

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.

The United Nations must carry out a thorough investigation into UN peacekeeping troops' response to a recent attack that killed as many as 100 civilians in a displaced persons camp in the Central African Republic, Amnesty International said today in a new report.
According to multiple eyewitnesses, UN peacekeepers did not engage an attack by an armed group but instead retreated in an armored vehicle to their central base, leaving thousands of civilians unprotected at the camp in Alindao on November 15.
An immediate and impartial inquiry must focus, in particular, on whether the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) failed in its duty to protect the lives of more than 18,000 people residing at the site.
"Scores of civilians at the displaced persons camp in Alindao were massacred after the UN peacekeepers charged with protecting them failed to take action to fend off their armed attackers," said Joanne Mariner, Senior Crisis Response Adviser at Amnesty International.
"While UN troops were badly outnumbered by armed attackers, their actions--both before and during the attack--raise serious questions as to whether they lived up to their mandate to protect civilians."
MINUSCA told Amnesty International that, given the small number of peacekeepers, it would have been impossible for them to contain the violence. But it is far from clear that, with their armored vehicles and heavier weapons, the troops could not have taken defensive positions that might have deterred the attack, particularly had they fired warning shots.
Bloody attack
At around 8-8:30am on November 15, a Seleka off-shoot called the Union for Peace in the Central African Republic (Union pour la Paix en Centrafrique, UPC) attacked the displaced persons camp located at Alindao's Catholic mission. They fired mortars and rocket-propelled grenades at the site, and then looted and burned the majority of the displaced persons' dwellings.
The UPC fighters were joined by many armed Muslim civilians from Alindao and surrounding villages. They were reportedly angered by previous killings of Muslim civilians in the area, including the murder of a Muslim motorcycle-taxi driver that same morning.
Amnesty International interviewed 20 survivors, many of whom described how Mauritanian MINUSCA peacekeepers stationed at the site failed to respond to the attack. Rather than defend against the attackers, or even fire warning shots, the Mauritanian troops retreated to their main base at the site.
By the time the attackers finished plundering and burning the site toward the end of the day, at least 70 civilians had been killed - with some sources estimating a total of nearly 100 dead - and around 18,000 displaced civilians had been forced to flee again.
Women, children and vulnerable IDPs killed en masse
The dead included many women, children, older people, and people with disabilities.
Georgette, whose family had been forced to flee her home in Alindao's Bangui-ville neighborhood in May 2017, lost both her mother and her eight-year-old daughter when attackers broke down the door to their home and shot them. Her mother, Marie, age about 65, died on the spot; her daughter, Natasha, died 10 days later at the hospital in Bambari, where she had been transferred to receive medical care.
Older people and people with disabilities were particularly vulnerable, and were killed in large numbers when they were unable to run away to escape the attack. Many were burned alive in their shelters, which were made of wooden poles and extremely combustible dried vegetation.
The attackers also killed two Catholic priests - Fr. Prospere Blaise Mada and Fr. Celestin Ngoumbango. While Amnesty International was unable to confirm whether they were purposefully targeted as priests, witnesses said they were wearing their priestly cassocks when killed.
UPC fighters and their accomplices massively looted and then burnt down nearly all of the shelters on the site and emptied a storehouse used by the World Food Programme. Amnesty International reviewed satellite imagery clearly indicating the area that had been burnt.
"The United Nations needs to assess whether the massacre at Alindao was preventable, and, most importantly, what it can do to ensure that future violent attacks on civilians are deterred or contained," said Joanne Mariner.
Given a robust mandate to protect civilians, MINUSCA forces have maintained a long-standing presence at the IDP site in Alindao. Before the current posting of Mauritanian peacekeepers (which, since the 15 November attack, have been joined by a contingent of Rwandan troops), Burundian troops protected the site.
Numerous former residents of the site told Amnesty International that the Mauritanian peacekeepers, based there since about May, failed to properly control the area and prevent the entry of arms and armed fighters. In contrast to MINUSCA contingents previously based at the site, they rarely carried out patrols, and delegated much of their day-to-day duties to a small "security team" of anti-balaka fighters.
"The Mauritanian peacekeepers' apparent acceptance of anti-balaka control of the site put the civilian population in great danger," said Joanne Mariner.
MINUSCA denied that its forces allowed the anti-balaka to operate at the camp, pointing out that the camp is huge, making control over it extremely difficult. However, the actions of the Mauritanian troops showed that they not only knew of the anti-balaka fighters' presence, they authorized it.
Threat of further violence
The threat of further attacks against displaced civilians looms large elsewhere in the country. On 4 December, UPC fighters reportedly attacked another IDP site run by the Catholic church in Ippy, resulting in the deaths of two children. Eyewitnesses told Amnesty International that Mauritanian MINUSCA peacekeepers were present at the time, but failed to prevent the attack.
UN vote to renew peacekeeping mandate
The UN Security Council is holding a vote on 14 December to renew MINUSCA's mandate for another year. Amnesty International supports MINUSCA's presence in the Central African Republic, and recognizes that, despite the many challenges, the peacekeeping force has saved countless lives. It calls on the international community to ensure, however, that the force is adequately trained, structured, and equipped to deliver on its ambitious mandate.
"United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres should set up a thorough and timely independent investigation into what led to the killings in Alindao. This will help the UN better fulfill its mandate of protecting the Central African Republic's civilians," said Joanne Mariner.
"The report of the investigation should be made public, and its recommendations should lead to concrete action."
In addition, MINUSCA should ensure that adequate military forces with appropriate equipment carry out robust patrols in high-risk areas of the country, including Bambari, Batangafo, Alindao, Ippy, and Bangassou.
This release and the report are available at: https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/car-up-to-100-civilians-shot-and-burnt-alive-as-un-peacekeepers-leave-posts-in-alindao/
Follow Amnesty International USA on Twitter.
Amnesty International is a global movement of millions of people demanding human rights for all people - no matter who they are or where they are. We are the world's largest grassroots human rights organization.
(212) 807-8400"I guess acknowledging that you attacked a school and killed a bunch of children right off the bat might spoil POTUS's splendid little war."
US President Donald Trump baselessly claimed over the weekend that Iran was behind the strike on an Iranian elementary school that killed more than 160 people—mostly young girls—during the first wave of US-Israeli bombings, even as evidence mounted that an American missile attack caused the devastation.
A reporter aboard Air Force One asked Trump straightforwardly whether the US bombed "a girls' elementary school in southern Iran on the first day of the war," to which the president responded: "No. In my opinion, based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran."
The reporter then asked Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth, standing right behind the president, whether the claim was true, and he declined to endorse it, saying, "We're certainly investigating."
JUST NOW: “It was done by Iran.”🤔
Despite NYT analysis that a 🇺🇸 bomb killed those Iranian school girls, Trump insists Iran did it. (Hegseth hesitated to agree)
Color us unconvinced.
(H/T @Acyn) pic.twitter.com/jgPkudSm2h
— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) March 7, 2026
Michael Waltz, the US ambassador to the United Nations, similarly declined to back Trump's claim, telling ABC's Martha Raddatz on Sunday that he would "leave that to the investigators to determine."
"I can tell you, as a veteran, in no uncertain terms, the United States does everything it can to avoid civilian casualties," Waltz added. "Sometimes, of course, tragic mistakes occur."
The administration officials' comments on the massacre, which Human Rights Watch said should be investigated as a possible war crime, came as video footage, satellite images, and other evidence further indicated it was likely US forces who carried out the February 28 attack on the Iranian school in Minab. Reuters reported last week that, contrary to Trump's claim, US military investigators believe American forces were likely behind the school bombing.
"I guess acknowledging that you attacked a school and killed a bunch of children right off the bat might spoil POTUS's splendid little war," Brian Finucane, a former US State Department lawyer, wrote on social media.
The new video footage, which shows a Tomahawk missile hitting an Iranian military facility near the school, was released by the Iranian outlet Mehr News and analyzed by Bellingcat.
"The US is the only participant in the war that is known to have Tomahawk missiles," Bellingcat noted. "Israel is not known to have Tomahawk missiles."
New video footage shows a US Tomahawk missile hitting an IRGC facility in Minab, Iran, on Feb 28, showing for the first time that the US struck the area. The footage also shows smoke already rising from the vicinity of the girls’ school, where 175 people were reportedly killed. pic.twitter.com/4jBXrNcRJO
— Trevor Ball (@Easybakeovensz) March 8, 2026
The New York Times, which independently verified the video, observed that "as the camera pans to the right, large plumes of dust and smoke are already billowing from the area around the elementary school, suggesting that it had been struck shortly before the strike on the naval base."
"This is supported by a timeline of the strikes assembled by the Times that shows the school was hit around the time as the base," the newspaper added. "The Times has identified the weapon seen in the new video as a Tomahawk cruise missile, a weapon that neither the Israeli military nor the Iranian military has. Dozens of Tomahawks have been launched by US Navy warships into Iran since February 28, when the US-Israeli attack on Iran began."
A group of six Democratic US senators said in a joint statement late Sunday that they are "horrified" by the latest reports on the school strike, noting that "independent analysis credibly suggests the strike may have been conducted by US forces, which if true, would make it one of the worst cases of civilian casualties in decades of American military action in the Middle East."
"The killing of school children is appalling and unacceptable under any circumstance," said Sens. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, Patty Murray of Washington, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Mark Warner of Virginia, and Chris Coons of Delaware. "This incident is particularly concerning in light of Secretary Hegseth’s openly cavalier approach to the use of force, including his statement that US strikes in Iran wouldn’t be bound by ‘stupid rules of engagement,’ in his words."
"Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances," vowed the Senate Minority Leader.
The extremes to which the Republican Party will go to sway the 2026 elections in their favor was highlighted again on Sunday after US President Donald Trump said he will sign no other legislation into law this year until the SAVE Act—a bill that would deeply erode voting rights and threatens ballot access for tens of millions of Americans—is passed by Congress.
"It must be done immediately," Trump declared in a characteristically unhinged social media post on Sunday, referring to the SAVE Act, versions of which have passed the Republican-controlled House but so far stalled in the Senate.
"It supersedes everything else. MUST GO TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE," Trump continued in an all-caps tantrum. "I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed, AND NOT THE WATERED DOWN VERSION - GO FOR THE GOLD: MUST SHOW VOTER I.D. & PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP: NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS EXCEPT FOR MILITARY - ILLNESS, DISABILITY, TRAVEL: NO MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS: NO TRANSGENDER MUTILIZATION FOR CHILDREN! DO NOT FAIL!!!"
Voting rights experts and Democratic lawmakers have denounced the SAVE Act as a dangerous threat to millions of eligible voters, calling it a clear effort by the GOP to tip the scales in their favor by depressing voter turnout in 2026 and beyond.
"In every form, the SAVE Act would require American citizens to show documents like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research shows that more than 21 million Americans lack ready access to those documents," warned Eliza Sweren-Becker and Owen Bacskai of the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates for robust voting rights, in a blog post last week.
"Roughly half of Americans don’t even have a passport," Sweren-Becker and Bacskai continued. "Millions lack access to a paper copy of their birth certificate. The SAVE Act would disenfranchise Americans of all ages and races, but younger voters and voters of color would suffer disproportionately. Likewise, millions of women whose married names aren’t on their birth certificates or passports would face extra steps just to make their voices heard."
In response to Trump's threat on Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) characterized the SAVE Act as "Jim Crow 2.0" as he condemned the president and his GOP allies.
"If Trump is saying he won’t sign any bills until the SAVE Act is passed, then so be it: there will be total gridlock in the Senate," said Schumer. "Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances."
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, said Sunday that the SAVE Act—which Trump said last week must be passed "at the expense of everything else"—is not a voter ID bill, but rather "voter suppression" legislation bill masquerading as a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
"If it was a voter ID bill, it would provide people with the proper IDs to vote, with no barriers — but it doesn’t," noted D'Arrigo. "The voter fraud rate is .0001%, and this bill would potentially prevent up to 69 million women, 40 million who don’t have access to their birth certificate, and 140 million without a passport, from voting."
"The American people don't want this war," said Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut. "Virtually nothing good happened from sending thousands of Americans to die in Iraq in the 2000s and if we don't learn that lesson then shame on every single one of us."
Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut offered immediate push back on Sunday when CNN anchorJake Tapper said a vote against an expected $50 billion request by President Donald Trump to fund his attack on Iran would be seen as "voting against the troops."
"Oh come on," said Murphy, incredulous. "I mean, the American people don't want this war. They don't want this war—they have seen what happens when American troops go into places like Iraq, places like Afghanistan. Ultimately we get a lot of people killed, we waste a lot of dollars. The one thing the people of the American people have been clear about is that they don't want the United States dragged into another long-term war in the Middle East."
Polling has shown that Murphy is correct, with only one out of four people—a mere 25%—in a Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week showing any kind of support for Trump's war of choice against Iran.
"If you support the troops," said Murphy, "then you should vote against this war so that we get our troops out of harm's way. Virtually nothing good happened from sending thousands of Americans to die in Iraq in the 2000s and if we don't learn that lesson then shame on every single one of us."
TAPPER: "You have said you're a 'hell no' on funding the war. We have seen this movie before. We know that vote will be cast as - especially if you run for higher office - you voting against the troops."
MURPHY: "Oh come on I mean, the American people don't want this war." pic.twitter.com/lTB5isM8I7
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) March 8, 2026
Trump has yet to make the formal request for the $50 billion in funding, but estimates for just one week of fighting have put the cost of the military operations thus far at something close to $1billion per day.
Murphy has said he is a "hell no" on any additional funding and other members of the Democratic caucus have echoed that message.
"Trump is already spending $1 BILLION PER DAY on his illegal regime change war of choice in Iran," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Thursday. "Now, he's going to ask Congress to give him up to $50 BILLION MORE. My vote: hell NO."
"We could be lowering the cost of health care, but instead Trump is spending BILLIONS on his reckless war with Iran," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on Thursday. "Trump is blowing YOUR taxpayer dollars on war and causing gas prices to spike while he's at it."