Piecing Together the May 4th Bombing in Afghanistan

Neil Halloran, May 11, 2009

Although air support missions are flown virtually every day in Afghanistan, it is unusual for a single airstrike to generate so much media coverage and public discourse. The May 4th incident in Farah province does deserve special attention due to the sheer number of civilian deaths reported (up to 143 civilians) and the significant political fallout that came as a result. The incident also reveals an incredible diversity in the reporting by different media and government organizations. This blog entry is the result of an effort sort through the numerous accounts from Afghan witnesses, Afghan officials, media reports, and U.S. military statements.

The Lead Up

The events leading up to the firefight are not widely disputed. According to General Petreas, the Taliban moved into the region "seeking to extort money", and it is reported that Taliban killed and be-headed three villagers. On Sunday May 3rd, the Taliban ambushed an Afghan police force, killing a number of officers. This led to the police asking for help from the Afghan National Army, and in turn, the provincial governor asking for help from U.S. forces. The U.S. forces eventually called in air support.

Many Accounts, Many Contradictions

The attack took place in three villages, so different stories could have taken place at different times and locations. Still, a significant number of accounts do contradict one other. Here are some of the reports that I have gathered:

• Col. Gregory Julian, U.S. military spokesman, claims that the U.S. dropped 13 bombs on isolated buildings, and that an estimated 50 people died in total - most of them militants
• In contrast, Abdul Basir Khan, a local Afghan official, said he had collected the names of 147 people who died, almost entirely civilian
• When air strikes began, the Taliban moved into the remote villages. According to U.S. military press release, the fighting continued into the night from the villages
• Local Afghan villagers dispute the above claim. Muhammad Jan, a resident of one of the bombed villages, said the Taliban left the village before the bombs fell, and that only civilians remained in his village. He believes villagers were killed by U.S. bombs alone. Jamil Ahmad, a resident of another village, confirmed his account.
• U.S. Military reports that during the firefight, the Taliban were on rooftops forcing villagers to stay in their homes - in essence using them as human shields. This account was confirmed by doctors who heard such stories from patients at Farah Hospital - according to a military press release.
• There is a report from a local Afghan that some Taliban soldiers went into a house and killed residents with grenades, then carried their bodies outside claiming they were killed by U.S. fire.
• According to a U.S. Military press release, doctors at Farah hospital treated 16 patients -- 5 police and 11 civilians -- for flash burns and small lacerations. Afghan doctors said the injuries could have resulted from hand grenades or exploding propane tanks.
• Villagers and Afghan lawmakers disputed the American claims that Taliban grenades had caused the casualties. For example, the New York Times interviewed Muhammad Naeem Farahi, a Parliament member who is from the area and has followed the case closely. He said “No, that’s not true, and I am someone who supports the American presence.”
• The U.S. statements about the Taliban grenade attacks and death counts were a major cause of the anger expressed in the riots and in the public statements by Afghan officials.

The Media's Treatment

With such an assortment of accounts to choose from, different media outlets chose to focus on the stories that are most in tune with their target audience. Center and left leaning sources (i.e. New York Times, Huffington Post) tend to focus on the high number of reported civilian deaths, the local outrage, and the U.S. denial of the numbers. They also tend to relay stories of local Afghan residents who reject American military accounts. Right leaning media groups (i.e. Fox News, Rush Limbaugh) focus sharply on the story of deaths caused by Taliban grenades and dispel other reports as Taliban propaganda or liberal media bias.

Below is an interview with Fox News strategic analyst Col. Peters, on Fox & Friends, that illustrates a particularly right wing take on this issue.

Inconclusive Conclusion

It is safe to assume that most people (both Afghans and Americans) would feel that the U.S. Military had justification to engage the Taliban with force given the circumstances - especially considering the U.S. was asked for help by the regional governor. Questions about the number of civilian vs. Taliban deaths, the extent to which villagers were killed by Taliban grenades, and the use of human shields may come into better light over time - but the whole story is likely to remain a mixed picture.

As we've logged in the strike tracker, the U.S. military has a history of making initial strong denials about death counts that get overruled, sometimes retracted, down the road. Whether or not this case gets a similar reversal, the official U.S. report on this incident - which selectively picks out some local accounts as evidence and others as lies - paints a pretty skewed picture of what probably occurred. Arguably, the Taliban has demonstrated a willingness to use misinformation against us, and we simply have to fight back in the propaganda war. But while declaring a widely supported Afghan outcry as merely Taliban propaganda may muddy the picture for Americans at home - which tends to make us less critical of the incident - it certainly doesn't help the U.S. image in the region where the strike occurred. Surely we can understand why Afghans would become outraged when after enduring such an incredible tragedy they are told that Americans are denying the numbers and blaming Taliban forces for the civilian deaths. This is a complicated war, and nobody better understands that than the people of Afghanistan. The best counter attack to Taliban propaganda is probably to stand tall above their actions and provide honest reports and clear apologies. Who says we have to play their game?

For more information on this strike, inculding sources and videos, please see its entry in our air strike tracker.