The Cost of Killing Civilians in Iraq
By Greg Mitchell
Published: June 10, 2006 11:55 AM ET
Long before the Haditha revelations, I was always amazed, if not surprised, when newspapers routinely took at face value reports from the military on the results of a raid, air strike or firefight in Iraq: you know, "15 insurgents were killed," and so forth. After more than three years of fighting a shadowy enemy in Iraq -- not to mention the Vietnam experience -- you would think the strong chance that a few civilians were among the dead would inspire more skepticism.
I understand that it is extremely risky for individual reporters to travel to insurgent hotbeds to secure the true facts -- but at least their papers, and the wire services, could use the word "claimed" or "asserted" when referring to the military's report, or add, "could not be independently confirmed." This, of course, is only the truth.
I've long felt this way, and even written so, but perhaps this approach now has gained some traction following the Haditha revelations -- remember, the initial accounts carried in all papers was that only "insurgents" were killed there. Then, this past week, came revelations in The Boston Globe and, today, in The New York Times, about U.S. payoffs to thousands of families of civilians we have killed or maimed.
The Times even provides a city-by-city chart today tracing the recent payments -- more than $6 million just in Baghdad last year -- and observes that the Marines have made the bulk of the payments.
The local custom is known as "solatia" --it means families in Iraq receive financial compensation for physical damage or a loss of life. The practice has earned more attention in recent weeks, with news that the U.S. military paid about $2500 per victim to families in Haditha following the alleged massacre there last November.
But how common is the practice? And how many deaths do the numbers seem to suggest?
A chilling report from the Boston Globe on Thursday revealed that the amount of cash the U.S. military has paid to families of Iraqi civilians killed or badly injured operations involving American troops "skyrocketed from just under $5 million in 2004 to almost $20 million last year, according to Pentagon financial data." The payments can range from several hundred dollars for a severed limb to a standard of $2500 for loss of life.
There is no explanation on how that top figure was arrived at.
Globe reporter Bryan Bender observed: "If each of the payments made in 2005 was the maximum $2,500 for an Iraqi death, it would amount to 8,000 fatalities. But it's unknown exactly how many payments were made or for what amount."
Defense Department officials stressed to Bender that the payments shouldn't be seen as an admission of guilt or responsibility. But Bender observed that "the fourfold increase in condolence payments raises new questions about the extent to which Iraqi civilians have been the victims of U.S. firepower."
A report earlier this week by Tom Lasseter for Knight Ridder described the accidental death of three civilians, a woman and two men, in a U.S. raid of an insurgent hotspot south of Baghdad one week ago. That story closed with the military indicating it would probably be making compensation payments to families -- and an Army captain saying he wasn't looking forward to making that visit to hand out the money.
Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is pushing for a broader investigation into condolence payments. "The dramatic rise in condolence payments raises many questions of accountability and process -- and serve as a warning sign for incidents like Haditha," Kennedy told the Globe.
Compensation payments come from the Commanders Emergency Response Program, which allows commanders to make payments to help win the hearts and minds of Iraqis affected by the war. But is it possible that the ability to make the payoffs encourages the military to feel that this closes the book on a civilian kiling or true atrocity? Bender notes that "some experts have said that the commanding officers who approved the Haditha condolence payments should have asked more questions about what happened that day -- and whether the Marines were responsible."
The Times' charts today seem to show that the payoffs, already high, soared in January, with more than $4 million shelled out in that month alone. And the carnage has only increased since.
Greg Mitchell (gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com) is editor of E&P.
Link Here
Published: June 10, 2006 11:55 AM ET
Long before the Haditha revelations, I was always amazed, if not surprised, when newspapers routinely took at face value reports from the military on the results of a raid, air strike or firefight in Iraq: you know, "15 insurgents were killed," and so forth. After more than three years of fighting a shadowy enemy in Iraq -- not to mention the Vietnam experience -- you would think the strong chance that a few civilians were among the dead would inspire more skepticism.
I understand that it is extremely risky for individual reporters to travel to insurgent hotbeds to secure the true facts -- but at least their papers, and the wire services, could use the word "claimed" or "asserted" when referring to the military's report, or add, "could not be independently confirmed." This, of course, is only the truth.
I've long felt this way, and even written so, but perhaps this approach now has gained some traction following the Haditha revelations -- remember, the initial accounts carried in all papers was that only "insurgents" were killed there. Then, this past week, came revelations in The Boston Globe and, today, in The New York Times, about U.S. payoffs to thousands of families of civilians we have killed or maimed.
The Times even provides a city-by-city chart today tracing the recent payments -- more than $6 million just in Baghdad last year -- and observes that the Marines have made the bulk of the payments.
The local custom is known as "solatia" --it means families in Iraq receive financial compensation for physical damage or a loss of life. The practice has earned more attention in recent weeks, with news that the U.S. military paid about $2500 per victim to families in Haditha following the alleged massacre there last November.
But how common is the practice? And how many deaths do the numbers seem to suggest?
A chilling report from the Boston Globe on Thursday revealed that the amount of cash the U.S. military has paid to families of Iraqi civilians killed or badly injured operations involving American troops "skyrocketed from just under $5 million in 2004 to almost $20 million last year, according to Pentagon financial data." The payments can range from several hundred dollars for a severed limb to a standard of $2500 for loss of life.
There is no explanation on how that top figure was arrived at.
Globe reporter Bryan Bender observed: "If each of the payments made in 2005 was the maximum $2,500 for an Iraqi death, it would amount to 8,000 fatalities. But it's unknown exactly how many payments were made or for what amount."
Defense Department officials stressed to Bender that the payments shouldn't be seen as an admission of guilt or responsibility. But Bender observed that "the fourfold increase in condolence payments raises new questions about the extent to which Iraqi civilians have been the victims of U.S. firepower."
A report earlier this week by Tom Lasseter for Knight Ridder described the accidental death of three civilians, a woman and two men, in a U.S. raid of an insurgent hotspot south of Baghdad one week ago. That story closed with the military indicating it would probably be making compensation payments to families -- and an Army captain saying he wasn't looking forward to making that visit to hand out the money.
Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is pushing for a broader investigation into condolence payments. "The dramatic rise in condolence payments raises many questions of accountability and process -- and serve as a warning sign for incidents like Haditha," Kennedy told the Globe.
Compensation payments come from the Commanders Emergency Response Program, which allows commanders to make payments to help win the hearts and minds of Iraqis affected by the war. But is it possible that the ability to make the payoffs encourages the military to feel that this closes the book on a civilian kiling or true atrocity? Bender notes that "some experts have said that the commanding officers who approved the Haditha condolence payments should have asked more questions about what happened that day -- and whether the Marines were responsible."
The Times' charts today seem to show that the payoffs, already high, soared in January, with more than $4 million shelled out in that month alone. And the carnage has only increased since.
Greg Mitchell (gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com) is editor of E&P.
Link Here
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home