[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11895-11896]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      PROTECTING AFGHAN CIVILIANS

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as we take stock of the changes made last 
week by President Obama to the military command in Afghanistan, there 
is a related issue that has been discussed in the press that is of 
particular concern to me.
  I believe the President's decision to replace General McChrystal was 
the right decision. The published comments of the general and his aides 
were unquestionably insubordinate. They portrayed extraordinarily poor 
judgment and disrespect, and a deterioration of discipline that was 
unacceptable.
  But putting aside those matters, I believe General McChrystal's 
command was notable for his recognition, to an unprecedented extent, of 
the importance of protecting the lives of innocent Afghan civilians for 
the safety of U.S. troops and to improve the chances of success of the 
mission.
  Before General McChrystal's tenure, the need to do more to reduce 
civilian casualties was discussed, particularly after each incident 
when civilians were inadvertently killed or injured. But far too little 
was done about it. The frequent reliance on air power in areas where 
civilians were present caused many innocent casualties. Whole villages 
were destroyed. Wedding parties were wiped out. Night raids also often 
caused civilian deaths or injuries, as well as widespread anger and 
resentment towards U.S. troops who were perceived as disrespectful of 
Afghan customs.
  General McChrystal implemented stricter rules of engagement to reduce 
these tragic incidents. While in some cases these rules have limited 
our troops' actions, they do not prevent soldiers from acting in self-
defense when there is a real or perceived threat. There is no basis, as 
far as I am aware, military or otherwise, to criticize these efforts to 
protect civilian lives. Indeed, I believe more can still be done, 
particularly to prevent such unfortunate incidents at roadblocks and

[[Page 11896]]

checkpoints, where those killed have, with few exceptions, turned out 
to be unarmed civilians who posed no threat. Their deaths caused great 
suffering for their families, and incited support for the Taliban in 
their communities.
  Reducing civilian casualties, and by doing so winning the support of 
the Afghan people, is essential. In late April, the people of the town 
of Gizab, north of Kandahar, took up arms and ousted the Taliban. This 
is encouraging, but it is unlikely to continue to occur if the United 
States and our ISAF partners are perceived by the civilian population 
as another invader.
  I have my own concerns with the President's strategy in Afghanistan, 
which I will discuss at a later time. But today, as General Petraeus 
prepares to assume command of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, it is 
fortunate, I believe, that he knows from Iraq that winning the support 
and respect of the local population means much more than the cliche it 
has become. Progress in Afghanistan depends on it.

                          ____________________