More than 100 people have died in the night from 3. on the 4.In September 2009, the NATO air attack in Kunduz. The Afghanistan expert Thomas Ruttig says that Germany has drawn the wrong conclusions.
DW: Mr Ruttig, ten years ago, it came in the vicinity of Kunduz to the bloodiest German military deployment since the Second world war, with more than 100 dead. What did everything went wrong?
Thomas Ruttig: The investigation Committee of the Bundestag came to the conclusion that the then competent. German commander of the local reconstruction team hijacked an air strike on two Taliban-tank truck and disposed only on a single Afghan source has supported. These tankers that had stuck in a sandy river bed, was only of Taliban fighters surrounded. Colonel Georg Klein then instructed two of you in there for air support circle at the end of U.S. combat aircraft, bombs on these people to throw off, though there was on the part of the pilots doubt that it was actually only Taliban fighters. The commander ordered the attack despite the existence of a very thin information, and ensured that dozens of civilians have been killed.
Today we can say that it was without, If and But a war crime?
A war crime could be, if actually aware of the civilians have been attacked or unless arrangements have been made to prevent this. The Interesting thing about that Situation was that the commander of the US troops, a small number of troops, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, had changed. And that said, it is best to leave under all circumstances, air attacks, if even the slightest risk that civilians could be affected. This arrangement has not implemented the German commander. He argued that this tanker truck could be used as a driving bombs against German army camp. It was obvious that they had driven in the river bed and more came. The high number of civilian casualties came about by the fact that people from surrounding villages abzapften trucks in Afghanistan, expensive gasoline from the Tank.
We have talked about the scandal of the bombing, after the second scandal began with the attempt to cover up the events of Kunduz.
Thomas Ruttig from the Afghanistan Analysts Network
At the beginning we wanted to have the responsible Agencies of the German government with the former Minister of defence Franz Josef Jung of the Christian democratic party is not true that there have also been civilian casualties. You can understand this, but you would have the need to immediately investigate. Also, it has prevented the start. A correspondent of the news Agency Associated Press, for example, tried to go, but he was deterred. Also within the German army there was at that time commander-level evidence that there must have been civilian casualties. There is the testimony of a former General, said that it would surprise him very much if it would give in such an attack, no civilian casualties. All of this has been trying to sweep under the table. But in the end, a very extensive media coverage has ensured that this came out yet. The Bundestag Committee has been set up explained all the details. Unfortunately all of this came to the benefit of the Afghan Victims. There was a low compensation, more claims are rejected in Germany in court. At the Moment, the action of a concerned family members from Afghanistan to be running in front of the European court.
In Germany, the Illusion prevailed for many, the Bundeswehr could participate in a war and at the same time to be a pacifist to stay. Was over the Kunduz?
I believe that the Bundeswehr, and thus the Federal government has contributed to a large extent with the purpose of give the impression that you could remain a pacifist. Over many years, was denied that, in Afghanistan at all is a war, and that, therefore, the Bundeswehr is also a party in this war. I know a lot of diplomats in Kabul, who found this in Germany, used the term war-like conditions, quite ridiculous. It was, however, the mandate of the Bundeswehr to protect the other soldiers of the NATO, the new state institutions in Afghanistan and, of course, weapons to use force. In this respect, the public’s reasoning had to do relatively little to do with reality. It was not the job of the armed forces, to take over development tasks. It was always reported from the drilling Wells, or from the “Technical work in Uniform” is spoken. This was euphemistically. Although the Bundeswehr was supposed to support certain infrastructure projects and has done the part. However, reconstruction and development cooperation the task of other institutions in Germany and also in Europe.
Would you say ten years after Kunduz, that can not repeat such an incident?
I think that the discussion of Kunduz has contributed to the fact that some of the command’s thinking commander-in-chief now longer about the Situation, before he arranges for such use. You can not deny the Bundeswehr, that you learn. But we have also seen that German soldiers have caused more civilian casualties, when compared to the US troops in Afghanistan in a much lesser extent. There was yet another incident that has received less attention than the Kunduz bombing, the so-called Operation Halmasag in the year 2010. At the time, three Bundeswehr soldiers were in a battle in the province of Kunduz killed a armored vehicle of the German army was caught by an IED. In the case of the counter-offensive against the Taliban, there was almost certainly back in civilian casualties. Also, in the following investigation, this was denied. But there is research pointing in the other direction. The conclusion from the Kunduz-use and the command of Colonel Klein’s, then, is that the consequences have been for the Afghans tend to be ignored.
Thomas Ruttig is the co-founder and Deputy Director of the Think-tank Afghanistan Analysts Network.
The conversation with Oliver Pieper led.