrysler, with all its workers, may just be another one of those Too Big 2 Fail enterprises--but, alas, big enough to add plenty more dead weight to our economy and national debt.

You can follow my postings and media appearances via Twitter by clicking here.