Statement Of Sen. Patrick Leahy,
Preventing Civilian Casualties In Iraq
September 29, 2006

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 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 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.

# # # # #