Airwars boosts its monitoring, reporting and advocacy team

Published

October 10, 2016

Written by

Airwars Staff

Responding to a steep rise in reported civilian deaths from both Coalition and Russian airstrikes in 2016, Airwars has appointed three new full-time postholders who will help with the organisation’s monitoring, reporting and advocacy work.

The trio are New York based investigative reporter Samuel Oakford; UK-based Syria researcher Abdulwahab Tahhan; and Eline Westra, an Amsterdam-based researcher focused on Dutch and Belgian airstrikes and transparency.

The new appointments – funded by the Open Society Foundations and the Dutch Democracy and Media Foundation – mean Airwars now has eight full and part time staff in five countries monitoring international airstrikes and civilian casualties in Iraq, Syria and Libya.

Samuel Oakford joins Airwars as its first full time investigative reporter

Samuel Oakford is an investigative journalist based in New York City. His work focuses primarily on diplomacy, peacekeeping and human rights issues, particularly civilians in conflict. For two years Sam was VICE News’ United Nations correspondent, where he broke a number of stories on conflicts in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Burundi, and South Sudan.

Sam was also one of the first journalists to hold a microscope to Washington’s backing of the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, publishing details of civilian casualties; Saudi threats to aid workers and the UN; and efforts to block human rights inquiries in Yemen.

Samuel’s work often looks at the phenomenon of “coalition” interventions and what that means for transparency, accountability and justice for civilian victims. In Iraq and Syria, he has applied this lens to anti-ISIL operations and reported on civilian casualties from US-led Coalition attacks, as well as Russian bombings.

Samuel’s work has appeared in the New York Times, The Atlantic Magazine, Politico Magazine, the Intercept, IRIN News and IPS News. Prior to becoming a journalist, he worked for several years as a cartographer and researcher.

Refugee Abdulwahab Tahhan joins Airwars as a full time researcher, focused on international airstrikes in Syria

Abulwahab Tahhan was raised in Aleppo, Syria, where he studied English at university. A refugee from the civil war, he worked in Turkey for Cultures of Resistance helping make the film The Suffering Grasses – a documentary about Syrian refugees which went on to win six awards.

Abdulwahab eventually made his way to the UK where he was awarded refugee status. He obtained a Masters in Applied Linguistics at Southampton University, where he also worked as a volunteer researcher for Amnesty International.

With the assistance of the Refugee Journalism Project, Abdulwahab first joined Airwars in summer 2016 as a volunteer researcher tracking Russian airstrikes and civilian casualties. His new full time role – funded by the Open Society Foundations for 18 months – will significantly improve capacity at Airwars, particularly its monitoring of Russia’s actions.

Amsterdam-based Eline Westra will focus on Dutch and Belgian airstrike transparency

Amsterdam-based researcher Eline Westra is focused exclusively on Dutch and Belgian airstrikes, thanks to a one year grant from Stichting Democratie en Media. The two nations are among the least transparent of the 13-member Coalition fighting so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria – raising significant accountability concerns.

Eline holds an MA in Human Rights and Democratisation, and has a particular interest in women’s rights; the role of religion in the public domain; and investigative journalism. Most recently she worked as a volunteer with Syrian refugees in Greece.

Her new Airwars post – based at Dutch transparency project the Open State Foundation – will see Eline working closely with Belgian and Dutch political parties, civic society and media to help stimulate engagement on transparency issues.

The trio join five other Airwars staff – and eight key volunteers – who between them seek to track thousands of international airstrikes in Iraq, Syria and Libya.

“We’re absolutely delighted that Eline, Abulwahab and Samuel have joined the Airwars team,” says director Chris Woods. “Our researchers have so far tracked more than 2,000 individual events in which either Russia or the US-led Coalition is alleged to have killed civilians. These new full time posts will significantly improve our ability to research and report on such incidents – and to help hold international powers to account for their actions.”

▲ New funding for Airwars means Dutch and Belgian airstrikes - the least accountable in the Coalition - will come under more scrutiny (Belgian MoD/ Sedeyn Ritchie)

Two families likely among 20 new civilian deaths admitted by US in war against ISIL

Published

April 22, 2016

Written by

Airwars Staff

Web link

In a doubling of previous estimates of civilians killed in its air war against so-called Islamic State, the US has confirmed that 20 more non-combatants are believed to have died and 11 injured in nine separate events between September 2015 and February 2016.

Among those likely killed were two Iraqi families. On October 5th, US aircraft targeted an ‘ISIL mortar position’ in the village of Atshanah near Huwaijah. CENTCOM now admits that “eight civilians were killed.”

According to an earlier United Nations report, all of the dead came from one family, that of a village elder: “On 5 October, an airstrike mistakenly targeted a civilian house in Atshana village, east of Hawija and southwest of Kirkuk, that belonged to the Mukhtar of the village, killing eight persons from the same family, including several women and children and the Mukhtar himself.”

And on December 12th 2015 in Ramadi, five members of the Kazem family including three children died when US aircraft struck an ‘ISIL checkpoint.’ CENTCOM now says that “five civilians were killed after they unexpectedly moved into the target location after weapons were already in flight.”

Local media have named the dead as Duraid Ibrahim Kazem, his wife Nebras Abdul Alkarim, and three of their children: Mustafa, Mohammed and Farah. Graphic images of their bodies were posted at the time.

New admissions

Nine new civilian casualty events have been reported in total – bringing to 25 the number of cases so far admitted. A total of 41 civilian deaths and 28 injuries have now been conceded by the US.

That compares with 406 alleged Coalition civilian casualty events tracked by Airwars since strikes began in August 2014. Of these, Airwars presently assesses a further 167 events as having been fairly reported, with a likely additional civilian toll of 1,064 to 1,638 civilians killed.

All of the newly-admitted events were carried out by US aircraft, most the result of civilians entering the ‘kill box’ after weapon release. No other Coalition ally – or Russia – has so far conceded killing or injuring any civilians, despite thousands of airstrikes between them.

“While we appreciate the latest US admission of civilian casualties from its 20-month war against so-called Islamic State, we remain concerned that the Coalition is significantly under-reporting non-combatant deaths,” said Airwars director Chris Woods. “Only 41 of 1,100 or more likely civilian deaths have so far been conceded – and all by the United States. Other allies in the Coalition – as well as Russia – now need to be open about the casualties they too have inflicted.”

Six of the newly admitted events took place in Iraq and three in Syria. Only a third of the incidents were publicly reported at the time, suggesting both that internal CENTCOM monitoring is capable of detecting likely civilian casualties – but also that public accounts of civilian deaths may represent a significant underreporting.

The US has also confirmed the first civilian death in Mosul – a city which has seen more Coalition airstrikes and alleged civilian fatalities than anywhere else in Iraq or Syria. On January 11th CENTCOM now admits, at least one civilian died and five or more were injured during a US air raid on a bank in the city. At the time the US let it be known it had been prepared to inflict up to 50 civilian casualties in the attack.

Latest confirmed civilian casualties from US strikes

Sept 10th 2015	Kubaysah, Iraq	2 killed and 4 injured when vehicle enters killbox
Oct 5th 2015	Atshanah, Iraq	Family of 8 or 9 killed when house struck
Nov 4th 2015	Huwaijah, Iraq	2 nearby civilians injured when ‘ISIL vehicle’ hit
Nov 12th 2015	Ramadi, Iraq	1 civilian killed in strike on ‘ISIL fighters’
Dec 10th 2015	Raqqa, Syria	1 civilian killed in targeted strike on HVT
Dec 12th 2015	Ramadi, Iraq	Family of 5 includng 3 children killed
Dec 24th 2015	Tishreen, Syria	1 civilian killed when motorbike enters killbox
Jan 11th 2016	Mosul, Iraq	1 civilian killed and 5 injured in strike on ‘ISIL bank’
Feb 2nd 2016	Al Ghazili, Syria	1 civilian killed in strike on ‘ISIL vehicle’

▲ Family of five killed in a reported Coalition strike December 10 (via Ramadi News)

Podcast: US whistleblower Brandon Bryant on Germany’s role in America’s drone wars

Published

October 15, 2015

Written by

Airwars Staff

Web link

This page is archived from original Bureau of Investigative Journalism reporting on US military actions in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Former US drone operator Brandon Bryant (photo: Democracy Now!/You Tube)

As a parliamentary inquiry in Berlin explores Germany’s role in America’s drone wars, former drone operator Brandon Bryant tells the Bureau about what he saw of it during his time with the Air Force.

Bryant, who himself gave testimony to the inquiry today, said that drone operators in the US would interact with Ramstein Air Force base in Germany throughout the mission.

“It was a constant communication, before every mission after every mission and every time signal strength was weak or we might lose signal strength we’d always have to call Ramstein Air Force Base for troubleshooting,” he told the Bureau.

“They were the ones that handled all of our…feeds, and they were the ones that assigned us specific codes where we would connect to the relay.”

Ramstein is a well-known US base, but until recently little was known about its role in supporting drone operations. Earlier this year, the Intercept and Spiegel reported on the existence of classified documents adding further weight to allegations that Ramstein plays a vital role in relaying the satellite signal from the machines flying over the Middle East to pilots and analysts in the US. In May, three Yemeni plaintiffs who lost relatives in a drone strike brought a court case against the German government, though the judge dismissed it.

The Bundestag committee’s inquiry was originally set up in the wake of revelations by whistleblower Edward Snowden about the extent of US surveillance activities worldwide, including in Germany.

As Bryant sees it, the stakes for the German government are high.

“Ramstein is enabling us to fly in countries where there is no declared warzone as well as declared warzones,” he said. “What does that it mean for us as a country, what does it mean for the German people as a country? Because if they accept the fact that we have used drones in illegal warzones and that’s ok then that makes them complicit in all the strikes we’ve messed up.”

Listen to the full podcast here

Follow Owen Bennett-Jones and Abigail Fielding-Smith on Twitter

Sign up for monthly updates from the Bureau’s Covert War project and follow Drone Reads on Twitter to see what our team is reading.

Denmark brings F-16s home on first anniversary of anti-Daesh mission

Published

October 6, 2015

Written by

Airwars Staff

Web link

Denmark was one of the last international allies to join Coalition strikes against Islamic State in Iraq. Even so, the past year has seen such a heavy workload that Danish personnel went public with their complaints of fatigue. With all seven F-16s now safely home, guest reporter Rasmus Raun Westh looks at a year of strikes – and a battle to force Denmark to be more transparent on where it bombs.

On the night of September 29th-30th, heavily-armed Danish combat aircraft took off from Ahmed Al Jaber Air Base in Kuwait for their last missions against Islamic State.

[pullquote]Danish aircrew and ground support personnel were finally coming home after 547 missions and 503 bombs dropped. [/pullquote]Four F-16s – each armed with two 2,000 pound bombs – would participate in a larger mission with the US Air Force. Another pair of F-16s took off later that same night, but returned with their bombs still attached, Middle East correspondent Puk Damsgård later reported from the base.

Their missions completed, Danish aircrew and ground support personnel were finally coming home after 547 missions and 503 bombs dropped.

Denmark formally joined the war against Daesh on October 2nd 2014, when the Folketing (Parliament) – in a near-unanimous vote – authorized the deployment of 140 Air Force personnel to Kuwait and 20 more to Coalition headquarters in Qatar. Another 120 Army personnel have been carrying out training missions in Iraq’s Anbar province, and the Kurdistan Regional Governorate.

Initially delayed by a lack of permits to operate in Kuwaiti air space, Danish fighter jets took off on their first mission on October 16th.

A Danish F-16 takes off on its last combat mission over Iraq, September 29 2015 (Danish MoD/Ronny Rasmussen)

Despite political intentions to extend the mission mandate into a second year, the seven F-16s were pulled home following a public appeal from overworked flight mechanics reportedly suffering illness and high absence rates.

During a visit to Denmark shortly before the withdrawal agreement, US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey – citing a need for Denmark to be able to stay in the anti-Daesh war in the long run – endorsed the temporary withdrawal while encouraging the Danes to rejoin the fight “at the appropriate time”.

In place of the F-16s, the Danish Air Force is sending an AN/TPS-77 transportable radar to Ayn al-Asad Base in Anbar province, reportedly in response to a US request for a radar capable of replacing two AWACS surveillance aircraft currently flying over Iraq and Syria.

Vi trækker syv F16-fly hjem. Men kampen mod IS fortsætter, bl.a. med træningsbidraget i Irak. #dkpol

— Carl Holst (@CarlHolst) August 22, 2015

Denmark’s then-Defence Minister announces end of F-16 mission

Transparency issues In a series of articles penned by this author for Dagbladet Information, Danish MPs and others have heavily criticized Denmark’s military for its lack of transparency in its war against Daesh.

The first Danish strikes coincided with a change in the wording of press releases sent out by US Central Command. Prior to the Danish engagement, CENTCOM’s summaries would include lines like “the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of the Netherlands aircraft participated in these airstrikes.”

Defence chief General Peter Bartram visiting F-16s in Kuwait, August 2015 (Danish MoD)

As of October 21st 2014 however, “out of respect for participating nations“, CENTCOM now left it up to individual countries to identify their role in airstrikes.

In its own first mission update on October 20th, Danish Defence Command informed the public that its F-16’s had flown “11 missions in Iraq” and that the fighters had “used bombs in connection with some of the missions”. There was no mention of which locations had been struck, or on which dates.

“You shouldn’t be able to track one specific attack in one specific area back to a Danish plane. We prefer to hide in the crowd,” Colonel Søren W. Andersen said in an interview with Dagbladet Information – a policy later defended by General Peter Bartram, head of the Danish military.

Colonel Andersen confirmed that the Danish military had asked CENTCOM not to identify Danish actions in its press releases, though argued that the introduction of the ‘partner nation’ term was a result of “several interests that had to be united” rather than a Danish request exclusively.

[pullquote]We prefer to hide in the crowd” Spokesman Colonel Søren W. Andersen, justifying Denmark’s decision to refuse to say where it bombs[/pullquote]A FOIA request by Danish reporter Charlotte Aagaard later confirmed the Danish policy of rendering it impossible to identify Denmark’s role in strikes, “neither directly or by through deduction”, specifying that “the Danish contribution should not be mentioned in Coalition press releases if fewer than three nations are mentioned in relation to the activity in question.”

Under pressure from Danish media, mission updates were initially expanded in November to include the names of provinces and cities targeted – although dates and locations of attacks were still withheld. Three months later, Defence Command scaled back the level of geographic detail by omitting city names. And from March a caveat was added noting that strikes took place ‘primarily’ in e.g. Anbar province, thus leaving open the possibility of strikes elsewhere.

‘No civilian casualties’ Despite its reticence in saying where it bombs, Denmark recently set a new benchmark for Coalition transparency.

No Danish aircraft had featured in a recently declassified CENTCOM report on 45 alleged civilian casualty incidents in Iraq and Syria to April 30th. However in early September Danish Armed Forces announced they may have killed civilians during an Iraq air strike on Sunday August 30th.

Suspicions had been aroused during a post-strike video review, Colonel Søren W. Andersen told DR – and the strike was now the subject of a CENTCOM investigation. As a subsequent statement noted, “In certain parts of the video material, showing four people and a vehicle, actions are taken that could be considered as not openly hostile.”

In an announcement published on October 2nd, shortly after the last F-16 missions, Defence Command announced the CENTCOM investigation had found the strike “most likely” did not kill civilians, but that the four people targeted were “in the process of planting roadside bombs”.

“The Coalition has reviewed all accessible material from the attack. This includes, among other things, full video material of the attack from two Danish F16-planes; the pilots’ own observations; as well as other intelligence,” the statement read.

In keeping with its generally more secretive approach to warfare, Danish Defence Command has said it will publish only the report’s conclusions, and that the investigation itself will remain classified.

Danish technicians check weapons for the final F-16 missions (Danish MoD/Ronny Rasmussen)

Return of the F-16s? The war against Daesh still enjoys fairly wide support in the Danish parliament. Even with newly elected green party The Alternative joining the leftist Red-Green Alliance in the anti-war choir, seven out of nine parties have expressed support for a new mandate, including the provision of radar in Anbar province.

[pullquote]I am open to the idea, but I am not yet decided.” Danish Foreign Minister Kristian Jensen on possible future deployments to Syria[/pullquote]Although newly appointed Foreign Minister Kristian Jensen has indicated a possible return of Denmark’s F-16s in the summer of 2016, no timescale has so far been set. In political interviews and parliamentary hearings, Jensen has also supported expanding the Danish mission into Syria following Canada, Australia and France’s recent lead.

“I am open to the idea, but I am not yet decided. We will decide once we redeploy our F-16s. Several things come into play here. One is our allies, another is that our troops are deployed with the backing of a strong and wide mandate,” Jensen has said.

The Foreign Minister’s apparent reticence may be an acknowledgement that the Socialist People’s Party – presently a backer of the mission – has expressed skepticism about bombing Daesh in Syria.

▲ Danish aircrew load a 2,000lb bomb onto an F-16 for its last Iraq mission (Dabnish MoD/ )

Podcast: “Sudden Justice” author Chris Woods on CIA accountability and the politics of US drone wars

Published

June 5, 2015

Written by

Airwars Staff

Web link

This page is archived from original Bureau of Investigative Journalism reporting on US military actions in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

John Brennan, the Director of the CIA since March 2013

Transferring control of the US drone programme away from the CIA could paradoxically result in less accountability, author and investigative journalist Chris Woods told this week’s Drone News.

Since President Barack Obama announced in April that a CIA drone strike on an al Qaeda compound in Pakistan had accidentally killed two Western hostages, calls for the drone programme to be transferred to the Pentagon have been amplified.

Woods said however that former senior US intelligence officials he interviewed for his new book, ‘Sudden Justice’, told him that the CIA was bound by more stringent congressional reporting requirements than the Department of Defense’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), which has its own drone programme. “That was a surprise to me,” said Woods, formerly a reporter at the Bureau.

“What my sources told me was ‘if you think you’ve got it bad now, if this goes to JSOC we may never know anything.’”

The CIA is legally obliged to declare its actions to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, Woods said, whereas there is no such obligation to the Armed Services Committee, which oversees the military.

During research for his book, he was also surprised how high a proportion of drone strikes have been conducted on conventional battlefields, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq.

He said: “If 80% of drone strikes are happening on the regular battlefield under full military control and the laws of war, which they are, then that really maybe changes the way we think about drones….in terms of the threat they represent towards civilians.”

“One of the conclusions I reached for the book was that drones can – if used properly – significantly reduce the risk to civilians on the battlefield. But there’s got to be the political will there, and time after time where we’ve found problems with civilian deaths in places like Pakistan or Yemen it’s because there hasn’t been the political will to control those deaths.”

Download the Podcast here

When asked by Jack Serle why it was so hard to obtain information about the US’s use of drones in conventional battlegrounds, Woods said it was likely due to different drone programmes being “bundled tightly together”.

He said: “You have special forces drones, CIA drones and regular drones all flown by the regular Air Force and in fact owned by Air Combat Command. What happened over time was that they realised that if they started to allow information about one aspect of the war to come out, the whole thing risked unbundling, so what they’ve actually done is classify all drone operations including on the regular battlefield.”

Follow our drones team Owen Bennett-Jones, Abigail Fielding-Smith and Jack Serle on Twitter.

Sign up for monthly updates from the Bureau’s Covert War project, subscribe to our podcast Drone News, and follow Drone Reads on Twitter to see what our team is reading.

Six months after deadly Syrian air raid, US finally concedes it killed two children

Published

May 21, 2015

Written by

Airwars Staff

Web link

After more than 4,000 airstrikes by the international alliance over a nine month period, the US-led coalition has finally conceded that its actions have killed civilians.

According to a statement issued by CENTCOM late on May 21st, an airstrike on the village of Harem near Aleppo six months previously had “likely led to the deaths of two non-combatant children.”

Five year old Daniya Ali Al Haj Qaddour and her father, alleged militant Ali Saeed Al Haj Qaddour, both killed in a US air strike at Harem, November 5th 2014 (via SNHR)

According to Airwars’ own records, one of those killed was five year old Daniya Ali Al Haj Qaddour, whose father Ali Saeed Al Haj Qaddour (an alleged fighter with the Al Nusra Front) also died in the attack according to reports at the time.

Daniya’s mother, and her young brother Saeed, were also reported to have been severely wounded in the bombing. The identity of the second slain child is not clear.

While welcome, CENTCOM’s admission that it has killed non-combatants also raises uncomfortable questions.

Details of the childrens’ deaths were published on social media and by Syrian monitoring groups within hours of the US attack, on the night of November 5th-6th 2014.

And redacted emails released by CENTCOM indicate that military officials were aware of possible civilian deaths almost immediately after the event.

Yet it was not until January 8 2015 – two months after the killings – that an inquiry was ordered. Overseen by coalition commander Lt. General James L. Terry, the declassified report confirms that a series of US air raids on the so-called Khorasan Group, a faction of Al Qaeda, had also “triggered secondary explosions.”

Although four children were reported killed at the time of the attack, CENTCOM’s investigation has only been able to confirm two “likely” deaths.

‘Too little, too late’ Airwars will shortly publish its own major report into civilians allegedly killed by the coalition since August.

Our provisional findings show that between 384 and 753 civilians have been reported killed in some 97 problem incidents, according to local and international media, and Iraqi and Syrian monitoring groups.

Verifying these claims can be extremely difficult. Most areas being bombed by the coalition are occupied by Islamic State. Civic society has often collapsed, and local people live in fear of retaliation for speaking out. Even so, evidence linking the coalition to civilian deaths can often be compelling.

“While we welcome CENTCOM’s admission after nine months of bombings that it has indeed killed civilians, it’s a case of too little too late,” says Chris Woods of Airwars.

“The first claims of civilian deaths from coalition actions emerged just days after air strikes began in August 2014. Since then, hundreds of likely non-combatant deaths have occurred, many in incidents better documented than the November 5th incident which CENTCOM has now conceded.”

Woods urged the coalition to speed up its investigation and review process – and to be far more transparent about where and when individual coalition members are bombing in Iraq and Syria.

Airwars Report on November 5th-6th Strike

November 5th-6th 2014: Harem, Idlib governorate, Syria Summary: Six months after US air raids targeted the Khorasan Group (part of the Nusra Front) and the militant group Ahrar al-Sham, the coalition finally conceded that two children had died in the attack – the first public concession of any civilian deaths after 4,000 airstrikes over nine months. The November 5th US raid targeted the villages of Harem, Bab Al Hawa, Sarmada, Reef Al-Muhameen and Binsh. Reports from the night remains confused, with civilian deaths claimed at a number of locations. Reuters carried a statement from Ahrar al-Sham saying that “The air strikes came last night and hit a number of areas in the liberated Idlib countryside,” and that casualties included “women and children and civilians.” CENTCOM later confirmed that US actions had led to civilian deaths at Harem. According to the Syrian Revolution Forum blog: “The planes of the Arab/Western coalition launched air strikes on Syrian cities adjacent to the Turkish border. The centre of the town of Harem was targeted with more than six raids causing the death of four children and causing massive destruction to residential and commercial property on Al Sijn street.” One of the children named as killed was five year old Daniya Ali Al Haj Qaddour, whose father Ali Saeed Al Haj Qaddour – a fighter with the Al Nusra Front – also died in the attack (both pictured below.) Daniya’s mother and brother Saeed were reported to have been severely wounded. Reported killed: 2-4 children Reported injured: Unknown Sources: Reuters, GRAPHIC Jakob Sheikh Facebook page [Danish], Syrian Revolution Forum [Arabic], Free Syrian Army [Arabic], Syrian Network for Human Rights [Arabic] [English], GRAPHIC YouTube video [two slain children], YouTube [post-strike destruction in Harem], YouTube (2nd video of destruction in Harem), YouTube, Syrian Martyrs [Arabic], YouTube [civil-defence rescuers search for survivors in Harem – Arabic commentary], YouTube [Syrian rescue services hunt for survivors], Violations Documentation Center [Arabic], CENTCOM declassified report Quality of reporting: High, with coalition confirming civilian casualties Coalition position: CENTCOM confirmed on May 21st 2015 that it likely killed two children in an airstrike at Harem. “We regret the unintentional loss of lives,” Lt General Terry said of the incident. “The Coalition continues to take all reasonable measures during the targeting process to mitigate risks to non-combatants, and to comply with the principles of the Law of Armed Conflict.”

GRAPHIC: Two child victims of US airstrike, Harem in Syria November 5 2015

Why we’ve launched Airwars

Published

May 13, 2015

Written by

Airwars Staff

Web link

In the first 40 weeks of US-led military action against so-called Islamic State (Daesh), more than 3,800 airstrikes were carried out by a dozen international coalition members across both Iraq and Syria. Those strikes saw around 13,000 bombs and missiles dropped in an aerial war likely to continue for many more months, if not years.

Civilian non-combatants already faced great risk on the ground. Islamic State and other militant and terrorist groups have caused untold death and misery to thousands. In Syria, civilians are also repeatedly targeted by the Assad regime in indiscriminate bombings, while in Iraq both the Army and associated militias have been accused of atrocities.

Yet civilians are also at risk from the international coalition’s actions. This is a complex conflict, involving multiple allies fighting across two nations. It is also an intense air war, with Islamic State frequently targeted by airstrikes within the towns and cities it now occupies. Civilian casualties are inevitable.

Ibrahim al Mussul, a shepherd killed with his two daughters Jozah and Zahra in a reported US airstrike on his home, February 2nd 2015 (Syrian Network for Human Rights)

Promoting accountability Most of the 12 coalition members do issue at least some information about the strikes they conduct – yet there is rarely mention of any casualties inflicted.

With so many nations carrying out bombings, determining responsibility when civilians are killed or injured presents major challenges. We believe there is an acute need for greater openness from our militaries – and our project is an attempt to address this.

Airwars is a non-aligned, not-for-profit organisation seeking to promote transparency and accountability by the US and its allies in the following ways:

* We monitor and record the international coalition’s airstrikes against Islamic State (Daesh) in both Iraq and Syria

* We archive all publicly available official military reports of the war

* We collate – and aim to verify wherever possible – all credible claims of non-combatant civilian deaths.

The Airwars project was begun in August 2014 by journalist Chris Woods, who previously set up and ran the award-winning Drones Project at the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

“With so many airstrikes being carried out by so many nations in Iraq and Syria – yet with little real transparency or accountability – there is an urgent need for credible independent monitoring,” says Woods. “We know from other recent conflicts that holding combatants to account for their actions can play a significant role in reducing the risk to civilians on the ground.”

Airwars today comprises a small team of professional journalists and researchers. While much of our work is voluntary, thanks to generous funding from the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust we also employ two part time specialists – an Iraqi and a Syrian – who monitor Arabic media and monitoring groups, and follow up wherever possible credible claims of civilian casualties.

In March 2015, Airwars transitioned to this purpose-built website thanks to the project’s second core volunteer, data journalist Basile Simon.

Montage of damage from a reported coalition airstrike near Mosul April 20th 2015 (Photo: Mosul Residents Facebook page)

Civilian casualties Airstrikes can often represent the greatest threat to civilians on the ground during conflicts. And there are plenty of indications that the coalition’s air war against Islamic State places non-combatants at risk of death or injury:

Coalition strikes are often focused on towns and cities, in both Iraq and Syria. Recent official data showed that at least a third of all coalition airstrikes have been aimed at buildings, for example. Most coalition airstrikes are dynamic – that is, they’re aimed at targets of opportunity as opposed to pre-planned operations. As a consequence, little may be known about civilians in the immediate vicinity of a strike location. There are very few forward air controllers in Iraq – and none in Syria – meaning the coalition is heavily dependent upon aerial surveillance for accuracy. Yet as Airwars monitoring shows, ISR provision still lags far behind other conflicts such as Afghanistan. There appears little or no accountability for coalition actions – crucial if pressure is to be applied to reduce non-combatant deaths. Some nations like Belgium and Saudi Arabia generally refuse to release details of their airstrikes, while others will only say how many bombs they drop – and not where they strike.

Despite these risks, the coalition continues to insist that it cannot officially confirm the death of a single civilian after nine months of airstrikes.

In its latest statement to Airwars dated March 25th, a Pentagon spokesman told us: “It is CENTCOM‘s view that no non-combatant deaths from coalition airstrikes in either Iraq or Syria have officially been confirmed.”

Counting the dead Instead of the ‘zero civilians killed’ which CENTCOM insists upon, Airwars has identified a significant number of non-combatants likely to have been killed in coalition strikes.

Our early findings have (as of May 13th 2015) identified 95 incidents of concern, in which between 587 and 734 civilian non-combatant fatalities have been claimed.

Many of these events represent significant challenges to our researchers. That said, it is our present view that there are reasonable indications of between 370-465 non-combatant deaths likely to have been caused by coalition strikes.

A further 130-145 deaths are presently poorly reported, or are single-sourced. And an additional 85-125 fatalities result from a contested event (for example, alongside claims that the Iraq military might instead have been responsible.)

Our researchers have also identified 140 or more ‘friendly fire’ deaths of allied ground forces which have been attributed to the coalition, with varying levels of certainty.

Four year old Abdullah Ghassan Salem al Hadid, killed with his family in a reported coalition airstrike on Mosul, Iraq on April 23 2015

“Claims by the coalition that it has killed few or no civilians in its many thousands of airstrikes are not borne out by the evidence,” says Woods. “For numerous events, we have detailed information regarding non-combatants killed – and confirmed coalition strikes in the immediate vicinity. Yet there is little evidence the international alliance is following up on such cases.

“The coalition needs to improve both its post-strike investigations, and to acknowledge promptly and publicly any non-combatant fatalities. Failure to do so risks undermining support among Iraqi and Syrian civilians for ongoing operations – and also hands a propaganda tool to those opposing international intervention.”

If, as expected, the coalition’s airwar continues for some time, Airwars believes there is a vital public interest in its continuing to monitor, scrutinize and challenge military and government narratives of the war.

Experience from previous conflicts such as Afghanistan also indicates that sustained public scrutiny can help to reduce the risk to non-combatants on the battlefield.

Archiving the war Another important role for Airwars is to gather and permanently archive public military records of the war.

Already the Daily Reports section of our website has collated hundreds of official releases by the US and other militaries. We cross-reference these records where possible against claims of civilian casualties, and also archive video, photographic and other evidence of strikes and their consequences.

There are important reasons for doing this. Official digital records of recent conflicts have proven highly vulnerable to amendment or deletion.

Records of the recent Afghanistan conflict have already fragmented, with CENTCOM only making available records dating back four years. Researchers then have to re-obtain such data using Freedom of Information requests, a laborious and time-consuming process. The British government too has removed daily reports published as recently as 2012.

April 5: RAF reports Tornado strike at RamadiApril 16th: Strike details are goneThis is why we archive everything. pic.twitter.com/zZBUFVPZXz

— Airwars (@airwars) April 16, 2015

Already in the present coalition air war, some records have disappeared from the public record. On April 5th for example, the UK reported an airstrike by one of its Tornados at Ramadi in Iraq [see above]. Eleven days later that record was removed.

By publishing all official reports as they are released, our aim is to archive the entire air war, ensuring that future researchers have full public access to records as they were issued.

For our latest news on coalition strikes follow Airwars on Twitter

▲ French attack aircraft onboard the carrier Charles de Gaulle, March 20th 2014 (Ministère de la Défense)

prev 1 … 5 6 7