While the Goldstone Report occupies the UNHRC and the NGOs, the horrendous treatment of civilians in Darfur falls through the cracks.

Left Behind

Why aid for Darfur's rape survivors has all but disappeared.

Rebecca Hamilton

October 14, 2009 | 12:00 am

NYALA, Darfur -- When Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir was indicted [1] for war crimes by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in March, he responded by expelling 13 international aid agencies from Darfur and disbanding three other domestic relief groups. Khartoum claims the organizations were sharing information with the ICC, which both the groups [2] and the court [3] deny. With the void left by the ousted organizations, the United Nations has instituted emergency measures to help provide food, water, and other vital aid. But one service remains virtually decimated: support for rape survivors.

Deaths in two conflicts 1989-2009:

Democratic Republic of Congo, 5,400,000

Israel-Palestine, under 10,000.

The proportions are roughly inverted in the news footprint, with the large circle representing coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict and that of the Democratic Republic of Congo. In the first two years of the DRC conflict (1988-90), CNN covered the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (First Intifada) 53 times more often than the DRC.  

For a discussion of "Stealth Conflicts" see Virgil Hawkins, Stealth Conflicts: How the world's worst violence is Ignored (Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2008); data on the comparative media coverage, p. 109.

For a discussion of these issues, see The Casualty Footprint of Conflicts: Stealth Conflicts gives us a view of the Astronomical Differences.

A troubling study of US practices in targeted killings.  These figures of both acceptable collateral civilian damage and actual literally dwarf Israeli figures.

RAWA News, September 9, 2009

How Many Dead Non-White Civilians Does It Take for the U.S. to Notice? Putting the Kunduz Massacre in Context

In the past few years, U.S. officialdom and the mainstream press barely take note of dead Afghans unless the number exceeds thirty.

Prof. Marc W. Herold

The magic cut-off is revealed to be about 30-40. Such revealed facts tell far more than mere words. Some years ago, Human Rights Watch’s Marc Garlasco when in the employ of the Defense Intelligence Agency as an air strike targeting decision-maker would have to seek higher level clearance for U.S. air strikes if the estimated Afghan civilian deaths (“collateral damage”) exceeded thirty. (1)

In the past few years, U.S. officialdom and the mainstream press barely take note of dead Afghans unless the number exceeds thirty. On the other hand, when a Taliban’s improved explosive device kills innocent bystanders, meters of newsprint spews forth often accompanied with victims’ photos. For the U.S. press, Human Rights Watch, and U.S. citizenry clearly some bodies are worthy of mention whereas others are not. As I wrote some time ago,

For the Pentagon and its many media boosters, there are good bodies (civilians killed by “our enemy”) and bad bodies (civilians killed by “our” militaries), respectively in the western mainstream labeled accidental collateral damage and (Afghan civilians transformed by the click on a keyboard into) “militants” or “insurgents.” During the Yugoslav conflict, Human Rights Watch highlighted civilians killed by Serbs while neglecting civilians killed by non-Serbs. Today in Afghanistan, the U.S. mainstream media led by the Associated Press describes in detail the civilian victims of “Taliban” suicide attacks often even providing photographs while remaining far more circumspect about the victims of US/NATO air strikes and never printing photographs. (2)

Read more at the article.

Shavit goes over some of the most recent incidents involving NATO and US forces which come nowhere near Israel's standards for acceptable civilian casualties in targeted killings, illustrating both the "absurd" nature of the Goldstone Report's demands on Israel and the intense difficulty of avoiding civilian casualties.

UN must hold Obama to same standard as Israel

Some two weeks ago American airplanes fired on two oil tankers in northern Afghanistan. It was a German officer who'd asked the U.S. air force to attack the tankers in the middle of the night, in a populated area. The attack was successful - the two tankers were hit, went up in flames and were destroyed. But the overwhelming American-German air attack killed some 70 people. Some of those brought to hospitals were severely injured - with mutilated faces, burned hands and charred bodies. 

It is not clear to this day if most of those who burned to death were Taliban warriors, as NATO first claimed, or innocent civilians who wanted to bring home a bit of oil. One way or another, it's clear that the United States and Germany are responsible for an extremely brutal attack. Britain, France, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium and Norway also bear responsibility for the massacre as NATO members.