|
January 9, 2003 Claims
of Torture and Intimidation Against Witnesses to Afghan War Crimes The United Nations is investigating claims that General Abdul Rashid Dostum, an Afghan warlord and a key US ally during the war against the Taliban, tortured witnesses to prevent them from testifying against him in a war crimes inquiry. The inquiry relates to charges that several hundred Taliban fighters who were taken prisoner by General Dostum in November 2001 died from suffocation after being transported in airless metal containers. The allegations were raised after the discovery of a mass grave near Dasht-i-Leili in January, which appeared to contain close to a thousand bodies, according to a UN estimate based on eyewitness accounts. The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, (UNAMA), has begun a preliminary investigation into the mass grave, including specialist forensic research on the site. However, the UNAMA spokesman in Kabul, Manoel de Almeida e Silva, admitted recently that a full investigation would be difficult without a witness protection program, since it was hard to guarantee security in a "weak state with weak institutions that can’t enforce law and order." Recent allegations of torture and disappearance of witnesses to the alleged mass killings emphasize this point. On November 14, 2002, Almeida e Silva expressed his concern over "credible reports of very serious incidents relating to the prospect of an investigation into the mass graves of Dasht-i-Leili". He said these included "harassment, arbitrary detention, torture and extrajudicial execution of Afghans who are believed to be in possession of information relating to the circumstances surrounding Dasht-i-Leili." In an interview conducted by the Crimes of War Project, Ron Miller, advisor to the War Crimes Office of the US State Department stated that "we are interested in what is going on, we have made visits to Afghanistan and we have been engaging the authorities on this matter." However, when asked about the possibility of having a US led investigation into allegations of war crimes he responded, "This office would not be directly involved in the investigation, it would be Afghan led with some international support." Signs of War Crimes In January 2001, following leads from Taliban fighters who had been captured by General Dostum, two investigators from Boston based Physicians for Human Rights discovered signs of a mass grave in the area of Dasht-e Leili in the northern region of Afghanistan. Bulldozer tracks, scraps of clothing, and human bones provided evidence for the alleged killing of close to 1,000 Taliban prisoners. Prisoners who survived told horror stories of how Taliban soldiers died a long and painful death following their surrender at Kunduz in November 2001. The negotiated surrender of several thousand Taliban and al-Qaeda soldiers to the US supported Northern Alliance included a promise that Afghan fighters who gave themselves up would be allowed to return home. However, instead the soldiers were piled into airless, metal containers and transported to Sheberghan prison. Along the way, a witness quoted in a confidential UN memo leaked to Newsweek estimates that 960 soldiers died of suffocation and dehydration. Earlier this year, Physicians for Human Rights conducted a preliminary investigation of the mass grave and found that none of the bodies showed overt trauma such a gunshot wounds or torture scars, which is consistent with the stories of death by asphyxiation. When asked about the deaths of prisoners under his control, General Dostum’s spokesperson, Faizullah Zaki, told Newsweek that some of the prisoners "were seriously injured and died en route." He also referred to the uprising at Qala Jangi a few days earlier as a justification for the harsh treatment of the prisoners. He then added: "They suffocated. Died, not killed. Nobody killed anybody." In September 2002, a few weeks after the initial Newsweek story, General Dostum issued a formal statement acknowledging that "approximately 200 prisoners died, but mostly of wounds suffered in the fighting, disease, suffocation, suicide and general weakness." The killing of these Taliban prisoners (even if indirectly by asphyxiation) is in violation of the Third Geneva Convention, which establishes guidelines for the treatment of prisoners of war. Earlier this year, according to a press release from the International Committee for the Red Cross, the US reaffirmed the applicability of the third Geneva Convention to the international armed conflict in Afghanistan and its recognition of the treaty’s importance and value. If the US supports the Geneva Conventions and is committed to promoting respect for human rights, greater attention should be given to serious violations committed by a close ally. Monitoring Allies in Proxy Wars Human rights groups and the Newsweek feature article, "The Death Convoy of Afghanistan," question the role of the United States in the massacre and clandestine burial of Taliban prisoners of war. It is known that United States troops worked closely with General Dostum and were monitoring Sheberghan prison at the time when the cargo trucks arrived with all the prisoners. When asked about the possibility that the US knew about the crime being committed, advisor Miller from the Office of War Crimes responded: "there is nothing more to say on that matter…There is no evidence to support that US troops had pre-existing knowledge of this." But the US was working closely with General Dostum and was present at the prisoners’ surrender. Does the United States bear responsibility to monitor how the war is being carried out and how prisoners of war are treated? Should the US work to hold its allies accountable to the Geneva Conventions? In a CNN interview, Leonard Rubenstein, Executive Director of Physicians for Human Rights, expressed his belief that the Pentagon’s responsibility extends beyond direct US involvement: "Because this was an alliance [and] a proxy war, we think the United States has a responsibility to assure that its allies in the field in circumstances like this don’t commit war crimes, and if there are serious allegations that they have, that there be a full investigation." In the same interview, former Ambassador for War Crimes Issues, David Scheffer, also expressed the belief that the United States has an obligation to fulfill. According to Scheffer, once news of the alleged war crimes was released, "that should have been an immediate alarm bell for investigations and fulfilling even the slightest obligations under the third Geneva convention to demonstrate that the United States was entirely on top of the obligations of its allies, as well as itself, towards prisoners of war." Speaking recently to the Crimes of War Project, the Deputy General Counsel for International Affairs at the Department of Defense, Charles Allen, emphasized that the United States is committed to ensure that its allies respect the laws of war: "We are not only are trained in the law of war, but as part of that training are imbued with the strong sense that it is necessary to report all possible suspected or alleged violations of the law of war, including those committed by or against our forces or persons allied with us. And we take that responsibility very seriously. In our relations with other countries, particularly coalition partners, we emphasize these values, and we address law of armed conflict issues with them as we link up with them, for example, on the applicable rules of engagement. We train with our coalition partners on adherence to the law of war, and we take seriously our requirement to report and investigate any alleged violations of the law of war." Despite this stated commitment to uphold the laws of war, to this date the US military has not yet conducted a full-fledged investigation into this matter. It is possible that US military personnel did not know about the massacre at the time, but now that it has been discovered, critics urge the United States to take a more active role in investigating and protecting witnesses and evidence to enforce respect for human rights and international law. As Rubenstein states in a press release from Physicians from Human Rights, "the Bush Administration is leaving security for the mass grave in the hands of the alleged perpetrator, [and] failure to secure the site sends a message that perpetrators around the world can act with impunity." With the impending threat of war in Iraq, this case can set an important precedent, especially if the US decides to enlist the help of the Kurds, notorious for their disrespect for the laws of war, in fighting the war in Iraq.
Related chapters from Crimes of War: What the Public Should Know: Mass
Graves Related Links US
Afghan ally 'tortured witnesses to his war crimes'
|