A recent study commissioned by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has unveiled a lack of mechanisms for assessing civilian casualties resulting from UK military operations. The MoD currently does not keep a centralized record of incidents or claims involving civilian harm, and it has determined that its existing protective measures are sufficient, despite significant civilian casualties reported by other nations.
Previously established procedures, which facilitated the disbursement of £31.8 million in over 6,500 claims related to civilian deaths, injuries, and torture in Iraq and Afghanistan, have reportedly fallen out of practice, according to the study.
This revelation comes on the heels of the Foreign Office’s decision to dissolve its international humanitarian law unit, responsible for scrutinizing the actions of other nations in conflict.
The findings were disclosed in a seven-page summary released last week by the MoD in response to freedom of information requests submitted by Ceasefire, an international organization advocating for civilian rights in warfare.
Mae Thompson, an advocacy officer with Ceasefire, expressed concern, stating, “The UK’s failure to identify civilian harm raises serious questions regarding its adherence to international humanitarian law, which mandates states to exercise ‘constant care’ to protect civilian populations and to take ‘all feasible precautions’ to minimize harm to them.”
The MoD’s summary acknowledged that the UK does not possess a coherent policy framework for managing civilian casualties, with related responsibilities scattered across various departments rather than centralized within a single entity.
Despite this, the report noted that the prevention of civilian harm is fundamentally integrated into the military’s targeting practices, fostering a strong belief within the institution that civilian casualties from current UK operations are “extremely unlikely.”
However, the study cautioned that the absence of a formal system could lead the British military to adopt a reactive stance rather than a proactive one, potentially jeopardizing its reputation in the event of an incident involving significant civilian casualties.
An MoD representative remarked that all military operations inherently involve risks, but emphasized that the UK military employs meticulous targeting and weaponry protocols, investigating all credible civilian casualty claims and conducting assessments of battle damage post-strike. They asserted that the review confirmed the sophistication and robustness of their methods and the diligent application of mitigation practices.
In a related incident, a girls’ primary school in Minab, southern Iran, was reportedly struck by a US missile during the initial phase of the US-Israeli military action against Iran, resulting in the deaths of 175 individuals, primarily children. Preliminary reports suggest that this tragedy occurred due to a targeting error involving a US Tomahawk cruise missile.
British forces are currently on heightened alert in the Middle East, with pilots and drone operators safeguarding allies and installations in Iraq, Qatar, and Cyprus. Since 2014, RAF pilots and drone units have conducted over 11,500 missions targeting Islamic State forces in Syria and Iraq.
The UK government has reported a single civilian casualty due to an error during Operation Shader against IS, which remains ongoing. However, other assessments suggest that the actual number of civilian casualties could be significantly higher, based on additional information from US Central Command and field research.
A report from Action on Armed Violence indicated that between 2016 and 2018, approximately 29 civilians may have been killed during nine RAF airstrikes in Iraq and Syria. Another analysis by Airwars revealed that 26 civilian fatalities occurred in just six airstrikes in the city of Mosul.
The MoD summary noted that while other nations have advanced policies for reducing civilian harm following catastrophic airstrikes, the UK has not experienced a similar incident that would compel an urgent reevaluation of its response systems.
In contrast to the Netherlands and the United States, the UK has not encountered a galvanizing event that necessitated political urgency to enhance its civilian harm response strategies, the summary stated.
A US review was initiated following a New York Times investigation that reported the deaths of 10 civilians, including seven children, in Kabul, Afghanistan, in August 2021 during the withdrawal under President Biden. This review highlights a significant reduction in US efforts during the Trump administration, which focused on increasing military lethality.
In a notable incident, a Dutch F-16 airstrike in June 2015 targeting a weapons factory in Hawija, Iraq, resulted in approximately 85 civilian deaths due to an unintended secondary explosion. The Dutch government issued an apology for this tragic event in January.
Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, a policy expert at Airwars, stated that the MoD summary confirms a lack of systems to track civilian outcomes following airstrikes, suggesting that the military apparatus is not equipped to assess the human costs of its actions.
According to the MoD, the full analysis has been integrated into a related study, containing sensitive information that cannot be publicly disclosed. The department noted that 13 separate teams would need to review the document for redaction of classified content.
