Follow us on social

Shutterstock_324849629-scaled

US quietly releases new report on civilian casualties

The American-led coalition fighting ISIS updated its assessment of innocents killed in airstrikes, but the tally is likely far higher.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex

Earlier this month, the U.S.-led coalition aimed at combating ISIS quietly announced its first public assessment of civilian casualties in more than 8 months, tallying at least 1,437 civilians killed in operations since 2014, a figure far lower than estimates from non-government organizations. 

Without any accompanying press release or efforts at greater public awareness, the Combined Joint Task Force — Operation Inherent Resolve, said that it had analyzed 68 cases of suspected civilian casualties and found 10 credible, 53 non-credible, and 5 to be duplicates. OIR said that 18 civilians were killed and 11 injured in the 10 reports it deemed credible. 

Airwars, an NGO monitoring civilian casualties in armed conflict, says that according to its assessments of the same incidents, the casualty figures are likely far higher, “with between 45 and 166 civilians reportedly killed.” 

The OIR release comes nearly a month after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered a comprehensive review of civilian harm caused by U.S. airstrikes. Austin’s announcement came in the wake of a bombshell New York Times report on how U.S. government documents reveal that American bombing campaigns in the Middle East in recent years have been “marked by deeply flawed intelligence, rushed and often imprecise targeting, and the deaths of thousands of civilians, many of them children, a sharp contrast to the American government’s image of war waged by all-seeing drones and precision bombs.” The Times said the documents also show “that despite the Pentagon’s highly codified system for examining civilian casualties, pledges of transparency and accountability have given way to opacity and impunity.”

While the OIR release this month acknowledged 1,437 civilian deaths, Airwars says that at least 8,192 and as many as 13,243 civilians have been killed by coalition forces in the war against ISIS. Airwars also found irregularities in OIR’s explanations for the 53 alleged incidents of civilian casualties that it deemed “non-credible.”

“While we welcome the release of these civilian harm assessments, it is clear that there still needs to be radical improvement in DoD processes.” said Airwars incoming Director Emily Tripp. “We are seeking clarity in particular on when the remaining 37 open cases will be reviewed, as well as further information from DoD on their civilian harm assessment standards.”


Editorial credit: Orlok / Shutterstock.com
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.