U.S. Intentionally Attacks Civilians: Afghan Women's Leader
As the UN reports, year by year, a dramatic increase on civilians killings in Afghanistan, and the International Criminal Court does not advance in investigating such crimes by the local governments, terrorists and the US-led forces, Friba, the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan's representative, states in the following interview with Pravda.ru that the US has opressed and destroyed to dominate her country.
"The lives of Afghans has no value for the US," Friba says. "Such disproportionate use of force can only be titled as intentional attacks on civilian populations."
Edu Montesanti: As UNAMA recently issued reports on the dramatic increase of civilians deaths in Afghanistan, which does not change year by year, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is considering to investigate crimes committed in Afghanistan by the local government, the Taliban and other anti-government forces, and the US-led forces. Your view on the ICC and Unama, and how much RAWA is confident that the US will be taken to an international court.
Friba: For years, RAWA has made extensive efforts to prosecute fundamentalist criminal warlords through ICC or other courts, but as predictable, it has not borne any result. We all know the reality of these bodies that serve the agenda of imperialist countries, and don't stand for justice.
UNAMA, as the UN in general is a US-dominated entity and a small tool in its hands for its imperialist pursuits. For decades now, the victims of the US's wars and interventions have learned this bitter truth and have no hopes or expectations from the UN, which has openly persecuted the US's rivals around the world while largely ignoring the US's own crimes.
Afghan representatives in the UN are also CIA sell-outs who are the mouthpieces of the US, furthering its aims in the UN. This is not to mention the widespread corruption that has hit UN for years.
While the UN's shameful past is one of a pro-US body, the ICC has yet to earn this unpopular status. The present wars inAfghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria are also testing grounds for the ICC to establish whether it is an impartial body that will go after all war criminals, or just be a pro-US body that ignores the crimes committed by the US and its allies and its puppets, like the UN.
The recent decision by the chief prosecutor of the ICC to seek an investigation into alleged war crimes perpetrated by U.S. military forces and the CIA in Afghanistan is a positive step, despite the fact that many do not see the investigation as yielding any result.
Edu Montesanti: We have recently talked about the old imperialistic strategy, oppress and destroy to dominate a region, as you and I were talking about US killing of civilians increasing year by year, since 2001. The ICC reported that "although these operations [US attacks] resulted in incidental loss of civilian life and harm to civilians, in most incidents the information available does not provide a reasonable basis to believe that the military forces intended the civilian population as such or individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities to be the object of the attack.", I firmly believe, given the facts regarding these killings and US practices in Afghanistan and all over the world through history, that at least many of these crimes against innocents in your country is intentional to destroy and dominate Afghanistan, as well as a consequence of hatred, discrimination, drug effect on the US military, mentally ill soldiers, revenge for the 9/11 false flag...
What are your thoughts on the killings of civilians in Afghanistan, Friba?
Friba: The lives of Afghans has no value for the US. I agree with all the points mentioned above: hatred, racist discrimination, dehumanization, drug effect, mentally ill, revenge, and most importantly to dominate the region. In Iraq, I especially believe that they bombarded the country and tortured and killed people to dominate it. Afghanistan was already destroyed by 20 years of war when the US came.
"Oppress and destroy to dominate" is a very effective tactic to take over a country or nation, as demonstrated by the US in Iraq and Libya recently. A developed country with an independent government will never accept foreign domination. Driving a country towards poverty and devastation with the utter obliteration of its economic base, basic infrastructure, and state system will oppress its people and destroy the country to the point that it breaks the backbone of the nation and they cannot resist any oppression.
This tactic was effectively implemented by the US's Jihadi lackeys during the infighting of 1992-1996, when the Northern Alliance's Pakistani masters ordered the destruction of every basic infrastructure of the country immediately after these Jihadi brutes took power.
Now after more than 20 years of war, the Afghan people are too tired and deprived of a humane life to seek their bigger desires for their country, like indepetndence, freedom, democracy and social justice.
The majority of the attacks by the US are carried out without accurate intelligence and regard to civilian lives, resulting in bloody massacres through airstrikes, drone strikes, night raids, and shootings across Afghanistan.
After all these years, the US understands the fighting tactics of the Taliban very well: they fight guerilla-style and immediately leave an area after carrying out their operation, leaving behind innocent civilians who have nowhere to escape to. Bombarding an area after an operation has been carried out, and has usually only targeted innocent civilians. This well-known pattern has been ignored by the US military. In certain cases, an entire gathering or village has been bombarded to target a few Taliban members or a single Taliban commander.
Such disproportionate use of force can only be titled as intentional attacks on civilian populations. There is overwhelming evidence, in the form of admission by US army members and leaked documents, like The Intercept reported that 90% the people killed in drone strikes were not the target, that most attacks that have caused loss of innocent lives, have either been intentional or highly reckless.
Most of the troops and private company contractors sent in the Afghan war were brainwashed with hatred for Afghans and motivated by revenge for 9/11. This made innocent Afghan civilians easy prey for them to fulfill their sick hatred.
There are numerous examples of murderous, intentional attacks on innocent people by such troops and contractors in Afghanistan, as well as the other US victim, Iraq, where people have been killed, decapitated, and humiliated for fun. The infamous "Kill Team" and the Panjwai massacre are only two incidents that were exposed and investigated. Many incidents, especially in botched raids and night raids, go uninvestigated.
The consistence of these war crimes is not surprising since the US military has avoided investigation and prosecution of war crimes in Afghanistan, providing untrue accounts of events and protecting the troops who are involved in crimes. US troops also have immunity from prosecution in Afghanistan under the Bilateral Security Agreement signed between the traitorous Afghan government and the US in 2014.
The investigations and prosecutions carried out by the US army itself cannot be just and fair which is why US troops guilty of crimes have either escaped punishment or received a slap on the wrist for their heinous crimes. This immunity encourages the US troops and contractors to continue their crimes without worrying about consequences or fear of punishment or accountability. This is why weddings, hospitals and densely populated villages continue to be attacked causing innocent people to die.
If we broadly talk about intention, the US never "intended" to "liberate" our people, restore peace, or fight terrorists in its "war on terror", in the first place, and the fact that this criminal war took the lives of thousands of innocent women, children, and men,should not escape prosecution and condemnation just because it was not "intentional".
Can the discussion of "intention" be the answer for the people who have lost their children and family members and are looking for justice? Certainly not. This goes against the very concept of justice, of holding armies and governments accountable for their actions, so as to stop the reoccurrence of such crimes.
The ICC should not deceive itself and the people of the world by turning a blind eye to such war crimes on simply the defense of "intention". If the ICC is adamant in its pursuit of justice, then it should take some concrete action against the commission of war crimes like the Kunduz hospital attack, the Balabuluk massacre, the Shindand massacare, and countless others that have not even been reported and investigated.
Edu Montesanti: We have also talked on Wali Karzai, a CIA asset who was a drug dealer in Afghanistan. Wali is a key figure to understand the CIA's role in Afghanistan, and his killing in July 2011 looks something to burn an alive file against the CIA, don't you think so, Friba?
Friba: We do not have an exact information on Wali Karzai. We know as much as the media exposed.
However, we have several theories, nothing confirmed, as to why he might have been killed and by who. Most probably he was targeted by the US, maybe for many hidden reasons, but mainly because the US is very careful in making sure no figure accumulates too much power in any part of Afghanistan. This is especially true for corrupt warlords who may deviate from serving the US in their pursuit for money and power and that is unacceptable to the US. We have observed this policy of the US here.
Another possibility is that he was simply killed in typical, internal mafia conflicts. In any case, what is a fact is that he was involved in drug trade, money laundering, had a death squad, and most importantly, on CIA payroll.
Edu Montesanti: We sometimes hear that US companies have been extracting rare earth minerals in Afghanistan: Oh, a "new" news...
Friba: Old news, Edu Jan. When English troops were in Helmand province for years, people reported that they dug up uranium and transported them secretly out of Afghanistan by air. We have so many accounts of such dirty plunders of these countries.
Post-2001, English troops were mainly stationed in that southern province for years. There was not even that much war and insecurity and Taliban presence at that time, so it was very suspicious. Many such suspicious activities have been reported from everywhere.
While such reports are useful to denounce US war (using their own sources against them), I don't think it paints a true picture of Afghanistan. It makes it appear as though the US is truly fighting terrorism in Afghanistan and really struggling against the Taliban, and that this corruption is the only hindrance. While the corruption part is true, and that many young soldiers have unfortunately been brainwashed into fighting this war, the truth is that the US's bigger policy in the region is not to fight the Taliban/ISIS, rather to use them as tools for their gains. Such reports only deceive the people of the US and the world into believing this is a "good" war.
Edu Montesanti: How do you describe the 17-year long US occupation of Afghanistan?
Friba: Afghanistan's situation is different from the other current US wars because Afghanistan is under the direct occupation of the US, with no other country currently even competing with it, and is dominated in all parts by the US's Islamic fundamentalist mercenaries, the Afghan puppet government, ISIS and Taliban.
Naturally, our country's devastation, politically, socially, and economics-wise, is the direct result of this occupation and domination. Our people have tasted the US's 17-year neo-colonial war and the disasters it has brought upon them. Insecurity, war, killings, torture, violence against women, poverty, mafia, corruption, unemployment, refugee or immigration crisis, drugs, are all gifts of the US occupation to our people.
This reality gets zero coverage around the world and it is painful how people have a distorted picture of the US's criminal war in Afghanistan and other countries.
Edu Montesanti: Please speak a little more about RAWA's origins, and the movement's current work.
Friba: RAWA was based in Pakistan during the wars of Afghanistan, 1980s and 90s, when the situation was too difficult for us to carry out our activities. In the 80s, the so-called Communist regime was rabidly after intellectuals and activists, especially revolutionaries and leftists, struggling against it. Then the civil war and Taliban came in the 90s. Even in Pakistan, RAWA was not safe, as our young leader, Meena, was martyred in Quetta by the bloodthirsty Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.
Our activities were still largely carried out in Afghanistan, but underground. RAWA's name had become synonymous with resistance against foreign occupation, the Soviet occupation, and a fierce, relentless struggle against the more dangerous species, the Islamic fundamentalists on the US/Pakistan/Saudi Arabia/Iran's leash who took power in 1992. While we held demonstrations and functions in Pakistan, and worked extensively among Afghan women through social projects in refugee camps, our publications were distributed secretly all over Afghanistan, and we had underground activities for women all over Afghanistan as well, such as literacy courses and income generating projects.
While RAWA was formed to fight for women's rights and equality, we simply believe that that goal is unattainable without freedom, from foreign occupation/intervention, democracy, a real democracy achieved by the people's struggle and not the mockery the US has made out of it since 2001, social justice and secularism. This has been RAWA's slogan since it was formed in 1977.
RAWA moved back to Afghanistan in 2001 after the relative calm and continues to operate in different parts, but underground. Our enemies, the fundamentalists, are still powerful thanks to the West's backing, and we still cannot work openly. We do not have an official office or a phone number, we operate under different names and our members use pseudonyms. The situation has not changed much for us, and similar movements in Afghanistan.
An objective analysis of where the United Kingdom and its Prime Minister stand one hundred days before the Brexit deadline. Let us see the facts, not conjecture