Description
The reporting of civilian casualty figures is fraught with uncertainty and incongruities, despite attracting substantial political and media focus. Even though the campaign of the Global Coalition against the Islamic State has all the trappings of legality and legitimacy, it became mired in a CIVCAS controversy. Based on a unique dataset, this article investigates the connections between the character of Western military power and the civilian casualties reported for the Coalition’s airstrikes. By combining the number of sorties with monthly civilian casualty reports reported by the Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve, and contrasting those to Airwars’ civilian harm reports, the dataset provides two unique insights: firstly, how the changing character of war affects the number of civilian casualties; and secondly, how it affects the discrepancies in reporting. The paper argues that CIVCAS reporting and the uncovered discrepancies are caused by a disconnect between the political and military level of the Coalition’s strategy in contemporary warfare, and an ineptitude to navigate the contemporary normative framework for armed conflict.
