Study: Rules to curb Afghan civilian casualties led to fewer attacks on U.S. troops

[superconnected]

Source: Bellingham Herald

WASHINGTON - Efforts to reduce civilian casualties by restricting U.S. airstrikes and other uses of force in Afghanistan are also sparing American troops from attack, according to a new study to be unveiled Tuesday.

Tighter rules of engagement put in place last year by Gen. Stanley McChrystal have provoked complaints among U.S. troops that their lives have been put at risk. McChrystal's replacement, Gen. David Petraeus, promised lawmakers last month he would re-examine how the rules had been implemented, while expressing overall support for them.

A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, being released Tuesday at the non-partisan New America Foundation in Washington, found that civilian casualties in Afghanistan from U.S. and NATO actions "are associated with a substantively and statistically large increase in attacks" by the Taliban and other militants.

The study undercuts the notion that the military faces a zero-sum choice between protecting its troops and protecting civilians, said one of the authors, Jacob Shapiro of Princeton University.


Read more: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/08/02/1552923/study-rules-to-curb-afghan-civilian.html

---

This should have been a no brainer, but it's not. This article shows that soldiers were supposed to create civilian casualties --> http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/08/01-0.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. That policy is gone with McChrystal...wonder if they will re-assess.

[maxsolomon]

2. they need to re-assess the policy of opposing poppy cultivation

to one of actively purchasing the crop.

[daleo]

3. Reciprocity

The fundamental rule of human interaction.