[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 125 (Friday, September 29, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10650-S10652]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PREVENTING CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN IRAQ
Mr. LEAHY. The heart wrenching reports of civilian casualties in
Iraq,
[[Page S10651]]
each one of whom represents a mother, father, son or daughter who has
been injured or killed in the crossfire or as a result of deliberate
attacks, should deeply concern us. Thousands of innocent Iraqi men,
women and children have died as a result of suicide bombs, shootings,
improvised explosive devices, or from tragic mistakes at U.S. military
checkpoints.
There is not enough time today to discuss this issue in depth. There
are too many incidents, and too many issues, from the widespread and
inappropriate use of cluster munitions in populated areas which
indiscriminately and disproportionately injure and kill civilians, to
the despicable acts of terrorism that are designed to cause the maximum
amount of suffering among innocent people.
I do want to mention that both the Department of Defense and the U.S.
Agency for International Development have programs in both Iraq and
Afghanistan to provide condolence payments or assistance to civilians
who have been injured or the families of those killed as a result of
U.S. military operations. The USAID program is named after Marla
Ruzicka who died in a car bombing in Baghdad on April 16, 2005, at the
age of 28. Marla devoted the last years of her life getting assistance
to innocent victims of the military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq,
and the organization she founded, Campaign for Innocent Victims in
Conflict, continues to work on these issues in both countries.
The Pentagon's condolence program, which is administered by Judge
Advocate General officers in the field, provides limited amounts of
compensation depending on the nature of the loss. The program has
suffered from some administrative weaknesses which I will speak about
at greater length at another time. However, it does represent an
acknowledgement by U.S. military commanders that it is neither right,
nor is it in our interest, to turn our backs on innocent people who
have been harmed as a result of our mistakes.
I also want to mention a June 6, 2006, Wall Street Journal article
entitled ``U.S. Curbs Iraqi Civilian Deaths In Checkpoint, Convoy
Incidents,'' and I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the
Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 1.)
Mr. LEAHY. This article describes laudable efforts by the Department
of Defense to reduce civilian casualties that have so often resulted
from mistakes that could have been avoided with relatively simple
precautions at checkpoints.
For years, I and others urged the Pentagon to ensure that U.S.
checkpoints were clearly marked and that soldiers at checkpoints in
Iraq are trained to warn drivers in ways that avoid confusion, not
simply with lights or by firing their guns into the air which a driver
might not see or that could cause a driver to panic. For years, we were
ignored, with horrific incident after horrific incident, whole families
gunned down, or only young children left alive after their parents in
the front seat were riddled with bullets.
Iraq is an extraordinarily dangerous place and attacks against our
troops often happen without a moment's notice. Split second decisions
are sometimes necessary. No one suggests that our troops should not be
able to defend themselves or that they should be penalized for
unavoidable mistakes. But Pentagon officials stubbornly refused to heed
the most reasonable, constructive suggestions, always insisting that
they were acting according to procedures.
Those procedures were woefully inadequate and they devalued innocent
Iraqi lives. It is inexcusable, because it was so obvious and many
casualties could have been avoided with the changes that field
commanders have recently made. All it took was caring enough to do it.
The article also mentions that the Pentagon has finally been
investigating and reporting on civilian casualties. It is not an exact
science, since sometimes a person dressed like a civilian is actually
an enemy combatant, but it is vitally important that we do our best to
determine the cause of civilian casualties that result from our
actions.
Section 1223 of H.R. 1815, the fiscal year 2006 Defense Authorization
Act, requires a report on the Pentagon's procedures for recording
civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. That report, a copy of
which I only just received, is an embarrassment. It totals just two
pages and it makes clear that the Pentagon does very little to
determine the cause of civilian casualties or to keep a record of
civilian victims.
No one expects our troops to be forensic investigators, but we do
expect the Pentagon to take this issue seriously and to do its best to
document and maintain a record of civilian casualties. By doing so we
can make clear that we value innocent lives, we are better able to know
when and how to assist the families of those injured or killed, and we
can make changes to procedures to prevent such mistakes in the future.
[From the Wall Street Journal, June 6, 2006]
U.S. Curbs Iraqi Civilian Deaths In Checkpoint, Convoy Incidents
(By Greg Jaffe)
Washington--The U.S. military has cut the number of Iraqi
civilians killed at U.S. checkpoints or shot by U.S. convoys
to about one a week today from about seven a week in July,
according to U.S. defense officials in Iraq.
The reduction in civilian casualties shows that months
before the killing of 24 Iraqis in the western Iraqi town of
Haditha came to light, the military was pushing to reduce the
number of Iraqi civilians killed or wounded at the hands of
U.S. forces. The drop since July, however, suggests that
hundreds of Iraqi civilians were killed at U.S. checkpoints
or on Iraqi highways during the first two years of the war.
The shooting of civilians in such instances has angered
Iraqi civilians and political leaders. It also likely has
helped fuel the insurgency. Last week, Iraqi Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki lashed out at U.S. forces for showing ``no
respect for citizens, smashing civilian cars and killing on a
suspicion or a hunch.'' Mr. Maliki's comments were driven in
part by the news that U.S. military investigators had opened
a pair of formal probes into the mid-November incident in
Haditha in which Marines allegedly killed two dozen unarmed
civilians, including several women and children without
provocation. Evidence indicates that the Marines tried to
blame the incident on a roadside bomb and an ambush from
insurgents, say lawmakers and U.S. officials familiar with
the probes.
In contrast with the Haditha incident, where the killings
are alleged to be intentional, checkpoint and convoy
shootings are almost always the result of mistakes in which
confused or disoriented Iraqi drivers don't respond to
initial warnings from U.S. forces to slow down or back off,
U.S. officials say. U.S. forces, worried about their own
security and that of their colleagues, must make split-second
decisions to fire warning shots or open fire.
Such shooting incidents--or escalation-of-force incidents,
as military officials call them--result in civilian
casualties in 12% of the cases. The numbers don't include
civilians killed in raids resulting from bad intelligence or
Iraqis killed in the crossfire of battles with insurgents.
Until July 2005, the U.S. military didn't track civilian
casualties in these incidents, senior military officials say.
In December, President Bush estimated that about 30,000 Iraqi
civilians had been killed since the war started. His
spokesman, however, said the estimate was based on media
reports and not a formal military count.
The military's failure to track such killings has drawn
criticism from human-rights experts. ``If you don't keep
track of the civilians you harm, you don't know how you are
doing,'' said Sarah Sewall, director of the Carr Center for-
Human Rights Policy at Harvard University. She praised the
military for paying more attention to the problem but
lamented that it took so long.
Since arriving in Iraq as the No.2 military official in
January, Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli has made reducing Iraqi
civilian casualties in escalation-of-force incidents a bigger
priority. Gen. Chiarelli has been critical of the U.S.
military for using force too quickly.
``It is something he has been pushing since we got into
theater, and we have been making good progress,'' said a
military officer familiar with the general's efforts. Some of
the decrease has been the result of changes in tactics and
training. Military commanders have been ordered to ensure
that their checkpoints all use the same signs and setup to
minimize confusion.
U.S. soldiers have been given new equipment such as sirens
and green lasers that allow them to get Iraqi drivers'
attention without firing warning shots. Soldiers also have
been schooled in new ways of spotting suicide bombers.
In April, Gen. Chiarelli directed his subordinate
commanders to investigate all escalation-of-force incidents
that result in an Iraqi being seriously wounded or killed or
cause more than $10,000 in property damage. The results must
be sent to Gen. Chiarelli's Baghdad headquarters. Before his
order, such incidents weren't always investigated.
In recent months, senior military officials have focused
less on finding insurgents and
[[Page S10652]]
more on keeping soldiers in one place, where they provide
daily security for the population. ``They are getting into
small towns more and staying for a longer period of time.
That cuts down on mistakes,'' says Andrew Krepinevich,
executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessments, a Washington defense think tank.
____________________