DOCSLIB.ORG

Body-Count.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Body-Count.Pdf Table of Contents Body Count Casualty Figures after 10 Years of the “War on Terror” Iraq Afghanistan Pakistan - 1 - First international edition (March 2015) Table of Contents Body Count Casualty Figures after 10 Years of the “War on Terror” Iraq Afghanistan Pakistan First international edition - Washington DC, Berlin, Ottawa - March 2015 translated from German by Ali Fathollah-Nejad available from the editors: Internationale Ärzte für die Verhütung des Atomkrieges / Ärzte in sozialer Verantwortung (German affiliate), Berlin PSR: Physicians for Social Responsibility (US American affiliate), Washington DC PGS: Physicians for Global Survival (Canandian affiliate), Ottawa of IPPNW (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) www.ippnw.de www.psr.org www.pgs.ca hardcopies: [email protected] (print on demand) ISBN-13: 978-3-9817315-0-7 - 2 - Table of Contents Table of Contents Preface by Dr. h.c. Hans-C. von Sponeck .......................................................................... 6 Foreword by Physicians for Social Responsibility (USA)............................................ 8 Foreword for the international edition - by IPPNW Germany................................10 Introduction .....................................................................................................................11 Executive Summary.........................................................................................................15 Iraq “Body Count” in Iraq ....................................................................................................19 Different Methods of Counting ......................................................................................... 21 Fragmentary Observations .................................................................................................. 23 Realistic Estimates through Representative Polls ........................................................... 25 The Lancet Study of 2006 ................................................................................................... 26 The WHO Study ................................................................................................................... 28 Possible Distortions in Mortality Studies ......................................................................... 28 The Question of Who Are the Perpetrators .................................................................... 28 Summary 30 Ostrich Policy ........................................................................................................................ 33 Incomplete Databases.....................................................................................................34 IBC Criticism of the Lancet Studies.................................................................................... 34 Evidence of a Gross Underestimation by IBC................................................................ 36 Lancet Study Figures Appear More Plausible ................................................................... 38 Deficient and One-Sided Reporting .................................................................................. 39 Examples of Large Gaps ..................................................................................................... 40 “The Numbers War”: On the Dispute Surrounding the Credibility of the Lancet Studies .........................43 The Lancet study..................................................................................................................... 43 Spontaneous Rejection......................................................................................................... 44 Barely Disputed Among Experts ....................................................................................... 45 Criticism from Scientists ...................................................................................................... 46 “Main Street Bias”................................................................................................................. 47 “40 Households per Day Not Feasible” ........................................................................... 47 “No Response to Critical Questions” ............................................................................... 48 “Decrease in Child Mortality” ............................................................................................ 48 “Low Pre-War Mortality” .................................................................................................... 48 Danger of Underestimation Greater than Danger of Overestimation ....................... 49 General Doubts in Representative Methods ................................................................... 50 The IFHS Study .................................................................................................................... 50 Flaws of the IFHS Study ..................................................................................................... 51 Politically Motivated Restriction ........................................................................................ 52 Who Did the Killing? ........................................................................................................... 53 Political Attacks against the Authors of the Lancet Studies ........................................... 53 Justified Criticism .................................................................................................................. 55 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 56 Meticulous, But Late: A New Mortality Study on the Iraq War ...............................56 Core Details of the Study .................................................................................................... 57 Comparing the PLOS and Lancet Studies ......................................................................... 58 - 3 - Table of Contents Reasons for the Difference Between the PLOS Study and Earlier Studies ............... 58 Adjustments for Migration in the PLOS Study ............................................................... 59 Consensus ............................................................................................................................... 61 “Response Rate” ........................................................................................................................ 62 Problems with the Cluster Selection.................................................................................. 62 Responses to the PLOS Study ............................................................................................ 63 Afghanistan Estimates of the Number of War Deaths in Afghanistan from October 7, 2001 to December 31, 2011 ........................................................... 65 Civilians ............................................................................................................................... 66 Directly Killed Civilians ........................................................................................... 66 Indirectly Killed Civilians ........................................................................................ 69 Killed Combatants ................................................................................................................ 69 Killed Afghan Security Forces ................................................................................ 70 Killed ISAF and OEF Soldiers ............................................................................... 70 Killed Staff of Private Security Contractors ......................................................... 71 Killed “Taliban”........................................................................................................ 71 Afghanistan ...................................................................................................................... 74 Security Forces Killed in Afghanistan ............................................................................... 74 Insurgents Killed in Afghanistan........................................................................................ 75 Civilian Employees of the US Government Killed ........................................................ 76 Journalists Killed in Afghanistan ........................................................................................ 76 Civilians Killed in Afghanistan ........................................................................................... 76 Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................... 79 Pakistan Overview: Pakistan.......................................................................................................... 81 Journalists Killed in Pakistan............................................................................................... 82 Victims of the “War on Terror” in Pakistan ............................................................... 84 The Most Important Areas of Conflict aside from the “War on Terror”:................. 85 1,842 “terrorist attacks” in which 1,395 persons were killed. ....................................... 86 An Assessment of the General Data Situation: ............................................................... 87 Summary ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Open Letter on CIA MDR Regs- Final.Pdf
    To: Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, David Petraeus Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, John Fitzpatrick February 23, 2012 Re: CIA Regulation change to 32 CFR Part 1908 allowing the Agency to charge requesters as high as $72 per hour for Mandatory Declassification Review requests. To whom it may concern: We the undersigned would like to call to your attention an alarming regulation that the Central Intelligence Agency entered into the Federal Register on 23 September 2011. Finalized without any notice for public comment, this regulation could cut off access to the most effective tool the public can use to request declassification of the CIA’s secret documents, the Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) program. The regulation states that declassification reviews will now cost requesters up to $72 per hour, even if no information is found or released. The public must now also agree to pay a minimum of $15 in duplication fees. Throughout the government, and previously at CIA, MDR fees are commensurate to FOIA fees. Under FOIA, Congress stipulated that public interest, educational, journalism, and other fee waivers must be granted, when applicable under the statute. Furthermore, agencies must forfeit their right to collect some FOIA processing fees when they miss their processing deadline. The effect of the CIA’s new policy will be to price the public out of submitting MDR requests, a result not at all consonant with Obama Administration transparency policy in general or its declassification policy under Executive Order 13,526 in particular. The MDR process is a popular and successful tool for researchers, historians, public interest advocates and others, in part because of the independent accountability and oversight the program provides.
    [Show full text]
  • Living Under Drones Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan
    Fall 08 September 2012 Living Under Drones Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic Stanford Law School Global Justice Clinic http://livingunderdrones.org/ NYU School of Law Cover Photo: Roof of the home of Faheem Qureshi, a then 14-year old victim of a January 23, 2009 drone strike (the first during President Obama’s administration), in Zeraki, North Waziristan, Pakistan. Photo supplied by Faheem Qureshi to our research team. Suggested Citation: INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION CLINIC (STANFORD LAW SCHOOL) AND GLOBAL JUSTICE CLINIC (NYU SCHOOL OF LAW), LIVING UNDER DRONES: DEATH, INJURY, AND TRAUMA TO CIVILIANS FROM US DRONE PRACTICES IN PAKISTAN (September, 2012) TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I ABOUT THE AUTHORS III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS V INTRODUCTION 1 METHODOLOGY 2 CHALLENGES 4 CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 7 DRONES: AN OVERVIEW 8 DRONES AND TARGETED KILLING AS A RESPONSE TO 9/11 10 PRESIDENT OBAMA’S ESCALATION OF THE DRONE PROGRAM 12 “PERSONALITY STRIKES” AND SO-CALLED “SIGNATURE STRIKES” 12 WHO MAKES THE CALL? 13 PAKISTAN’S DIVIDED ROLE 15 CONFLICT, ARMED NON-STATE GROUPS, AND MILITARY FORCES IN NORTHWEST PAKISTAN 17 UNDERSTANDING THE TARGET: FATA IN CONTEXT 20 PASHTUN CULTURE AND SOCIAL NORMS 22 GOVERNANCE 23 ECONOMY AND HOUSEHOLDS 25 ACCESSING FATA 26 CHAPTER 2: NUMBERS 29 TERMINOLOGY 30 UNDERREPORTING OF CIVILIAN CASUALTIES BY US GOVERNMENT SOURCES 32 CONFLICTING MEDIA REPORTS 35 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Gen. David H. Petraeus on Withdrawing US Troops from Afghanistan Featuring General David H
    The Dangers of Disengagement: Gen. David H. Petraeus on Withdrawing US Troops from Afghanistan Featuring General David H. Petraeus MARCH 16, 2021 Civil war and an unrestrained al Qaeda are all but certain should the US withdraw its forces from Afghanistan in May per the US-Taliban deal signed over a year ago. American disengagement will only embolden revisionist powers and create an even more dangerous security situation for the region and beyond. On this episode of Overwatch, Frederick W. Kagan, director of the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute, and General David H. Petraeus sit down to discuss the US-Taliban agreement, the consequences of a US withdrawal, and a sustainable way forward that protects not only American interests, but also advances those of the Afghan people. Jacob Taylor: This is Overwatch, a podcast presented by the Institute for the Study of War. Just over one year has passed since the United States signed an agreement with the Taliban that commits US forces to leave Afghanistan this May if the Taliban has met certain conditions. On this episode of Overwatch, Freder- ick Kagan, Director of the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute, sits down with General David H. Petraeus, to discuss the situation in Afghanistan, the state of the US-Taliban deal and the dangers for American national security of withdrawing US Forces from Afghanistan under the circumstances. General Petraeus is the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. His 37-year career in the US Military included command of the 101st Airborne Division in Iraq, Multinational Force Iraq, in which capacity he de- veloped and executed the Surge Strategy, the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and the US Central Command.
    [Show full text]
  • Quotes from Co-Signers of Garrett's Iran Letter to President
    QUOTES FROM CO-SIGNERS OF GARRETT’S IRAN LETTER TO PRESIDENT BUSH Walter Jones ● Authored A Letter With Democrat Rep. Keith Ellison Encouraging Negotiations With Iran In 2012, Jones Signed A Letter With Democrat Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) Encouraging Negotiations With Iran. “We strongly encourage your Administration to pursue bilateral and multilateral engagement with Iran. While we acknowledge that progress will be difficult, we believe that robust, sustained diplomacy is the best option to resolve our serious concerns about Iran's nuclear program, and to prevent a costly war that would be devastating for the United States and our allies in the region.” (Walter B. Jones and Keith Ellison, Letter, 3/2/12) ● Extreme Minority Of House Members To Vote Against Additional Sanctions On Iran In 2012, The House Passed Additional Sanctions Against Iran's Energy, Shipping, and Insurance Sectors. “Both houses of Congress approved legislation on Wednesday that would significantly tighten sanctions against Iran's energy, shipping and insurance sectors. The bill is the latest attempt by Congress to starve Iran of the hard currency it needs to fund what most members agree is Iran's ongoing attempt to develop a nuclear weapons program.” (Pete Kasperowicz, “House, Senate Approve Tougher Sanctions Against Iran, Syria,” The Hill's Floor Action, 8/1/12) One Of Only Six House Members To Vote Against The 2012 Sanctions Bill. “The sanctions bill was approved in the form of a resolution making changes to prior legislation, H.R. 1905, on which the House and Senate agreed — it passed in an 421-6 vote, and was opposed by just five Republicans and one Democrat.
    [Show full text]
  • Giuliani, 9/11 and the 2008 Race
    ABC NEWS/WASHINGTON POST POLL: ‘08 ELECTION UPDATE EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE AFTER 11:35 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2007 Giuliani, 9/11 and the 2008 Race Six years after the terrorist attacks that vaulted him to national prominence, it’s unclear whether 9/11 will lift Rudy Giuliani all the way to the presidency: He remains hamstrung in the Republican base, and his overall support for his party’s nomination has slipped in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll. Giuliani does better with Republicans who are concerned about another major terrorist attack in this country, a legacy of his 9/11 performance. But among those less focused on terrorism, he’s in a dead heat against newcomer Fred Thompson. Thompson also challenges Giuliani among conservatives and evangelical white Protestants – base groups in the Republican constituency – while John McCain has stabilized after a decline in support. Giuliani still leads, but his support is down by nine points in this poll from his level in July. Indeed this is the first ABC/Post poll this cycle in which Giuliani had less than a double- digit lead over all his competitors: He now leads Thompson by nine points (and McCain by 10). Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 28 percent support Giuliani, 19 percent Thompson, 18 percent McCain and 10 percent Mitt Romney. Other candidates remain in the low single digits. (There’s no significant difference among registered voters – and plenty of time to register.) ’08 Republican primary preferences Now July June April Feb Giuliani 28% 37 34 35 53 Thompson 19 15 13 10 NA McCain 18 16 20 22 23 Romney 10 8 10 10 5 The Democratic race, meanwhile, remains exceedingly stable; Hillary Clinton has led Barack Obama by 14 to 16 points in each ABC/Post poll since February, and still does.
    [Show full text]
  • Afghanistan 2015 Human Rights Report
    AFGHANISTAN 2015 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Afghanistan is an Islamic republic with a strong, directly elected presidency, a bicameral legislative branch, and a judicial branch. Presidential and provincial elections held in 2014 were marred by allegations of fraud that led to an audit of all ballot boxes. Protracted political negotiations between the presidential candidates led to the creation of a national unity government headed by President Ashraf Ghani, with runner-up Abdullah Abdullah assuming the newly created post of chief executive officer. Constitutionally mandated parliamentary elections did not take place during the year. The most recent parliamentary elections took place in 2010 and were marred by high levels of fraud and violence, according to domestic observers, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and other international election-monitoring organizations. Civilian authorities generally maintained control over the security forces, although there were occasions when security forces acted independently. The most significant human rights problems were widespread violence, including indiscriminate attacks on civilians by armed insurgent groups; armed insurgent groups’ killings of persons affiliated with the government; torture and abuse of detainees by government forces; widespread disregard for the rule of law and little accountability for those who committed human rights abuses; and targeted violence of and endemic societal discrimination against women and girls. Other human rights problems included
    [Show full text]
  • Afghanistan: the Situation of Christian Converts
    +*-/ !"#)$./) # .$/0/$*)*!#-$./$)*)1 -/. 7 April 2021 © Landinfo 2021 The material in this report is covered by copyright law. Any reproduction or publication of this report or any extract thereof other than as permitted by current Norwegian copyright law requires the explicit written consent of Landinfo. For information on all of the reports published by Landinfo, please contact: Landinfo Country of Origin Information Centre Storgata 33 A P.O. Box 2098 Vika NO-0125 Oslo Tel.: (+47) 23 30 94 70 Ema il: [email protected] www.landinfo.no *0/ )$)!*ҁ. - +*-/. The Norwegian Country of Origin Information Centre, Landinfo, is an independent body within the Norwegian Immigration Authorities. Landinfo provides country of origin information (COI) to the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration (Utlendingsdirektoratet – UDI), the Immigration Appeals Board (Utlendingsnemnda – UNE) and the Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security. Reports produced by Landinfo are based on information from carefully selected sources. The informa tion is collected a nd analysed in accordance with common methodology for processing COI and Landinfo’s internal guidelines on source and information analysis. To ensure balanced reports, efforts are made to obtain information from a wide range of sources. Many of our reports draw on findings and interviews conducted on fact-finding missions. All sources used are referenced. Sources hesitant to provide information to be cited in a public report have retained anonymity. The reports do not provide exhaustive overviews of topics or themes but cover aspects relevant for the processing of asylum and residency cases. Country of Origin Information presented in Landinfo’s reports does not contain policy recommendations nor does it reflect official Norwegian views.
    [Show full text]
  • “TELLING the STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: a Regional Perspective (2011-2016)
    “TELLING THE STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: A Regional Perspective (2011-2016) Emma Hooper (ed.) This monograph has been produced with the financial assistance of the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the position of the Ministry. © 2016 CIDOB This monograph has been produced with the financial assistance of the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the position of the Ministry. CIDOB edicions Elisabets, 12 08001 Barcelona Tel.: 933 026 495 www.cidob.org [email protected] D.L.: B 17561 - 2016 Barcelona, September 2016 CONTENTS CONTRIBUTOR BIOGRAPHIES 5 FOREWORD 11 Tine Mørch Smith INTRODUCTION 13 Emma Hooper CHAPTER ONE: MAPPING THE SOURCES OF TENSION WITH REGIONAL DIMENSIONS 17 Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: A Regional Perspective .......... 19 Zahid Hussain Mapping the Sources of Tension and the Interests of Regional Powers in Afghanistan and Pakistan ............................................................................................. 35 Emma Hooper & Juan Garrigues CHAPTER TWO: KEY PHENOMENA: THE TALIBAN, REFUGEES , & THE BRAIN DRAIN, GOVERNANCE 57 THE TALIBAN Preamble: Third Party Roles and Insurgencies in South Asia ............................... 61 Moeed Yusuf The Pakistan Taliban Movement: An Appraisal ......................................................... 65 Michael Semple The Taliban Movement in Afghanistan .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UN Assistance Mission for Iraq ﺑﻌﺜﺔ اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة (UNAMI) ﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﻢ اﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺪة
    ﺑﻌﺜﺔ اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة .UN Assistance Mission for Iraq 1 ﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﻢ اﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺪة ﻟﻠﻌﺮاق (UNAMI) Human Rights Report 1 January – 31 March 2007 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................2 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................2 PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.......................................................................................................4 EXTRA-JUDICIAL EXECUTIONS AND TARGETED AND INDISCRIMINATE KILLINGS .........................................4 EDUCATION SECTOR AND THE TARGETING OF ACADEMIC PROFESSIONALS ................................................8 FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION .........................................................................................................................10 MINORITIES...............................................................................................................................................13 PALESTINIAN REFUGEES ............................................................................................................................15 WOMEN.....................................................................................................................................................16 DISPLACEMENT
    [Show full text]
  • Explosive Weapon Effectsweapon Overview Effects
    CHARACTERISATION OF EXPLOSIVE WEAPONS EXPLOSIVEEXPLOSIVE WEAPON EFFECTSWEAPON OVERVIEW EFFECTS FINAL REPORT ABOUT THE GICHD AND THE PROJECT The Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) is an expert organisation working to reduce the impact of mines, cluster munitions and other explosive hazards, in close partnership with states, the UN and other human security actors. Based at the Maison de la paix in Geneva, the GICHD employs around 55 staff from over 15 countries with unique expertise and knowledge. Our work is made possible by core contributions, project funding and in-kind support from more than 20 governments and organisations. Motivated by its strategic goal to improve human security and equipped with subject expertise in explosive hazards, the GICHD launched a research project to characterise explosive weapons. The GICHD perceives the debate on explosive weapons in populated areas (EWIPA) as an important humanitarian issue. The aim of this research into explosive weapons characteristics and their immediate, destructive effects on humans and structures, is to help inform the ongoing discussions on EWIPA, intended to reduce harm to civilians. The intention of the research is not to discuss the moral, political or legal implications of using explosive weapon systems in populated areas, but to examine their characteristics, effects and use from a technical perspective. The research project started in January 2015 and was guided and advised by a group of 18 international experts dealing with weapons-related research and practitioners who address the implications of explosive weapons in the humanitarian, policy, advocacy and legal fields. This report and its annexes integrate the research efforts of the characterisation of explosive weapons (CEW) project in 2015-2016 and make reference to key information sources in this domain.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Drone War
    RETHINKING THE DRONE WAR RETHINKING THE DRONE WAR NATIONAL SECURITY, LEGITIMACY, AND CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN U.S. COUNTERTERRORISM OPERATIONS LARRY LEWIS DIANE M. VAVRICHEK A joint publication of CNA and Marine Corps University Press MCUP MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY PRESS Quantico, Virginia 2016 This book represents the best opinion of the authors at the time of printing. The views and opinions are the authors’ own, and do not necessarily represent those of CNA, the Department of the Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps, Marine Corps University, or the U.S. government. MCUP MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY PRESS Marine Corps University Press CNA Corporation 111 South Street Arlington, VA 22201 www.usmcu.edu/mcupress www.cna.org 1st printing, 2016 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lewis, Larry L. (Lawrence L.), author. | Vavrichek, Diane, author. Title: Rethinking the drone war : national security, legitimacy, and civilian casualties in U.S. counterterrorism operations / Larry Lewis, Diane Vavrichek. Other titles: National security, legitimacy, and civilian casualties in U.S. counterterrorism operations Description: Quantico, VA : CNA and Marine Corps University Press, [2016] | Includes index. Subjects: LCSH: Drone aircraft--United States--History. | Drone aircraft--Government policy--United States. | Drone aircraft--Moral and ethical aspects--United States. | Uninhabited combat aerial vehicles--Government policy--United States. | Terrorism--Prevention--Government policy--United States. | Targeted killing--Government policy--United
    [Show full text]
  • Conflict and Peacebuilding Observatory Nº 35 – November 2015
    Conflict and Peacebuilding Observatory Nº 35 – November 2015 WORSENING AFGHANISTAN: As the conflict rages, the Taliban split and Islamic State acquires new prominence US military sources announced the dismantling of what was probably al-Qaeda’s largest training camp. Located in the district of Shorabak in Kandahar province, the camp covered 77.7 km2. Losses of territory to the Taliban in some districts have been offset by gains in others. In Helmand, an offensive lasting several months pitted Afghan forces against the Taliban for control of the districts of Marjah and Nad-e-Ali, where over 200 Taliban and 85 soldiers were killed, according to the provincial government. In Kunduz, Afghan forces recovered a base in the district of Dasht-e-Archi, but lost a district in the province of Badakhshan. Government forces confirmed that alongside the Taliban, over 1,300 foreign insurgents (Pakistanis, Tajiks, Uyghurs and others) participated in the battle of Kunduz. Furthermore, in Nangarhar, where there is a group loyal to Islamic State, over 30 insurgents were killed in drone strikes. The local provincial government has stated that around 200 university students there are linked to Islamist groups. In fact, Islamic State banners were waved during an anti-government demonstration. In Zabul, Islamic State executed seven members of the Hazara (Shia) ethnic group that it abducted in September. Among them were three women, the first to be victims of beheading. Their families carried their bodies to Kabul, where they were joined by thousands of people (20,000 according to some media outlets) in one of the largest protests ever seen in the capital.
    [Show full text]