Share

UN Confirms Afghan Mass Grave Site Disturbed

by: Heidi Vogt  |  The Associated Press

photo
(Photo: Reuters)

    Kabul, Afghanistan - The U.N. confirmed Friday that a mass grave in northern Afghanistan has been disturbed, raising the possibility that evidence supporting allegations of a massacre seven years ago may have been removed.

    The Dasht-e-Leili grave site holds as many as 2,000 bodies of Taliban prisoners who died in transit after surrendering during one of the regime's last stands in November 2001, according to a State Department report from 2002.

    McClatchy Newspapers first reported the tampering with the grave site on Thursday.

    "We can confirm that the site at Dasht-e-Leili has been disturbed," said Dan McNorton, a spokesman for the U.N. mission in Afghanistan. He declined to say how or when the site had changed, saying that details would be available in an upcoming report.

    Boston-based Physicians for Human Rights, which discovered the Dasht-e-Leili site in 2002 and has performed autopsies on some of the bodies, said its researchers found two large pits at the site, both about 100 feet by 50 feet, in July that appeared to have been dug this year.

    "These are real holes appearing to have been professionally dug, and signs of heavy machinery were observed," the group's deputy director, Susannah Sirkin, said.

    Witnesses have claimed that forces with the U.S.-allied Northern Alliance placed the prisoners in sealed cargo containers over the two-day voyage to Sheberghan Prison, suffocating them and then burying them en masse using bulldozers to move the bodies, according to the State Department report. Some Northern Alliance soldiers have said that some of their troops opened fire on the containers, killing those within.

    Representatives for northern Afghan strongman Abdul Rahim Dostum, the Northern Alliance general who is accused of overseeing the atrocities, could not be reached for comment. Dostum has previously denied the allegations.

    Physicians for Human Rights has repeatedly called for an investigation into Dasht-e-Leili, and for protection of the area as possible evidence of a massacre.

    The U.N. said it does not have the authorization or the resources to protect all the mass grave sites in Afghanistan, a country still embroiled in conflict with Taliban fighters and other insurgent groups.

    "We know of at least 84 recorded mass graves across Afghanistan," McNorton said. "Whilst we might wish to have full protection in each case of these sites, we don't have the mandate, the jurisdiction or the ability to take the steps that are necessary."

    Regional officials said it was unclear if the site had truly been tampered with.

    "We have heard different kinds of rumors about this issue, including burning some of the evidence of mass graves, so we decided to send a team of investigators down there, but we were not able to find any evidence to show the removal of any thing from Dasht-e-Leili," said Gen. Khalil Aminzada, the police chief for Zawzjan province.

    Faqir Mohammed Jowzjani, deputy governor of Jowzjan province, declined to comment on the issue over the phone, saying it was too sensitive.

    One person who came forward in 2002 as an eyewitness to the killings was murdered and his body found in the desert, while others have been tortured or gone missing, according to the State Department report.

    Physicians for Human Rights urged the Afghan government and the international community to take quick action to protect site, arguing that the U.S. in particular has a responsibility to investigate because it was allied with the accused commanders.

    "The U.S. bears responsibility whether or not U.S. officials participated in a more active way in this crime," Sirkin said.

------------    

    Associated Press writer Rahim Faiez contributed to this report.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

A couple points: 1)

A couple points: 1) Shouldn't much vaunted satellite imaging be useful in determining that a site has been disturbed, in particular in the fashion being described here? 2) Does the Physicians for Human Rights argument make sense, that the U.S. bears responsibility for investigating the massacre since it was allied with the commanders accused of committing the massacre? Is this not one more example of the fact that the international community needs to actively condemn, investigate and prosecute U.S. complicity in human rights violations, war crimes and other atrocities around the world. What is this constant reference to the U.S. as somehow capable of policing itself and changing its lawless patterns and alliances?

I understand that some of

I understand that some of this article contains implied criticism of the United States. But it also sensationalizes from the word "Taliban" which sounds like "Caliban," a monster in Shakespeare's play "The Tempest." Clearly we're in for a spate of demonization of the Taliban to justify our newest, most foolish war. "Saddam" was a good word, too, and the "Viet Cong" also sounded very bad. My understanding is that there are other major tribes in Afghanistan besides the Taliban-- people who were active in defeating the 120,000 Russian troops and who will no doubt be active in fighting us and who probably had a hand in defeating the Brits in the mid-nineteenth century. As defense secretary Robert Gates has pointed out, the 120,000 Russians (his figure) were unable to defeat the Afghans because the Afghans weren't on theirside. His clear implication was that the Afghans-- miraculously, no?-- will be on our side. Why should this be so? Are we doing the things that would capture their hearts? Are their hearts that malleable? Shouldn't we have thought such considerations through before we started rolling in the munitions? And exactly what is this new war other than to feed our addiction for same? And how did we suddenly become such moneybags? And are we good at dealing with cultures alien to our own? Clearly not. Shift into reverse before it's too late.

The reason why we are in

The reason why we are in Afganistan in the first place is because we had no evidence of bin Laden's involvement in 9/11 to give to the Taliban when we demanded bin Laden's extradition. We haven't bothered to heed the lessons of history concerning the problems and obvious pitfalls the major powers face when invading Afghanistan. The short history lesson: It doesn't work.

I live in a rural area in

I live in a rural area in Australia, where the local council uses satellite imaging to find evidence of illegal building. If they can do it, of course the Pentagon can. But truth and justice seem to be of no concern to the Pentagon or the Bush administration ... The author writes that Afghanistan is "a country still embroiled in conflict with Taliban fighters and other insurgent groups." Very few people anywhere liked or supported the Taliban, but they were in charge of Afghanistan when the country was attacked by the USA and others after 9/11. They are now in charge again of most of the country. Seems to me that the aggressors are the "insurgent groups". They have no business being in Afghanistan and will surely be defeated, just as the Persians, British, Russians and many other invaders were before them.

Jamie Doran has already

Jamie Doran has already years ago made a film about this called Afgan Massacre, Convoy of death http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8763367484184611493 It showed in various places, including Amy Goodman, Democracy now- where it is archived and I believe you can still see it. horrible- but a very good film and great reporting.