Why
Dont They Count The Dead?
By Kim Sengupta
and Marie Woolf
17 May 2004
The
Independent
One year and 16 days after President George
Bush declared the end to major hostilities in Iraq, the toll of American
and British casualties continues to rise. Since the start of the invasion,
566 members of the American military and 211 US civilians have died.
The British figures are 59 and 8.
But at the same
time thousands of others men, women, the elderly and the very
young have been killed or maimed with far less fanfare. No one
knows how many. They are Iraqi civilians, and the Americans and the
British do not bother to keep count of the people they have "liberated"
and then killed.
This is not usual
in modern warfare. In most past conflicts, attempts were made to keep
a tally of civilian losses. Legal experts say that, particularly in
the case of Iraq, it is the duty of occupying powers to do so under
the Geneva Conventions.
The Pentagon says
it is not helpful to keep a "body count". Yet, there is no
hesitation in giving numbers of Iraqi fighters, described as "Saddam
loyalists" and "al-Qa'ida elements" who have supposedly
been eliminated by the Allies.
Unofficial estimates
of civilian casualties are available. The pressure group Iraq Body Count
presents a daily update. It puts the maximum number of killed Iraqi
civilians at 11,005, and the minimum at 9,148. But this does not include
about 800 reportedly killed recently in Fallujah and 235 in Baghdad,
or about 20 reported to have died in the British-controlled Basra region.
As the death toll
continued to mount yesterday, Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, ruled
out allowing MPs to vote on sending more troops amid reports that the
British deployment could double to 15,000. He and other Cabinet ministers
played down mounting speculation Tony Blair would step down as Prime
Minister. Meanwhile Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, was forced
back on the defensive by reports he had authorised the use of extreme
interrogation techniques on Iraqi prisoners.
Iraq Body Count
accepts its figures are inexact. "We only include deaths which
have been reported by multiple media sources, and we are also careful
in trying to avoid duplication," said Hamit Dardagan, a co-founder
of the organisation. "The numbers are likely to be higher, but
we do not want to speculate as to how many. But this really should be
done by the coalition powers. They owe a responsibility to the people
of Iraq."
Amnesty International,
which published a report last week detailing the British Army's alleged
involvement in the deaths of 37 civilians in disputed circumstances,
says it is "astonishing" that the US and Britain are not keeping
track of civilian casualties. "Unless this takes place it is very
difficult to find out what is going on. We do not believe that it is
not possible."
A spokesman for
the US-based Human Rights Watch said: "What is essential is to
find out why any civilian death or injury is happening. An investigation
is needed into the tactics and weapons causing this."
Sir Menzies Campbell,
the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats and the party's spokesman
on foreign affairs, said: "The failure to keep account of civilian
casualties is monstrous. It gives the impression that the lives of ordinary
Iraqi citizens are worth less than those of soldiers.
"It cannot
be beyond the wit of the Coalition Provisional Authority to find a way
to register Iraqi numbers. Not to do so appears contrary to the spirit
of Geneva Convention."
Alan Simpson, Labour
MP for Nottingham South, said: "Our refusal to count the deaths
of Iraqi civilians fuels the belief in the Arab world that the peace
is just a hidden war. In not counting Iraqi deaths, their lives appear
to count for nothing. In such circumstances you can't blame Iraqis for
believing that in our eyes they are still the enemy."