Civilian Casualties Are Skyrocketing in Afghanistan. The CIA Is Partly to Blame.

A 42-percent increase in deaths.

Afghan policemen display their skills at a police training center on the outskirts of Jalalabad in Nangarhar province.Noorullah Shirzada/AFP/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

This week brought more grim news from the US war in Afghanistan, which is now in its 19th year.

The United Nations reported a 42 percent increase in civilian deaths in July-September compared to the same period in 2018. The NATO-led military coalition, which generally underestimates civilian harm relative to the UN, found a nearly-identical 39-percent increase for June-September. This stretch, documented in a filing published Wednesday by the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, covers key events such as the Afghan presidential election and the breakdown of peace negotiations between the Taliban and the United States. During that time, several horrific attacks linked to the Taliban and ISIS’ Afghan offshoot took place at weddings, mosques, and other public venues.

The United States and its allies are hardly free from responsibility for the carnage. In July, a UN report said American-led forces and Afghan security officials were responsible for a majority of the civilian deaths in the country during the first six months of the year. On Thursday, Human Rights Watch unveiled evidence of atrocities by fighters aligned with the CIA, which has been training Afghan paramilitary units to fight terrorists for nearly two decades. The report identified 14 cases over the past two years in which “CIA-backed Afghan strike forces committed serious abuses, some amounting to war crimes.”

The intelligence community does not reveal the location or result of most of its raids, but reporting by HRW and news outlets like the Intercept have shed light on the gross overreach of CIA-backed operations. At a national security forum in October 2017, then-CIA director Mike Pompeo said that with President Donald Trump’s support, he and the agency’s leaders “were taking several steps to make CIA faster and more aggressive.” It quickly became clear what he meant. A New York Times story later that month reported that the CIA was “expanding its covert operations in Afghanistan” by sending agency personnel and contractors to help Afghan forces “hunt and kill Taliban militants across the country.”

A CIA spokesman told Reuters that the agency conducts its operations “in accordance with law and under a robust system of oversight.” But for months, the UN has flagged dangerous excesses by these CIA-backed groups. In its 2018 annual report, the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan warned of there being “no legal basis for the existence of the Khost Protection Force,” one such unit, adding that “Afghan authorities have not taken the necessary action to hold members of this group accountable with respect to allegations of excessive use of force, intentional killings, and other abuses that severely impact the human rights and the lives of Afghans.” 

More troubling news arrived on Tuesday with the publication of a memoir by Guy Snodgrass, former aide to ex-Defense Secretary James Mattis. During an overseas trip with Mattis to the Middle East, Snodgrass writes, he was ordered to redo the Trump administration’s Afghanistan strategy “in one day” after a first draft from the Pentagon’s policy shop proved unsatisfactory. Despite not having participated in “any rollout or strategy planning meetings,” Snodgrass states that he completed the task. Given the time constraints, he says he was forced to bypass the policy office, which was responsible for crafting the strategy in the first place. 

None of this happens in a vacuum. As Snodgrass told me in an interview earlier this week, a “chaotic administration” produces an “incredibly dangerous” environment for national security policymaking. 

“It’s not like there’s a well-thought-out strategy that’s simply being enacted as we go along,” he said.

How reassuring.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate