Follow us on social

google cta
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
google cta
google cta

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.”


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Editorial credit: Orlok / Shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

keep readingShow less
The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025
Top image credit: Dabari CGI/Shutterstock

The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025

Media

I spent the last few weeks asking experts about the foreign policy books that stood out in 2025. My goal was to create a wide-ranging list, featuring volumes that shed light on the most important issues facing American policymakers today, from military spending to the war in Gaza and the competition with China. Here are the eight books that made the cut.

keep readingShow less
Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war
Top image credit: People walking on Red square in Moscow in winter. (Oleg Elkov/Shutterstock)

Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war

Europe

After its emergence from the Soviet collapse, the new Russia grappled with the complex issue of developing a national identity that could embrace the radical contradictions of Russia’s past and foster integration with the West while maintaining Russian distinctiveness.

The Ukraine War has significantly changed public attitudes toward this question, and led to a consolidation of most of the Russian population behind a set of national ideas. This has contributed to the resilience that Russia has shown in the war, and helped to frustrate Western hopes that economic pressure and heavy casualties would undermine support for the war and for President Vladimir Putin. To judge by the evidence to date, there is very little hope of these Western goals being achieved in the future.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.