SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Tel: +1-212-290-4700
Email: hrwnyc@hrw.org
Civilian deaths in Afghanistan from US and NATO airstrikes nearly tripled from 2006 to 2007, with recent deadly airstrikes exacerbating the problem and fuelling a public backlash, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today. The report also condemns the Taliban's use of "human shields" in violation of the laws of war.
Though operational changes advocated by Human Rights Watch have reduced the rate of civilian casualties since they spiked in July 2007, continuing tragedies, such as the July 6, 2008 strike on a wedding party and the August 22, 2008 bombing in Azizabad, have greatly undermined local support for the efforts of international forces providing security in Afghanistan.
The 43-page report, "'Troops in Contact': Airstrikes and Civilian Deaths in Afghanistan,"
analyzes the use of airstrikes by US and NATO forces and resulting
civilian casualties, particularly when used to make up for the lack of
ground troops and during emergency situations. Human Rights Watch found
few civilian deaths resulted from planned airstrikes, while almost all
deaths occurred in unplanned airstrikes.
"Rapid response airstrikes have meant higher civilian
casualties, while every bomb dropped in populated areas amplifies the
chance of a mistake," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights
Watch. "Mistakes by the US and NATO have dramatically decreased public
support for the Afghan government and the presence of international
forces providing security to Afghans."
The report documents how insurgent forces have contributed
to the civilian toll from airstrikes by deploying their forces in
populated villages, at times with the specific intent to shield their
forces from counterattack, a serious violation of the laws of war.
Human Rights Watch found several instances where Taliban forces
purposefully used civilians as shields to deter US and NATO attacks.
In 2006, at least 929 Afghan civilians were killed in
fighting related to the armed conflict. Of those, at least 699 died
during Taliban attacks (including suicide bombings and other bombings
unlawfully targeting civilians) and at least 230 died during US or NATO
attacks. Of the latter, 116 were killed by US or NATO airstrikes. In
2007, at least 1,633 Afghan civilians were killed in fighting related
to the armed conflict. Of those, some 950 died during attacks by the
various insurgent forces, including the Taliban and al-Qaeda. At least
321 were killed by US or NATO airstrikes. Thus, civilian deaths from US
and NATO airstrikes nearly tripled from 2006 to 2007.
In the first seven months of 2008, at least 540 Afghan
civilians were killed in fighting related to the armed conflict. Of
those, at least 367 died during attacks by the various insurgent forces
and 173 died during US or NATO attacks. At least 119 were killed by US
or NATO airstrikes. For all periods cited, Human Rights Watch uses the most conservative figures available.
Human
Rights Watch criticized the poor response by US officials when civilian
deaths occur. Prior to conducting investigations into airstrikes
causing civilian loss, US officials often immediately deny
responsibility for civilian deaths or place all blame on the Taliban.
US investigations conducted have been unilateral, ponderous, and
lacking in transparency, undercutting rather than improving relations
with local populations and the Afghan government. A faulty condolence
payment system has not provided timely and adequate compensation to
assist civilians harmed by US actions.
"The US needs to end the mistakes that are killing so many
civilians," said Adams. "The US must also take responsibility,
including by providing timely compensation, when its airstrikes kill
Afghan civilians. While Taliban shielding is a factor in some civilian
deaths, the US shouldn't use this as an excuse when it could have taken
better precautions. It is, after all, its bombs that are doing the
killing."
Human Rights Watch found that few civilians casualties
occurred as the result of planned airstrikes on suspected Taliban
targets. Instead, most cases of civilian deaths from airstrikes
occurred during the fluid, rapid-response strikes mostly carried out in
support of "troops in contact" - ground troops who are under insurgent
attack. Such unplanned strikes included situations where US special
forces units - normally small in number and lightly armed - came under
insurgent attack; in US/NATO attacks in pursuit of insurgent forces who
had retreated to populated villages; and in air attacks where US
"anticipatory self-defense" rules of engagement applied.
The effects of airstrikes go beyond civilian deaths. For
example, an investigation by the Afghan government found that two
battles over a three-day period starting April 30, 2007 in Shindand
district resulted in the destruction of numerous homes. In every case
investigated by Human Rights Watch where airstrikes hit villages, many
civilians had to leave the village because of damage to their homes and
fear of further strikes. People from neighboring villages also
sometimes fled in fear of future strikes on their villages. This has
led to large numbers of internally displaced persons.
To respond to public concern and complaints from President
Hamid Karzai, in July 2007 the NATO-led International Security
Assistance Force (ISAF) announced several changes in targeting tactics.
These changes include employing smaller munitions, delaying attacks
where civilians might be harmed, and turning over house-to-house
searches to the Afghan National Army. A review of available evidence
suggests that the changes had some impact, as there was a significant
drop in civilian casualties due to airstrikes in the last half of 2007,
even as the overall tonnage of bombs dropped increased.
Human Rights Watch welcomed these changes in targeting, but
remained concerned by continuing civilian casualties from airstrikes,
particularly as the number of airstrikes has increased dramatically and
the number of deaths and injuries has spiked this summer.
Human Rights Watch called for the US and NATO to address
the rising civilian death toll from unplanned airstrikes, and to fix
continuing problems with field collateral damage estimation and the
inconsistent application of their Rules of Engagement.
"The recent airstrikes killing dozens of Afghans make clear
that the system is still broken and that civilians continue to pay the
ultimate price," said Adams. "Civilian deaths from airstrikes act as a
recruiting tool for the Taliban and risk fatally undermining the
international effort to provide basic security to the people of
Afghanistan."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
States that have criminalized abortion are "getting much more explicit" in pushing to prosecute women for obtaining abortion care, said one rights advocate.
A state judge in Georgia on Monday set a bail payment at just $1 for a woman who was charged with murder earlier this month after she took abortion pills to end a pregnancy—a charge about which Judge Steven G. Blackerby of State Superior Court expressed extreme skepticism.
“I think that charge is extremely problematic,” Blackerby said during a hearing that the woman, Alexia Moore, attended virtually. “That is going to be a hard charge to convict upon.”
District Attorney Keith Higgins, who is overseeing the case against Moore, also did not appear convinced that the 31-year-old should be imprisoned for the medication abortion she had last December. He told the judge that "whatever bond the defendant can make that will allow her to get out of jail is appropriate," and noted that police in Kingsland, Georgia had brought charges against Moore without his office's support.
Higgins said he was not ready to drop the murder charge altogether, but said he was also not prepared to present the case to a grand jury.
Moore had been in jail for about two weeks when the hearing took place. Investigators in Kingsland accused her of “unlawfully and with malice aforethought [causing] the death of Baby Girl Moore.” In addition to malice murder they charged her with possession of a controlled substance and a dangerous drug.
She was rushed to Southeast Georgia Health Center on December 30 after experiencing severe abdominal pain. Court records showed Moore told the medical staff she had taken about eight pills of misoprostol, a pill that can be used for medication abortion, and oxycodone for pain. She went into labor at the hospital and delivered a baby who was determined to be in the second trimester of development. The baby was declared dead about an hour after birth.
She said she had bought the medication online and believed herself to be less than 14 weeks pregnant.
The Kingsland Police Department did not specifically cite Georgia's six-week abortion ban—which the state Supreme Court has allowed to remain in effect despite a Superior Court ruling that permanently enjoined the ban and found it unconstitutional—but The New York Times reported that documents supporting the department's arrest warrant "echoed aspects of the ban, including saying that 'the baby was well beyond six weeks of conception.'"
The police said Moore was charged with murder because “the victim became a person at the moment of live birth.”
Higgins acknowledged in court that the malice murder charge may not meet "factual and merit" standards, and both Blackerby and Kelly Turner, Moore's defense attorney, noted that Georgia law prohibits the criminalization of someone who has induced an abortion on themself.
The Current, a Georgia-based outlet, also reported that "privacy issues" are likely to be scrutinized in court if the district attorney continues to pursue the case.
"A security guard at Southeast Georgia Health Center in St. Marys called police after medical staff said that Moore had ingested abortion medication and the infant was older than six weeks, according to police records, which also cited Moore’s previous abortion history," reported The Current.
Turner argued in court that Moore legally procured the misoprostol and noted that her blood tests and hospital records did not show Oxycodone in her system.
"Today’s decision is a reminder that justice is not served by accusation alone," said Don Plummer, press officer for the Georgia Public Defender Council, which is representing Moore.
Author and advocate Jessica Valenti of Abortion, Every Day emphasized after Moore's arrest that the murder charge shows how states that have criminalized abortion care are "getting much more explicit" about the anti-choice movement's desire to punish women for obtaining abortions—even though in the past, laws have typically avoided prosecuting them.
A 31-year-old in Georgia has been arrested and charged with murder for allegedly ending her pregnancy with abortion medication.
Here’s what we know: pic.twitter.com/EXAcMqEdak
— Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) March 16, 2026
The district attorneys of Georgia's four largest counties pledged in 2019, after the passage of the Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act, that they would not prosecute people who obtain abortions.
Since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, women in states including Kentucky, Ohio, and South Carolina have faced charges for obtaining abortion care and for suffering pregnancy loss. An Ohio woman sued medical providers last year for conspiring with police to fabricate a criminal case against her; she had been charged with felony abuse of a corpse after having a miscarriage, but a grand jury declined to indict her.
"I really hope that people are paying attention to this," said Valenti of the attempt to bring charges against Moore. "They really are counting on us being too overwhelmed to act, so it's incredibly, incredibly important that we let them know we're paying attention."
"Mullin refused to rule out sending armed, masked agents to polling places this November," noted one advocacy group.
The US Senate voted mostly along party lines on Monday to confirm former Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin to lead the Department of Homeland Security amid a partial shutdown at the agency that led President Donald Trump to deploy immigration enforcement agents to chaos-ridden airports.
Two Democrats, Sens. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, joined every Republican except for Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in voting to confirm Mullin, who will succeed scandal-plagued Kristi Noem at DHS—a sprawling agency that oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
Christina Harvey, executive director of the advocacy group Stand Up America, said in response to the vote that "Mullin’s confirmation hearings made clear he lacks the character and qualifications to serve as DHS secretary."
"He’s Kristi Noem 2.0: an election denier with unwavering loyalty to Donald Trump and a penchant for profiting off public office," said Harvey. "Mullin signaled he’ll continue the administration’s pattern of shielding federal agents from accountability while blocking crucial reforms. Even more alarming, Mullin refused to rule out sending armed, masked agents to polling places this November."
"Senate Republicans put Mullin in power," Harvey added, "and they’ll be responsible for what comes next.”
The confirmation vote came amid reports that senators are on the verge of a deal to end the month-long shutdown at DHS, which has left TSA workers unpaid. In the wake of ICE agents' deadly shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minnesota, Democratic lawmakers have demanded reforms to the immigration enforcement body as part of any DHS funding deal.
Roll Call reported late Monday that the "tentative arrangement" senators are considering "would split off a large chunk of regular fiscal 2026 funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement from the earlier full-year funding bill for DHS that stalled in the Senate."
"Democrats wouldn’t get everything they want in the tentative pact; Customs and Border Protection would be funded, for instance," the outlet noted. "And there were discussions about keeping other parts of ICE funded, including the Homeland Security Investigations division that works on anti-terror efforts, transnational crime, child exploitation, and human trafficking."
News of potential progress toward an agreement came after Trump nearly torpedoed negotiations by demanding that Republicans attach a massive voter suppression bill known as the SAVE America Act to any DHS funding deal.
“Don’t make any deal on anything unless you include voter ID,” Trump said during an event in Tennessee earlier Monday.
Politico reported late Monday that Senate Republicans are "looking at using reconciliation"—a filibuster-proof budget process—to "pass more ICE funding as well as parts of their partisan GOP elections bill, the SAVE America Act."
The legislation is part of what experts and democracy advocates have characterized as a sweeping Trump administration effort to sabotage the 2026 midterm elections. As part of that effort, the Trump administration has reportedly weighed the possibility of sending ICE agents to polling sites—something that Mullin declined to rule out during his confirmation hearing.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said in his statement opposing Mullin's confirmation that "with Trump unleashing ICE agents at our airports, we cannot risk another leader at DHS who will simply rubberstamp the illegal, brutal Trump agenda."
"Mullin refused to retract earlier comments he made justifying Renee Good’s murder at the hands of ICE officers. He refused to say that Joe Biden won the 2020 election. He deflected when asked if he would send ICE officers to the polls during the midterm elections," said Markey. "I voted against Senator Mullin’s nomination because he has not shown that he will lead DHS with independence, put an end to ICE’s lawlessness, or seek real accountability at the department and its agencies."
"JD Vance has a lot of nerve showing up in Texas to shake down wealthy donors... while Texans are paying through the nose at the pump and can’t get through the airport his party broke,” said one Democratic state lawmaker.
Vice President JD Vance's scheduled attendance at three $100,000-per-couple fundraisers has raised eyebrows and ire as Americans struggle to make ends meet due to the Trump administration economic policies and experts warn that the US-Israeli war on Iran could cause tens of millions of people in the Global South to suffer acute hunger.
Vance—who is widely expected to run for president in 2028—is in Texas this week for Republican National Committee fundraisers in Austin on Monday and Dallas on Tuesday. The vice president is also scheduled to attend another similar fundraising event in Nashville, Tennessee on March 30.
According to the Houston Chronicle, Joe Lonsdale, the billionaire founder of the controversial data analytics company Palantir, is hosting the Austin event. Billionaire investor and real estate developer Ray Washburne will co-host the Dallas fundraiser along with Chris Buskirk, founder of the venture capital firm where Donald Trump Jr. works. Buskirk openly advocates for an American "aristocracy" that "takes care of the country and governs it well so that everyone prospers.”
Also set to co-host the Dallas event is David Hininger, the former CEO of CoreCivic, a leading private prison firm in an industry that has gloated about the "unprecedented" profit potential of Trump's mass arrest and deportation campaign against undocumented immigrants.
Donors were reportedly asked to pay $250,000 to host one of the fundraisers.
"While Vance dines with billionaire donors, Americans are struggling to get by in the Trump-Vance economy as prices on everything from gas to groceries soar and working families dip into their savings to make ends meet," the Democratic National Committee said in a statement Monday.
"Trump and Vance’s war with Iran has already claimed the lives of 13 US service members and injured over 230, while driving up global oil prices and gas prices for Americans back home," the DNC added, without mentioning the thousands of Iranians killed or wounded by the illegal war of choice. "According to [the American Automobile Association], the average price for a gallon of gas is $3.96 nationwide, up from $2.94 just one month ago."
Trump campaigned on promises of no new wars and lower consumer prices, including gas, on "day one." Since returning to office, he has ordered the bombing of seven countries. Gas prices are up around 30% since Trump returned to the White House in January 2020.
“Prices on everything from gas to groceries to rent are soaring because of the Trump-Vance agenda, and what is JD Vance up to? He’s rubbing elbows with billionaires and special interests while working families struggle to make ends meet," DNC Chair Ken Martin said Monday. "Everyday Americans are stretching every dollar just to get by, and Vance is worried about lining his own pockets.”
Texas House Democratic Campaign Committee Chair Rep. Christina Morales (D-145) told the Houston Chronicle Monday that "JD Vance has a lot of nerve showing up in Texas to shake down wealthy donors for a quarter of a million dollars a head while Texans are paying through the nose at the pump and can’t get through the airport his party broke."
The war on Iran and its cascading global economic impacts could also fuel a sharp rise in acute hunger around the world, the United Nations World Food Program warned last week. WFP said the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is driving higher energy and fertilizer prices, which in turn can result in more expensive food.
“If this conflict continues, it will send shockwaves across the globe, and families who already cannot afford their next meal will be hit the hardest," Carl Skau, WFP’s deputy executive director and chief operating officer, said. “Without an adequately funded humanitarian response, it could spell catastrophe for millions already on the edge.”