[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 21531-21532]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 PREVENTING CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN IRAQ

  Mr. LEAHY. The heart wrenching reports of civilian casualties in 
Iraq, 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

[[Page 21532]]

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.

                               Exhibit 1

              [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 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.

                          ____________________