President Karzai blamed Western forces in Afghanistan for the deaths of a party of schoolchildren in eastern Afghanistan yesterday the day the UN revealed that civilian deaths in the first ten months of this year were 10 per cent higher than in the same period last year. It sounds like the same old disastrous story for Nato on the highly emotive issue of civilian casualties in Afghanistan. But examine the statistics and things look somewhat different. By UN calculations, the number of deaths that could be clearly linked to Nato forces has dropped significantly, from 38 per cent last year to 22 per cent this year. The Taliban, meanwhile, caused 68 per cent of deaths this year, three times that of Nato, and a much larger proportion than the 55 per cent they inflicted last year. The trends are linked to two things: The Nato commander Stanley McChrystals orders that Western troops should reduce their use of aerial bombs and artillery, and the huge increase in the Talibans use of roadside bombs. Western commanders are pursuing a strategy that prioritises Afghan public consent. They will be keen to decipher whether these trends have been noticed by the Afghan people and how much they resent the Taliban bombings. Set against this is the sharp upward trend in Natos death toll. Last year 295 Western soldiers died; this year it was 508. General McChrystal admitted to The Times this summer that he was prepared to endure heavier casualties because winning popular consent for his troops is, he believes, the key to defeating the Taleban. But how long will Western public opinion tolerate a rising death toll? One further trend is apparent. With significantly less use of heavy weapons and with the Taleban increasingly resorting to roadside bombs, Nato forces are killing fewer insurgents. Nato and Taliban casualties were at near parity. In 2008, the death rate was 1 Western soldier for every 6 Taliban killed. Natos response to this is that killing Taleban is less important than winning public support.(The Times)