SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Kabul Is No Child's Playground
Afghanistan is one of the worst places for a child to live in because of violence and disease.
Nov 22, 2010
Nato's top civilian spokesperson in Afghanistan has come under fire
for playing down the country's level of danger over the weekend.
"The children are probably safer here [Kabul] than they would be in
London, New York or Glasgow or many other cities," Mark Sedwill told
CBBC Newsround, the televised news programme for youngsters.
"Here in Kabul and the other big cities (in Afghanistan) actually there are very few of those bombs," he added.
But Sedwill tried to clarify the comments to reporters on Monday, saying they were taken out of context.
"I was trying to explain to an audience of British children how uneven violence is across Afghanistan," he said.
"Half the insurgent violence takes place in 10 of the 365 districts
and, in those places, children are too often the victims of IEDs and
other dangers.
"But, in cities like Kabul where security has improved, the total
levels of violence, including criminal violence, are comparable to those
which many western children would experience."
But contrary to what the Nato spokesman says, Afghanistan is one of
the worst places in the world for a child to live in. One in five
children there will die before they reach the age of five due to a
myriad of causes, ranging from everyday violence to widespread diseases.
Sue Turton reports from Kabul on how growing up in the Afghan capital is no child's play.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nato's top civilian spokesperson in Afghanistan has come under fire
for playing down the country's level of danger over the weekend.
"The children are probably safer here [Kabul] than they would be in
London, New York or Glasgow or many other cities," Mark Sedwill told
CBBC Newsround, the televised news programme for youngsters.
"Here in Kabul and the other big cities (in Afghanistan) actually there are very few of those bombs," he added.
But Sedwill tried to clarify the comments to reporters on Monday, saying they were taken out of context.
"I was trying to explain to an audience of British children how uneven violence is across Afghanistan," he said.
"Half the insurgent violence takes place in 10 of the 365 districts
and, in those places, children are too often the victims of IEDs and
other dangers.
"But, in cities like Kabul where security has improved, the total
levels of violence, including criminal violence, are comparable to those
which many western children would experience."
But contrary to what the Nato spokesman says, Afghanistan is one of
the worst places in the world for a child to live in. One in five
children there will die before they reach the age of five due to a
myriad of causes, ranging from everyday violence to widespread diseases.
Sue Turton reports from Kabul on how growing up in the Afghan capital is no child's play.
Nato's top civilian spokesperson in Afghanistan has come under fire
for playing down the country's level of danger over the weekend.
"The children are probably safer here [Kabul] than they would be in
London, New York or Glasgow or many other cities," Mark Sedwill told
CBBC Newsround, the televised news programme for youngsters.
"Here in Kabul and the other big cities (in Afghanistan) actually there are very few of those bombs," he added.
But Sedwill tried to clarify the comments to reporters on Monday, saying they were taken out of context.
"I was trying to explain to an audience of British children how uneven violence is across Afghanistan," he said.
"Half the insurgent violence takes place in 10 of the 365 districts
and, in those places, children are too often the victims of IEDs and
other dangers.
"But, in cities like Kabul where security has improved, the total
levels of violence, including criminal violence, are comparable to those
which many western children would experience."
But contrary to what the Nato spokesman says, Afghanistan is one of
the worst places in the world for a child to live in. One in five
children there will die before they reach the age of five due to a
myriad of causes, ranging from everyday violence to widespread diseases.
Sue Turton reports from Kabul on how growing up in the Afghan capital is no child's play.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.