CIVILIAN CASUALTIES ARE A POLICY CHOICE

By Geoff LaMear

The recent publication of hundreds of Pentagon civilian casualty assessments has prompted questions about US collateral damage. But these civilian casualties occur because US foreign policy has placed an unwarranted emphasis on military force, and has done so in the pursuit of unattainable objectives. A better way to prevent civilian losses is to reorient the objectives of US foreign policy. That means ending missions that don’t make sense.

The majority of civilian casualties documented in these Pentagon reports occurred in Iraq and Syria. Given the undeniable human cost to civilians in these countries compared to the paltry benefits, the US troop presence doesn’t help locals. Moreover, with the ISIS threat largely abated and pro-Iran militias continuously lashing out in response to the US presence, this mission doesn’t benefit the United States.

Despite being recently relabeled as noncombat forces, the role of US forces in Iraq remains what it has been since 2019: An “advise and assist” mission to the Iraqi government to counter ISIS. This mission, however, remains behind the times. While US troops remain and continue to conduct strikes, ISIS has pivoted to Africa after being attrited to near extinction in Iraq.

This piece was originally published in Inkstick on January 4, 2022. Read more HERE.