A new study conducted by Johns Hopkins and published in the British medical journal The Lancet posits that Iraqi civilian deaths since the 2003 invasion may top the 600,000 mark. A pdf of the study is here. Doubt has been cast on the study’s accuracy — of course by the Bush administration but also by qualified people in the fields of biostatistics and public health. The numbers don’t remotely jibe with previous estimates, even from such antiwar resources as Iraq Body Count. An earlier Lancet study from 2004 — the source of the oft-cited fatality figure of 100,000 — was questioned at the time by Fred Kaplan of Slate. (A reader subsequently took issue with Kaplan’s argument.)
I’m far from an expert on statistical research, but one line in the new Lancet article jumps out:
Across Iraq, deaths and injuries from violent causes were concentrated in adolescent to middle age men. Although some were probably combatants, a number of factors would expose this group to more risk — eg, life style, automobile travel, and employment outside the home. The circumstances of a number of deaths from gunshots suggest assassinations or executions. Coalition forces have been reported as targeting all men of military age. [My emphasis.]
Apparently it is beyond the purview of the study to distinguish civilians from combatants, yet the conclusions are being reported as an estimate of total civilian post-invasion deaths. In addition, the study breaks down the deaths three ways: those brought about by coalition forces, “other” causes and “unknown” causes. No attempt is made to identify political actors other than occupation troops, or to distinguish between “anti-coalition” actors and mere criminals. There are various methodological reasons for this, and they may be sound reasons. But the above passage strongly implies that it is coalition forces, as distinguished from other forces, that are killing these men in such large numbers. In fact, the “other” and “unknown” causes, when combined, account for the great majority of the Iraqi deaths reported in this study.
There will be some in the antiwar camp who take this study for proof that the U.S. has slaughtered 600,000 Iraqis. The study shows no such thing. It is true, however, that the U.S. has killed a great many civilians, and that Bush’s deplorable decision to invade Iraq has created the conditions under which the current civil war and bloodshed flourishes. Still, the Iraqi militias — Sunni and Shia — must not be allowed to evade responsibility for their actions.
It should be noted that the editor of The Lancet, Dr. Richard Horton, is an antiwar activist with a penchant for sloganeering about “the axis of Anglo-American imperialism.” He recently spoke at a rally held by the Stop the War Coalition — the leaders of which, including George Galloway, have glorified the Iraqi “resistance” and generally excused the wanton brutality of the Sunni forces arrayed against U.S. troops and the Iraqi central government. To be clear, I am not accusing Dr. Horton of supporting the insurgents. But since the Johns Hopkins study carries his imprimatur, and since he seems genuinely concerned about the lives of all Iraqis, he might want to clarify his views on the matter.
Comments are closed.