KABUL, Afghanistan - The U.S. air campaign in Afghanistan, based on a high-tech out-of-harm's-way strategy, has produced a pattern of mistakes that has killed hundreds of Afghan civilians.
On-site reviews by The New York Times of 11 places where civilians have been killed in airstrikes suggest that American commanders have sometimes relied on mistaken information from local Afghans. Also, the military's preference for airstrikes instead of riskier ground operations has made it harder to discover when the intelligence is wrong.
The reviews, which were conducted over a six-month period, found that the Pentagon's use of overwhelming force meant that even when true military targets were found, civilians were sometimes killed. The 11 sites visited accounted for many of the principal places where Afghans and human rights groups say civilians have been killed, a number estimated at upward of 400.
Pentagon officials say their strategy has evolved in recent months away from airstrikes to the use of ground forces to hunt down remaining Taliban and al-Qaida fighters. Since then, air power has been deployed mainly in a supporting role; still, the effects have often been disastrous.
The American attack this month on villages in Oruzgan province, where airstrikes killed at least 54 civilians, has crystallized a sense of anger here that threatens to undermine the good will the United States gained by helping dislodge the Taliban. That anger is threatening to frustrate America's ability to hunt down Taliban and al-Qaida forces.
For the first time, Afghan leaders are demanding a say in how air raids are conducted. And they are hinting that if the mistakes continue, they may limit America's military activities.
"We have to be given a larger role," Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah said in an interview. "If things do not improve, well, I will certainly pray for the Americans and wish them success, but I will no longer be able to take part in this."
The Pentagon often relies on information from warlords and other Afghans whose loyalties are unclear in a country split by decades of war and tribal rivalries. That information may be incomplete or inaccurate and sometimes even deliberately misleading. As a result, the Pentagon's critics say, the military has too often struck without a full understanding of what it was attacking.
