British Lay the Ground for Major Troop Withdrawals from Iraq

In a move, apparently designed create the perceptions necessary for a major troop withdrawals of British troops, a senior commander has been talking to the media about improvements in Basra. With the British army struggling to maintain the capabilities to fight effectively in two medium scale campaigns the need to withdraw more troops from Iraq is pressing. [BBC]

Remembering Iraq on World Refugee Day

On June 20th it is World Refugee Day [UNHCR]. Amnesty International are calling for notice to be given to the fact that there are now almost two million Iraqi refugees, fleeing murder, kidnap, torture and ill treatment, the majority of which are now living in Syria and Jordan. [Amnesty International]

They point out that international assistance for Iraqi refugees is desperately needed, due to inadequate contributions to UN agencies working with refugees. In May this year, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) made a fresh appeal for increased funding for its Iraq work. Citing a shortfall of $127 million for assistance programmes, they raised the prospect of essential health and food assistance programs being reduced, which in turn may force many Iraqis into further destitution and increase the likelihood of higher malnutrition rates and increased child labour [UNHCR].

To end on a brighter note, Iraqi oud (lute) player Naseer Shamma has raised more than US$ 24,000 for UNHCR's Iraqi refugee programme with a concert at the Damascus Opera House [UNHCR].

ICRC Reports on the Ongoing Fighting in Sadr City

ICRC 23.04.08

“Almost a month after the outbreak of armed clashes pitting Coalition and Iraqi forces against the Mehdi Army, the situation in Sadr City, in eastern Baghdad, is putting further strain on the civilian population,” says Patrick Youssef, head of the sub-delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Baghdad. “The clashes that began on 25 March did not let up until they eased briefly on 12 April. However, the lull in the fighting did not give the population enough time to stock up on food and water or to seek appropriate medical care.”

Al Jamila market, one of the largest in Sadr City, was entirely destroyed by the fighting. The market used to provide enough supplies to cover everyday needs in Sadr City. People are now short of food, especially as prices of fresh vegetables have increased considerably.

According to ICRC staff in Baghdad, who are in permanent contact with hospitals and health officials, several hospitals have exhausted their stocks of medical supplies as a result of the ongoing fighting.

The ICRC has had difficulty transporting food and medicines where they are needed because of the ongoing fighting.

The US Surge Revisited: What's the evidence for decreased casualties after one year of troop deployment?

In September last year we published a critique of the available data on the impact of the US 'surge' in Iraq. Comparing the figures for US coalition casualties with the data on attacks presented by General Petraeus to the US congress it was evident that things just did not add up. At that stage, in mid September 2007, US casualties had not declined and there was no evidence of a decrease in civilian casualties either. But now, after more than a full year of data has become available on the 'surge' (Feb 2007 - Mar 2008) what is the evidence for an improvement in the casualty burden?

Our updated graph of US Coalition fatalities (non-Iraqi troops only) shows that from mid September 2007 onwards daily fatalities have, in fact, markedly declined. In February 2008 an average of 1.03 deaths occurred per day compared to 3.04 per day in Feb 2007. For March, these figures were 1.26 and 2.65 respectively. This does suggest that conflict levels have fallen substantially. However, it should be noted that some of the decrease in foreign troop deaths may have been due to an increase in the number of active Iraqi units fighting within the US Coalition.

Figures for civilian fatalities are much harder to assess due to the substantial challenges faced in collecting reliable data. We are planning to publish a detailed review of this soon. However, the available trend data does indicate a significant fall. Good news it appears. A major remaining policy issue of course is to what extent the 'US surge' can account for these apparent improvements. The role of the Mahdi Army cease fire and the 'Anbar Awakening' are widely acknowledged to have been critical factors. Future political developments may reveal to what extent these have been responsible.

Data updated 21.04.08

British ground forces join fighting in Basra as ICRC voice concerns over impact on civilians

British ground forces have joined the fighting in Basra to bolster the offensive by Iraqi government forces against the Mehdi Army. [BBC]

On the same day the International Committe of the Red Cross is concerned about the humanitarian impact of continued fighting in Basra and Baghdad. Its staff in the two cities say that many people are running out of food and water and most shops are reported to be closed. The supply of electricity in Basra and in parts of Baghdad is intermittent or has been cut and hospitals are running out of medical stocks, food and fuel.

Patients' families are reportedly bringing their own small generators to some hospitals in the capital to ensure sufficient power supplies during treatment. Many medical workers are unable to reach hospitals because of the continuing fighting. [ICRC]

A spokesman for the British army, Maj Holloway, said that the action against militiamen in the Basra area was a "complicated operation". "I think we need to be prepared for this to run for a while", he said. [BBC]

5 Years and Counting

Its five years since the invasion of Iraq began. Over the next two weeks we will be posting an updated analysis of data on civilian casualties, the impact of the the US 'surge' and our regular updates on British casualties, both there and in Afghanistan.

In the meantime, a piece in the Guardian provides a good overview of what, perhaps, is the most burning question of today:

What is the real death toll in Iraq?
The Americans learned one lesson from Vietnam: don't count the civilian dead. As a result, no one knows how many Iraqis have been killed in the five years since the invasion. Estimates put the toll at between 100,000 and one million, and now a bitter war of numbers is raging.

ICRC Report Refocuses Attention on Humanitarian Crisis in Iraq

Geneva (ICRC) – Five years after the outbreak of the war in Iraq, the humanitarian situation in most of the country is among the most critical in the world, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said in a report issued today.

Because of the conflict, millions of Iraqis have insufficient access to clean water, sanitation and health care. The current crisis is exacerbated by the lasting effects of previous armed conflicts and years of sanctions.

“Better security in some parts of Iraq must not distract attention from the continuing plight of millions of people who have essentially been left to their own devices,” said Béatrice Mégevand Roggo, the ICRC’s head of operations for the Middle East and North Africa. “Among them are displaced and refugee families, and those who have returned to their homes, children, elderly people, disabled people, households headed by women and families of detainees.”

Although security has improved in some parts of the country, Iraqis continue to be killed or injured on a daily basis in fighting and attacks. Civilians are often deliberately targeted, in complete disregard for the rules of international humanitarian law. In many families there is at least one person who is sick, injured, missing or detained, or who has been forced to flee from home and live far away.

Health care, water and sanitation services and electricity supplies remain largely inadequate. Hospitals lack qualified staff and basic drugs, and therefore struggle to provide suitable care for the injured. Many health-care facilities have not been properly maintained, and the care they provide is often too expensive for ordinary Iraqis.

The water supply has continued to deteriorate over the past year. Millions of people have been forced to rely on insufficient supplies of poor-quality water as water and sewage systems suffer from a lack of maintenance and a shortage of engineers.

The full report (pdf) can be downloaded here

Turkish Invasion of Northern Iraq: Concerns Over Casualties and Destabilisation

Turkish military action into Northern Iraq has raised fears of a sharp increase in casualties in this part of Iraq that had been previously relatively peaceful.

The Independent

A new crisis has exploded in Iraq after Turkish troops, supported by attack planes and Cobra helicopters, yesterday launched a major ground offensive into Iraqi Kurdistan.

BBC Online

Iraq's foreign minister has warned that any escalation of Turkey's operation against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq could destabilise the region. Hoshyar Zebari told the BBC Iraq did not approve the "limited" raid into a remote, uninhabited area, and said it should end "as soon as possible".

Both Turkey and the rebels have given conflicting casualty figures...

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon expressed concern about the situation. "The protection of civilian life on both sides of the border remains the paramount concern," he said.

Rehabilitation under fire: Health care in Iraq 2003-2007

A new report by Medact, a global health charity, is being launched today at a meeting at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

The report focuses on the failure of the occupying forces and their governments to protect health and help rebuild a health system based on primary health care principles. Researched and written by Iraqi, UK and US health professionals and academics, it assesses the current state of the health system: the impact of insecurity on the workforce and the chronic lack of supplies, medicines and equipment. It also outlines the urgent measures needed to improve health and health services and contains a special focus on the neglected area of mental health care.

The full report can be downloaded here

New Government of Iraq Mortality Survey Published

Results from the Iraq Family Health Survey (IFHS) have just been published online by the high profile New England Journal of Medicine. The survey was designed as a nationally representative survey of 9345 households and collected information on deaths in the household since June 2001. The paper has been authored by a writing committee composed mainly of members of the Iraqi Government, together with the World Health Organisation.

The results indicate that from January 2002 to June 2006 there were 1325 reported deaths in the households included in the survey. They calculated that this mortality rate translates into an estimate of 151,000 (95% uncertainty range, 104,000 to 223,000) violent deaths from March 2003 to June 2006.

The authors conclude that violence is a leading cause of death for Iraqi adults and was the main cause of death in men between the ages of 15 and 59 years during the first 3 years after the 2003 invasion.

The results are substantially lower than other recent survey-based estimates. Nonetheless, the authors conclude that their data points to a massive death toll which is only one of the health and human consequences of an ongoing humanitarian crisis.

No doubt there will be a robust debate over the next few weeks over the comparative reliability of the different published survey results. One immediate observation regarding this latest survey is that the reported death rates change little over the years 2003 to 2006 - while the security situation over this perid was in fact subject to great variation. Slightly odd. Will continue to post on the expected debate as it happens.

Iraqi Casualty Monitor: Tracking the cost of war

Updated: 20th December
Casualty data analysed to: November 2007
Duration of war: 4 years, 8 months
Estimates of violent civilian deaths:
78,280 - 95,817
Estimates of total excess Iraqi deaths:
392,979 - 1,131,831
Total Iraqi casualties: no data available

The extent of the death toll resulting from the US-led invasion of Iraq and the following occupation and insurgency, continues to be the subject of debate. Ever since 2003, scientific discussion, heated debate in the media, and political spin and manipulation, have all been prominent as various stakeholders have strived to define a figure for the human cost to the Iraqi people.

As claims mount about the success of the US military surge in Iraq it appears that there is real evidence that the Iraqi casualty rate may be falling. Welcome news indeed. To try and gauge what the extent to which this is true we are pulling together various estimates and data sources on casualties, both civilian and combatant.

When undertaking this review it quickly becomes apparent that there is still no one definitive or completely reliable source. We have previously reviewed the limitations of the available data sources on casualties. To illustrate the range of estimates that exist we have constructed a graph of some of the publicly available estimates, drawing on the following sources:

Brookings Iraq Index
Lancet 2006 Mortality Survey
Coalition Casualty Count
Foreign Policy Estimate
Associated Press
Iraq Body Count
UNAMI

In the first graph we show monthly mortality estimates from 3 passive surveillance systems. Complete coverage of the war time period is only available from Iraq Body Count. However, it is worth noting that the estimates achieved by this project seem to be systematically lower than those from the Brooking Institute, which made adjustments to the IBC estimates using Iraqi Ministry of health data. The data from the Coalition Casualty Count is clearly presented on their site as being an incomplete underestimate of Iraqi deaths. Indeed, all three passive surveillance systems are almost certain to be seriously underestimating Iraqi mortality. This is not unexpected and is not a criticism of their methods per se. It just need to be clearly acknowledged, as it is by the Coalition Casualty Count project.

It is very important when looking at different estimates to bear in mind that they are not all trying to to measure the same thing. Iraq Body Count for example, which monitors media reports and some other sources to derive its estimate, is concerned with only civilian and police deaths and so will exclude deaths of members of the armed forces, militia, resistance, or terrorists. Other studies, such as the Lancet mortality surveys, have attempted to estimate the entire death toll including all categories of people. Therefore, even if their figures were representative of the entire population there is no reason to suppose that the estimates of deaths would be the same.

When trying to unravel the various sources of information on war deaths it is useful to distinguish between different types and causes of mortality. Death is as certain as taxation so in all populations there will be a 'normal' rate of mortality caused by causes such as chronic disease, old age, and traffic accidents. However, when an event such as a war occurs there will be additional deaths. These deaths are referred to as 'excess' mortality.

In Iraq, this excess mortality consists of deaths caused directly by war-related violence and deaths caused indirectly by the breakdown in infrastructure, law and order, and public health during and following the invasion.

Deaths are also measured in different population groups. Different methods distinguish in various, and not always consistent ways, between members of the previous Iraq military forces, occupation Forces, civilians, Iraq security forces and insurgents.

The second graph presents 4 estimates of total Iraqi fatalities. Bear in mind that these are estimates of different things. However, it is well known by epidemiologists that passive surveillance systems will tend to underestimate mortality compared to active approaches such as population surveys....

Iraqis Celebrate British Handover in Basra

The official handover of Basra province by the British occupation forces to the Iraqi authorities was marked by celebrations in Basra today. But what was achieved and how does it affect ordinary Iraqis? Why did it happen, and was this a real 'handover' anyway? Here are some comments from the mainstream media.

"Meanwhile inside the city which British troops have not entered since their withdrawal from Saddam Hussein's former palace three-and-a-half months ago, Iraqis paraded and celebrated what they called an "historic day".

The handover of control of security in the province is the biggest landmark yet on the path to full British withdrawal from Iraq. It comes at a time when extra forces may be needed in Afghanistan." [ITN]

“We knew we would succeed [in toppling Saddam], there was never any doubt, and we all knew that we would then enter a honeymoon period of peace-support operations which would be vital in winning hearts and minds. But when the initial fighting was over we were left with a force smaller than that which was based in Northern Ireland.” [The Times]

"The British have never sought to maintain the same level of control as the Americans did over the provinces the U.S. oversaw after the 2003 invasion. Since elections in 2005, southern Iraq has been under the domain of religious Shiite parties and their militia allies.

All of which means the British are handing over something local power players already possess.

"I don't think there is a handover. You've never had real British control of Basra or the area," said Anthony Cordesman, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "What you are really watching is a sort of nominal transfer of authority to the central government and Iraqi forces." [Associated Press]

Last week a British infantry officer wrote on the internet forum Arrse: “To anyone who thinks we have made it a better place, we haven’t.” [The Times]

Finally, this is by no means a British withdrawal. At the end of May 2007 there were 5,500 British troops in Iraq. By Christmas 2007, The MOD expects there to be around 4,500 and that this number will fall to around 2,500 from next Spring. No date has been set for withdrawal.

The British misadventure in Iraq is far from over.

Blackwater Comes in for US Government Criticism for Causing Civillian Deaths in Iraq

Of the many mercenary companies (private security contractors) operating in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of the US military effort, Blackwater USA has always had a high profile. Their reputation for agressive tactics and an all to ready tendency to resort to firepower appears to now be catching up with them. On September 16th the company was involved in a high profile incident in which at least 11 Iraqis were killed. The New York times is now reporting briefings against the company from both Bush administration and industry officials.

"The American security contractor Blackwater USA has been involved in a far higher rate of shootings while guarding American diplomats in Iraq than other security firms providing similar services to the State Department..."

And, in a more general and welcome move, which may go some way towards decreasing the rate of civillian casualties,

"On Tuesday night, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England sent a three-page memorandum to senior Defense Department officials and top commanders around the world ordering them to ensure that contractors in the field were operating under rules of engagement consistent with the military’s."

Red Cross Assessment Finds Iraq Situation Very Different from General Petraeus

A new assessment from the International Committee of the Red Cross emphasises that the humanitarian situation in Iraq is continuing to deteriorate. It appears to be completely at odds with the up beat message from General Petraeus on the success of the US surge in reducing violence. Béatrice Mégevand-Roggo writes from Geneva after returning from a recent field visit.

"The humanitarian crisis is continuing to spread, deepen and worsen. Security has deteriorated hugely over the last year, especially in recent months. The humanitarian situation is desperate.

On my mission to Iraq it struck me to what extent the main concerns for people in Iraq are security and survival. The danger is insidious. Violence can strike anywhere, anytime, anyhow, while you’re shopping or while you’re taking your children to school. Not only in Baghdad but in many other towns and several regions. You can see that life in Iraq is permeated by a deep-seated fear of what might happen next.

I think that’s what’s hardest for people there to live with. It’s even worse than the difficulties of everyday life – shortages of water and electricity, difficulty buying food because of the danger of leaving the house, limited access to medical care, etc. The hospitals are functioning badly and are swamped, very few qualified staff have stayed in Iraq, those health centres that haven’t closed down are only working intermittently, and even then they’re not functioning as they should be. Every aspect of life has become a strain. All this is forcing more and people to flee. They head for other parts of Iraq, or try to escape to other countries.

It’s very difficult to say how many people are affected by the conflict, or to give the number of displaced persons and refugees. What is certain is that several million people have emigrated and several hundred thousand have become internally displaced persons. The authorities have announced that they are going to close the border with Syria, which would make the situation even harder for people who want to leave the country."

US Mercenary Company Banned from Iraq after Killing Civilians

From BBC online

"Iraq has cancelled the licence of the private security firm, Blackwater USA, after it was involved in a gunfight in which at least eight civilians died.

The Iraqi interior ministry said the contractor, based in North Carolina, was now banned from operating in Iraq. The Blackwater workers, who were contracted by the US state department, apparently opened fire after coming under attack in Baghdad on Sunday. Thousands of private security guards are employed in lawless Iraq. They are often heavily armed, but critics say some are not properly trained and are not accountable except to their employers.

The interior ministry's director of operations, Maj Gen Abdul Karim Khalaf, said authorities would prosecute any foreign contractors found to have used excessive force. "We have opened a criminal investigation against the group who committed the crime," he told the AFP news agency. All Blackwater personnel have been told to leave Iraq immediately, with the exception of the men involved in the incident on Sunday..."

See also: Congress weighs rules for private security firms in Iraq

Iraq Poll Indicates 1.2 Million War Deaths

A household survey, conducted in Iraq by market research agency ORB, has indicated that about 1.2 million deaths have occurred from war-related causes since 2003. Like the previous Lancet surveys, these figures represent an estimate of total deaths, not just civilians.

The convergence between this survey result and a projection estimate calculated by Just Foreign Policy is striking. The Just Foreign Policy estimate is derived by extrapolation from the Lancet 2006 mortality survey (pdf) combined with trends in media reported fatalities, and today stands at 1,044,607. Taking into account the probable size of the survey confidence interval, the results are very similar. The poll also found that 48% of war-related deaths had been the result of gunfire, a figure very consistent with the 2006 Lancet survey.

However, despite the convergence of the two results there are, in our opinion, a few issues with the survey as it is reported:

• The methods employed in the survey are not described in the detail that would be expected for a scientific publication. It is therefore not easy to understand, for example, how they constructed their sampling plan and subsequently applied sample weighting during analysis.
• Confidence intervals (a measure of statistical certainty) for the reported percentages are not given.
  
• The number of injuries recorded is actually less than the number of deaths (1.1 vs. 1.2 million . This result is not what would be normally expected unless the respondents are only reporting very serious injuries. The definitions used in the survey are not made clear.
• Karbala, Al Anbar and Irbil were not included in the survey for security and administrative reasons.

Therefore, while the results are of the expected order of magnitude and very consistent with previous surveys, a degree of caution is required in interpreting their significance. However, in any event, the existence of a humanitarian catastrophe in Iraq remains irrefutable.

Iraq, the US Surge, and Statistics

When General David Petraeus presented his report (pdf) to the US and the world this week, he made important claims about a decrease in violence and casualties. The first key figure from his presentation is reproduced below. He claims that firstly, there is a decreasing rate of attacks on US troops and related targets, and secondly, there is a decreasing rate of civilian casualties associated with the surge. But how reliable are the data used to make the claims and how well does it compare to other available sources of information?

To assess the first claim we looked at the data for US casualties compiled by Iraq Coalition Casualty Count. The two images below are graphs we produced of their fatality and wounded monitoring tables for the period September 2006 - 2007 and July 2006-2007 respectively. It can be seen that the pattern is somewhat different than the graphs of attack rates shown above by Petraeus. While the graph of US coalition fatalities does show a marked decline between May and July this does not correspond to the period of the surge. The 'surge' may be considered as either comprising February 2007 onwards, or, comprising the period of the surge offensives, which Petraeus presents as occurring from 16 June onwards. In either event, by August the downwards trend has stopped and fatality rates are no longer declining. Current fatality rates during September this year are 2.8 deaths/day, higher than they were in September 2006 when the death rate stood at 2.6/day.

Examining the available data for injuries reveals a similarly inconclusive picture. Between July 2006 and July 2007 (months for which complete data are available) it is impossible to identify any period of decline that relates to the surge.

It should also be noted that as the US were surging in Bagdhad, the British were themselves experiencing a dramatic upsurge in attacks and casualties in the south of Iraq, the two events being perhaps more closely linked than either government may wish to acknowledge.

In conclusion, we have to say that there is no evidence, as yet, to suggest a decline in US casualties relating to the surge. The decline in attacks reported by Petraeus is therefore puzzling. Assuming that the decline shown by his attack rate is accurate, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that attacks by the Iraqi resistance against US forces are becoming more effective and deadly. This is no good news for the US.

The second major claim made in the presentation by Petraeus is that civilian casualties have declined.

"Civilian deaths of all categories, less natural causes, have also declined considerably, by over 45% Iraq-wide since the height of the sectarian violence in December."

If true, this is obviously an encouraging statement for all concerned, but the first problem is the source of the data that he cites. There are many serious deficiencies in 'host and coalition' reporting capacity in this area. Indeed, the Iraqi government recently refused to share its figures with the UN after the UN produced much higher estimates of civilian deaths. As for the US military, its previous commander of the Iraq campaign General Tommy Franks, infamously claimed "We don't do body counts". While this assertion was wisely taken with more than a pinch of salt, the US military has no known capacity for reliably recording or reporting total civilian casualties. So why should this current and very convenient claim on a decline in casualties be taken seriously now?

Looking at other sources of data shows: some support from the media monitoring project, Iraq Body Count, for a small decline in casualties, but nothing like the 45% reduction claimed by Petraeus. Media monitoring data of Iraqi civilian and security force casualties maintained by Iraq Coalition Casualty Monitor shows no clear trend associated with the surge.

But maybe the Iraqi people should have the last say on the success or otherwise of the surge. The BBC summarise the results of a poll of Iraqis indicating that "About 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the US military "surge" of the past six months".

Update: An analysis of casulaties during the 'surge' up to February 2008 is now available

ACLU Files Lawsuit to Require Disclosure on Human Costs of War

From the American Civil Liberties Union

"NEW YORK - The American Civil Liberties Union is filing a lawsuit today against the Department of Defense (DoD), demanding that it comply with a Freedom of Information Act request to release documents regarding civilians killed by coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"There can be no more important decision in a democracy than whether to go to war, yet this administration has gone to unprecedented lengths to control the information that the American people need to make informed judgments," said Ben Wizner, an attorney in ACLU's National Security Project. "The government’s refusal to comply with the ACLU’s FOIA request unlawfully obstructs the public’s right to know the true costs of our nation’s wars."

The ACLU sought records from several components of DoD more than a year ago, but has received documents only from the Department of the Army. The Army has provided thousands of pages of documents chronicling civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those documents include new evidence of coalition forces’ involvement in civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. The nearly 10,000 pages that the ACLU is making public today include courts martial proceedings and military investigations regarding the possible wrongful death of civilians. The documents released by the ACLU today are available online in a searchable database at: www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/log2.html

"The secrecy that surrounds the human costs of these wars keeps Americans from knowing what is being done in our name," said Nasrina Bargzie, an attorney in ACLU's National Security Project. "When the exigencies of war and the Pentagon’s policies interfere with the free flow of information, we must rely on our own government’s documents and records to help Americans make informed decisions."

Since U.S. troops first set foot in Afghanistan in 2001, the Defense Department has gone to unprecedented lengths to control and suppress information about the human costs of war.

The ACLU pointed out that during both the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Defense Department has instituted numerous policies designed to control information about the human costs of war. These policies include:

• Banning photographers on U.S. military bases from covering the arrival of caskets containing the remains of U.S. soldiers killed overseas;
• Paying Iraqi journalists to write positive accounts of the U.S. war effort;
• Inviting U.S. journalists to "embed" with military units but requiring them to submit their stories for pre-publication review;
• Erasing journalists' footage of civilian deaths in Afghanistan; and
• Refusing to disclose statistics on civilian casualties.

The files made public today cast further light on the killings of Iraqi and Afghan civilians in the conflict zones."

The full press release and links can be read here

Iraqi Casualty Monitor: One million deaths since the US invasion?

Just Foreign Policy have published an estimate showing that over one million Iraqis have died as a result of the US invasion Iraq. But just how reliable is that figure?

The extent of the death toll resulting from the US-led invasion of Iraq and the following occupation and insurgency, has been the subject of ongoing debate. Ever since 2003, scientific discussion, heated debate in the media, and political spin and manipulation, have all been prominent as various stakeholders have strived to define a figure for the human cost to the Iraqi people.

Today, a regularly updated estimate for Iraqi deaths crossed the staggering threshold of one million. But how can this be known, and to what extent should this estimate be taken seriously given that it is so much higher than other, more widely publicised figures?

The first important point in looking at different estimates is to bear in mind that they are not all trying to to measure the same thing. Iraq Body Count for example, which monitors media reports to derive its estimate, is concerned with only civilian deaths and so will exclude deaths of members of the armed forces, militia, resistance, or terrorists. Other bodies have attempted to estimate the entire death toll including all categories of people. Therefore, even if their figures were representative of the entire population there is no reason to suppose that the estimates would be the same.

One would hope of course that reliable figures would be available from the official bodies of the responsible governments and military. Indeed, it is these bodies that have a responsibility to monitor casualties to ensure their compliance with international law.

• The various ministries of the Iraqi Government have come up with estimates of doubtful validity.
• The US and UK military will keep records of estimates of civilian and combatant deaths caused by there own forces. However, they often deny the existence of these records and when they are released appear to be partial and incomplete.
• The US and UK governments appear to depend on a number of sources for their public estimates, and appear to have no current figures that can be accessed.

Other sources of potential sources of information include:

• The UN has been endeavouring to maintain a database on civilian casualties but have been thwarted by the Iraqi government which has denied them access to its data. Their estimates are therefore inevitably incomplete.
• The Red Cross and Red Crescent, while decrying the burden on the civilian population has issued no public estimates of the number involved.

So, the bottom line is that it is damn difficult to reach any kind of a consensus figure for the death toll using any of the above sources. Deriving an estimate for total casualties (fatalities and injuries) would be even more challenging.1

However, these types of difficulties are not at all unique to Iraq. Similar constraints apply in many conflicts around the world and this situation has led epidemiologists and relief agencies to develop standardised methods that can be used in surveys to generate a reliable estimate of fatalities. These cluster survey techniques have been applied in two national surveys in Iraq, and the results were published in the Lancet medical journal in 2004 and October 2006.

The results from the two surveys are remarkably consistent, a fact that lends reassurance to the validity of the measurements. The trend in the mortality increase that they found in their 2006 paper is also consistent with increases in other estimates of mortality from Iraq Body Count and the US Department of Defence. This comparison is shown in the figure below, reproduced from the 2006 Lancet paper by Burnham et al.


More recently, Just Foreign Policy have utilised these different data sets by combining the data for the 2006 Lancet survey with the trend in casualties observed by Iraq Body Count. This melding of data and approaches has led to the creation of a regularly updated estimate of current Iraqi deaths shown above.

The formula used to derive the estimate is:

Just Foreign Policy estimate = (Lancet estimate as of July 2006) * ( (Current IBC Deaths) / (IBC Deaths as of July 1, 2006) )

Is this a valid estimate? Well the answer you would get would, of course, be very dependent on who answered the question. In the opinion of this blog this estimate is currently the best available for total deaths during the current Iraq war.

The real figure for Iraqi deaths may of course be somewhat different but is almost certainly of the same order of magnitude. It's a horrifying thought that two of the world's most heralded democracies have allowed a catastrophe of these dimensions to occur.

1 For further discussion of the problems in involved in tracking civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan see But who's counting?

US Troops in Iraq and Civilian Casualties - Veterans Bear Witness

The Nation has published interviews with 50 US veterans of the war in Iraq. They help reveal some of the reasons for the large numbers of civilian casualties inflicted by US forces.

Over the past several months The Nation has interviewed fifty combat veterans of the Iraq War from around the United States in an effort to investigate the effects of the four-year-old occupation on average Iraqi civilians. These combat veterans, some of whom bear deep emotional and physical scars, and many of whom have come to oppose the occupation, gave vivid, on-the-record accounts. They described a brutal side of the war rarely seen on television screens or chronicled in newspaper accounts...

...Much of the resentment toward Iraqis described to The Nation by veterans was confirmed in a report released May 4 by the Pentagon. According to the survey, conducted by the Office of the Surgeon General of the US Army Medical Command, just 47 percent of soldiers and 38 percent of marines agreed that civilians should be treated with dignity and respect. Only 55 percent of soldiers and 40 percent of marines said they would report a unit member who had killed or injured "an innocent noncombatant."

The full article can be read here