Article

2004-07-28 Afghanistan/South Asia

Doctors Without Borders pulling out of Afghanistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Rafael 2004-07-28 1:50:29 AM|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 How about Doctors Usually Without Borders?

Posted by Siper Hose 2004-07-28 3:41:26 AM|| 2004-07-28 3:41:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Yep, it's French. Not that I can't see why they're pulling out (anger at a bad investigation), but on the contrary, Coalition forces using carrot and stick is a perfectly appropriate approach.

Posted by Edward Yee 2004-07-28 3:42:03 AM|| [http://edwardyee.fanworks.net] 2004-07-28 3:42:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 maybe they should call themselves "doctors without gonads."

Posted by Jarhead 2004-07-28 9:27:51 AM|| 2004-07-28 9:27:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 How about "Doctors Headed For The Border"?

Posted by BH 2004-07-28 10:11:21 AM|| 2004-07-28 10:11:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 "Exterminators Sans Frontieres" still top 10 one liner on RB.... can't remember the post or poster.

Posted by Shipman 2004-07-28 10:52:11 AM|| 2004-07-28 10:52:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Doctors Without Borders announced Wednesday that the killings of five of its staff members and the danger of further attacks has prompted the international medical relief agency to pull out of Afghanistan.

Damn Afghans. That's gratitude for you, eh?

The relief organization also blamed the U.S.-led forces of using humanitarian aid for "political and military motives", but refused to elaborate.

Refusing to elaborate == blowing smoke out their asses.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-07-28 12:03:29 PM|| 2004-07-28 12:03:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 I dunno, Jarhead. You find them working in some rough areas sometimes. Attitudes may vary with the station, I suppose.

Posted by James 2004-07-28 12:37:58 PM|| [http://www.idontknowbut.blogspot.com] 2004-07-28 12:37:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 "Todayâs context is rendering independent humanitarian aid for the Afghan people all but impossible," the agency said in a statement."

That's right, babe. Aid should be dependent on dealing with humane humans, which the Taliban ain't. If you are affiliated with another species (Homo Neandroterrorismus), you ain't getting aid.

Politics is hell, huh?

Posted by jules 187 2004-07-28 1:22:09 PM|| 2004-07-28 1:22:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 This is too weird. They're pulling out of all of Afghanistan over killings in one place? Afghanistan is the size of New England. Doctors without gonads is right.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-07-28 2:17:39 PM|| [http://www.polipundit.com] 2004-07-28 2:17:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 As a response to those who are quick to criticize Doctors without Borders as lacking courage when the going gets rough...keep in mind that these 2500 doctors and nurses are VOLUNTEERS with no special combat training who put their lives on the line to help others in global disaster situations. These professionals are not paid to deliver health care in these Third World nations, where often they are are viewed with suspicion because they are Westerners. Consider how many lawyers are out in these hellholes trying to mediate conflicts and doing it pro bono. Or what about stock brokers or sports figures or CPA's giving up their day jobs and going in to crises areas of the world along with doctors to help with re-building of devastated homes and water supplies, etc -even useless Jimmy Carter could hammer nails into a home, so you don't need to be a carpenter to do this stuff. Ergo, these doctor civilians are doing more to ameliorate nasty eventualities in the world than other professionals.

And yes though it was started by a Frenchman and the organization is most certainly left wing, Doctors without Borders has an American chapter and all these doctors in spite of their politics give more with no great fanfare than many of us, myself included.

Just doing my bit to stick up for society's most noble profession.
http://www.idofoundation.org/cgi-bin/nposummary.cgi?NonProfitID=107

Posted by rex 2004-07-28 3:06:40 PM|| 2004-07-28 3:06:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Obviously I can't speak for every conflict they've been in, though I can take this one on its own merit. The following statement makes my point, as usual they blame us. "The relief organization also blamed the U.S.-led forces of using humanitarian aid for "political and military motives", but refused to elaborate." No one said a doc can't carry a sidearm.

Posted by Jarhead 2004-07-28 3:29:19 PM|| 2004-07-28 3:29:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 The following statement makes my point, as usual they blame us.
I'd bet anything that the "they" are the pencil pushing bureaucrats sitting in the cush-y Manhattan office, where Doctors Without Borders is located. And the blaming spin is what emanates solely from the brains and mouths of same anti-American bureaucrats.

Look I'll agree that a good percentage of the doctors in this organization are probably recent idealistic med school graduates or good dooby Christian semi-retired types who are left wing leaning in politcs, so they may not be cheerleaders for the military. But I very much doubt these doctors would make such a politicized comment.

Doctors I know -and I know plenty - are pretty apolitical or at the very least they don't wear their politics on their lab coat sleeves and this schtick sounds like some propoganda piece coming out of the mouth of a bureaucrat.

Unfortunately, it probably is a fact that most parts of Afghanistan are not safe for volunteers -especially Western Caucasian nurses and doctors- and that's why they are pulling out.

And I doubt very much that physicians doing Dr. Kildaire stuff in the Third World are going to wear side arms, Jarhead. These medics need to win the trust of the locals to allow them to go under the surgical knife or to be innoculated with giant needles[think Tetanus], so if a Rambo equipped doc comes on the scene, it is not going to be a warm and fuzzy situation.

Posted by rex 2004-07-28 4:15:10 PM|| 2004-07-28 4:15:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 No slam on the doctors intended. Just what is the no bullsh*t translation of using humanitarian aid for "political and military motives. That is code for...?

Posted by jules 187 2004-07-28 4:19:37 PM|| 2004-07-28 4:19:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 That's the point, #13. There is no translation because the message is changed by the office bureaucrats. What the doctors probably said to head office of Doctors Without Borders was something short and sweet like: "It's unsafe for us to be here at this time. We're pulling out."

The Manhattan office for Doctors without Borders says" Okay, we get the message. We'll make the official announcement." Subsequent press release from Doctors Without Borders reads:"Our doctors are leaving Afghanistan. They do not want to be used as political pawns by the US military. We have have no more details at this time."

Posted by rex 2004-07-28 4:28:31 PM|| 2004-07-28 4:28:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 rex, while it's nice to give the benefit of the doubt to these French doctors, they are FRENCH.
The story makes clear that the Taliban killed their people.
The secondary blaming of the US military was a cheap shot which is something I've learned to expect from the French these days.
Notice the language: Jules is right.
"For political and military motives?" There is a war on there still, Hello!
Our soldiers are involved in skirmishes daily with the Taliban and AQ fighters in Afghanistan.
When you get out of Kabul, it's a pretty rough place.
These French assholes are complaining because the US hasn't totally cleaned up the country and made it into Disneyland yet!
Oh, yeah--and they act as if they're the only doctors available in the world, too.
I'm sure that American charities and those of other Coalition countries have sent medical teams as well and Aghanistan even has some doctors of its own.
Au revoir, mes amis and take your whining back to Jacques Chirac.
I have no doubt that the Chirac's government "encouraged" them to come home, being a French charity, so as not to help the American cowboys with their "phony" Bush war.
The French have categorically refused across the board to help our Coalition in Iraq or Afghanistan and it seems their charities will now be no exception.

Posted by GreatestJeneration 2004-07-28 4:41:40 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-07-28 4:41:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 The French have categorically refused across the board to help our Coalition in Iraq or Afghanistan

Im quite sure thats not true of Afghanistan, though they HAVE tried to stop deployment of NATOS rapid response force.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-07-28 4:52:01 PM|| 2004-07-28 4:52:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Today, France is still largely involved in Afghanistan. Now, 540 French troops are deployed in Afghanistan as part of the International Security Assistance Force, whose duty is to maintain security at the Kabul airport and its surroundings. And France is also playing a significant role in training the new Afghan army, alongside the US and the United Kingdom, having organized three battalions of 500 men and being presently involved in the training of all Afghan officers.

With the Navy contribution to OEF, a total of 1,470 French troops are involved in the stabilization of Afghanistan. They will amount to 1,820 with the arrival of Eurocorps in Kabul during the summer.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-07-28 4:55:15 PM|| 2004-07-28 4:55:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 while it's nice to give the benefit of the doubt to these French doctors, they are FRENCH
Doctors Without Borders is an international organization with chapters throughout the world. Although it was founded in 1971 by a small group of French doctors, it is no longer "French."

The US office in Manhattan is also the same office for its UN liason staff, which may have been co-ordinating the medical contingents going into Afghanistan. Some of these doctors in Afghanistan may have been American, Cdn, British whatever. I re-read the posted CBC article and there was no mention that the doctors being pulled out of Afghanistan were French nationals.

While it is true that the major reason that caused the pull-out was the targeted murder of 5 MSF workers on June 02 when a clearly marked MSF vehicle was ambushed in the northerwestern province of Badghis, you have to realize a few things and not blame "French" doctors for being cowards.

a) this is the first time in the 30 years of MSF operating in hellholes of the world - MSF gave aid in Afghanistan when they were fighting the Russians for example- and they've worked in Rwanda, etc... and there has always been a "respect" from the local savages...but not the Taliban it would seem. People, these are VOLUNTEERS -they are not trained military medics. They have no tough expensive mercs as body guards. They are humble little idealistic good dooby docs and nurses trying to help locals. They are neither Pubies nor Rats in this endeavour. They are just medics. They have families back home who are dependent on their getting back in one piece.

b) To add insult to injury, the local gov't refused to prosecute the bad guy murderers of the 5 MSF workers. Blame the Afghan gov't for not doing the "right" thing after the murders, don't just label the docs "cowards." Who are the real cowards in this scenario? I'd say the PM of Afghanistan, whom we are throwing lots of $ at, should get better focused on this issue and ease off on his near obsessive electioneering efforts.
From the MSF website,
...Although government officials have presented MSF with credible evidence that local commanders conducted the attack., they have neither detained nor publicly called for their arrest. The lack of government response to the killings represents a failure of responsibility and an inadequate commitment to the safety of aid workers on its soil.

c) It would appear that in S. Afghanistan on May 12, 2004, coalition troops distributed pamphlets promoting the idea that locals could get medical help from MSF in exchange for tips on Taliban. Well that's not really smart, because then MSF gets connected with the coalition military effort and makes MSF a target and truthfully speaking MSF is a-political and is not tied in with any particular country or political ideaology. The troops can offer $ for tips but they should not pretend that MSF's medical aid is contingent on giving troops "tips." I think this last point was shoved under the rug until the targeted killing took place in June and then when the Afghan officials sat on their hands and did nothing to apprehend the "bad guys", it was the final straw.

The Afghans are perfectly capable of protecting neutral medics. And if they choose not to and let the Taliban murder medics, too bad, so sad, but it's them who lose because of their lack of courage to stand up to the Taliban. It's not like they don't have plenty of coalition troops back up. Duh. These Afghan Muslims need to get off their giant collective butts and start helping others so as to help themselves. Sheesh.

Posted by rex 2004-07-28 5:41:52 PM|| 2004-07-28 5:41:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 rex: These Afghan Muslims need to get off their giant collective butts and start helping others so as to help themselves. Sheesh.

I think some of it is also that the various Afghan commanders don't necessarily like having Westerners around, even doctors. Some of these guys aren't really all that different from the Taliban, except now they know better than to openly shelter al Qaeda operatives. They can't do anything about the American presence unless they want to get into a world of hurt, so they target NGO's. And if they need medical care, well, they're commanders, aren't they? Why would they care if their people can't get access? Not their problem.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-07-28 6:05:25 PM|| [http://www.polipundit.com] 2004-07-28 6:05:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Let's see, I'm a care giver of western descent in a foreign country that's just been pulled out of the 7th century. Some of the locals would have no hesitation in killing me or my medical staff on the basis of our backgrounds. Due to their cultural mores some of them mistake kindness for weakness & others are just straight up thugs. Maybe I'll just make myself a walking target and run for the hills when trouble comes. Yep, totally logical and well thought out - that's the ticket.

Btw - carrying a sidearm in order to protect ones own life so that you may save another's isn't really being armed to the teeth rambo-style. Actually, I made that comment w/tongue in cheek in my last quote, but the more I think about it, the more plausible I think it is.

Posted by Jarhead 2004-07-28 7:27:12 PM|| 2004-07-28 7:27:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Jarhead, I often agree with you but not on this issue. I think you're feeling defensive and prickly because there was military error in judgement involved. The coalition troops did not kill the 5 medics but the lies in the May pamphlet thingy promoted the false idea that MSF folks were military operatives, causing the MSF to lose their neutrality in the eyes of the locals.
a) These are volunteer medics. They are not going to arm themselves with a side arm. They need to win trust. They must look totally non weaponized, non militarized to reach the locals living in the 7th century with modern medical care, much of which is threatening[needles] and involves pain before relief[surgery].
b) MSF has operated for 30 years in hellholes so the docs are not your run of the mill cowards. In all those years the MSF never been targeted for murder, nor have they ever been forced to pull out of a country before they completed what they set out to do. These medics have shown courage in dangerous places for 30 years and have not gone "running for the hills" at the first sign of trouble in all those 30 years.
Over the last 24 years, MSF has continued to provide health care throughout difficult periods of Afghanistanâs history, regardless of the political party or military group in power.âAfter having worked nearly without interruption alongside the most vulnerable Afghan people since 1980, it is with outrage and bitterness that we take the decision to abandon them.

c) The Afghans contributed to the MSF pull out because the Afghan gov't officials, the real cowards, made zero effort to apprehend the Taliban murderers living in their midst.
Although government officials have presented MSF with credible evidence that local commanders conducted the attack, they have neither detained nor publicly called for their arrest. The lack of government response to the killings represents a failure of responsibility and an inadequate commitment to the safety of aid workers on its soil.

d) The coalition troops should not have involved MSF docs in their pamphlet drive to get "tips" in exchange for medical care. That was stupid, pure and simple. Whatever military genius who came up with this pamphlet idea should get a reprimand a.s.a.p. The pamphlet was a lie. MSF had nothing to do with the coalition military. MSF is a-political. MSF would give medical care to Afghans whether they were informants or not.
MSF denounces the coalitionâs attempts to co-opt humanitarian aid and use it to âwin hearts and mindsâ. By doing so, providing aid is no longer seen as an impartial and neutral act, endangering the lives of humanitarian volunteers and jeopardizing the aid to people in need. Only recently, on May 12th 2004, MSF publicly condemned the distribution of leaflets by the coalition forces in southern Afghanistan in which the population was informed that providing information about the Taliban and al Qaeda was necessary if they wanted the delivery of aid to continue.

By promoting this falsehood in May, the coalition military drew targets on the backs of the medics, which was clearly stupid.
In addition, following the assassinations, a Taliban spokesperson claimed responsibility for the murders and stated later that organisations like MSF work for American interests, are therefore targets and would be at risk of further attacks. This false accusation is particularly unjustified as MSF honours the separation of aid from political motives as a founding principle...The killing of our colleagues, the governmentâs failure to arrest the culprits and the false allegations by the Taliban has regrettably made it impossible for MSF to continue providing assistance to the Afghan people.
Quotes from the MSF website.

Posted by rex 2004-07-28 7:57:26 PM|| 2004-07-28 7:57:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Back in the day, most corpsmen I knew deployed with Marine units, including myself, carried a sidearm while in the field. The instant we did so, we all knew that we were no longer "non-combatants" under the Geneva Convention and could be brought up on charges. Three hots a day and a mattress in the brig didn't sound too bad. While it wasn't the 'slims that were after us, I had no doubt that I was targeted by the bad guys and would be killed regards of my combatant status if the opportunity was there.

The MSF MDs are naive if they belive their good intentions will protect them. It seems like they are learning. Corpsmen have the protection of the nastiest warriors on the face of the earth. It is because of that fact that allows us to recover, treat and evacuate WIAs effectively. The MSF has no such protection.

Sorry guys, my view is if the host country can not or will not protect the MSF Docs, pack up and get the hell out of that shithole.

Casting some blaming the US for this is of course a cheap shot - they're french for Christ's sake! You expected more from them? But it remains that it's a bad pair of legs that let's a body get shot at while noone is willing to shoot back in your defense.

A dead doc is good to no one.

Posted by Doc8404 2004-07-28 8:19:55 PM|| 2004-07-28 8:19:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 "I think you're feeling defensive and prickly because there was military error in judgement involved."

Uh, negative, I never made mention of a military error in my previous posts, I did make mention that MSF blamed us for using them but they would not elaborate on it - so please do not put words in my mouth, I think you know me better then that.

I've never had a problem admitting military blunders as I see errors in judgement everyday, luckily they don't make the media radar most of the time. And, I strongly agree w/you that bardering medical attention for tipoffs is bad business in any case. Hopefully we learned a lesson from this, *if* that is what indeed happened. Did the military claim to have offered medical care from MSF and not from purely military medical units for tipoffs? If they involved MSF as you think - then that is stupid and goes against what we are taught in dealing w/NGOs and Civilian/Military Operations (CMO). I went through Civilian Military Operations Course some years back. The SOP on dealing w/NGOs i.e. IRC, MSF, SA, is pretty thick & strict. There's also a certain protocol about dealing w/them as well as Host Nation Support (HSN). I could go on and on but you get the picture. So, I'm not concerned about what the taliban claims or for that matter what MSF claims, my concern is that if the U.S. military did in fact implicate MSF in bardering medical care for information then somebody in the U.S. military is absolutely accountable (even if it's indirectly) for civilian deaths and should be dealt with. My other concern is that somewhere in an office in NY as you say some MSF bureacrat is pointing fingers at the mil and they may not be right. If they are right, then some commander needs to be removed for breaking U.S. mil regulations.

Posted by Jarhead 2004-07-28 8:41:07 PM|| 2004-07-28 8:41:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 One more thing, as Doc so ably put it. The onus of protection for ones self is always on that individual. If you put your trust in a fledling Afghan gov't which has its own troubles and you're stuck out in injun country - you better watch your own ass or just pack it up. Yeah, I know your trying to win hearts and minds and shit and don't want to look like a cowboy, but sometimes it takes a cowboy.

Posted by Jarhead 2004-07-28 8:45:54 PM|| 2004-07-28 8:45:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Amen, Jarhead and Doc8404 and I'm picking up a hostile attitude on the Frenchies part that they don't like, respect or try too very hard to work with the American cowboys who are protecting their asses and they're too "peace-loving" to carry guns even in a war zone.
No whine for these Frogs!

Posted by GreatestJeneration 2004-07-28 8:57:44 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-07-28 8:57:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 GJ, for me, it just comes down to simple common sense. What would I do in the same situation? Again, I'm definitely no expert on medicine or care giver ethics but seems to me if your in some fucked up shit hole in Oruzgan then you stash a piece of heat somewhere, maybe under your gown or whatever, maybe it saves your life, maybe it don't, but at least you got a chance. I see rex's point and agree w/him that if the U.S. mil did indeed employ a silly program of involving NGOs for tips then someone needs to be reprimanded. OTOH, if some MSF paper pusher is lying & making false accusations about the mil then they need to catch a bullet in the face.

Posted by Jarhead 2004-07-28 9:09:21 PM|| 2004-07-28 9:09:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Of course aid is linked to the military. Who provides most of the foreign medical aid? The US military. Who provides most of the food and development aid? The US government. Where is it directed? Areas where the Taliban had their asses kicked and are less likely to be shot at. There is no mention of MSF in any military leaflets, but what the leaflets said is true. If the Taliban comes back to the area, the development aid will stop. The food and medical aid will be severly curtailed or stop.

MSF hasn't yet figured out that they have changed sides. When the Taliban were in power, the Dhimmi's money and work benefitted them and were tolerated. Now any good MSF does goes against the Taliban interests because such acts benefit the Afghan government and coalition. Afghans and foreigners (including journalists) providing food, water projects, roads and medicine have been targeted since the fighting started in late 2001.

Posted by ed 2004-07-28 9:43:46 PM|| 2004-07-28 9:43:46 PM|| Front Page Top

01:01 Baba
00:57 Ryan
10:16 Frank G
09:03 Anonymous6406
18:15 .Abu Carver
18:11 Anonymous6189
18:10 Anonymous6189
09:03 Bulldog
05:23 Bulldog
04:16 Howard UK
03:21 Super Hose
03:18 rex
02:52 .com
02:21 rex
01:27 Super Hose
01:23 Super Hose
01:20 Super Hose
00:34 Anon-wetback
00:20 ed
00:03 Rafael
00:00 GreatestJeneration
23:52 FlameBait93268
23:50 Yank
23:40 Mike Kozlowski