Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search


Baghdad security plan puts US forces, civilians perilously close

The US killed three Iraqi civilians earlier this month, highlighting the risks of American troops taking the fight into neighborhoods.

By Sam DagherCorrespondent of The Christian Science Monitor / April 24, 2007



BAGHDAD

A massive funeral tent stood on the street in Baghdad's Al Amel neighborhood. Taped verses from the Koran echoed from loudspeakers. Black-clad women wailed and slapped their faces in sorrow.

Skip to next paragraph

On the surface, the scene last week was nothing unusual for Baghdad. But instead of mourning those killed by insurgents or militiamen, this time residents grieved for a mother and two of her adult sons killed in a US helicopter strike earlier this month.

While the Americans insist those killed were insurgents who had previously fired "small arms" with "hostile intent" on a US combat outpost (COP), neighbors see it differently. Witnesses say the men weren't firing on Americans, but reacting to what they thought was a Sunni insurgent attack. It proved to be a deadly mistake in the ever more dense fog of war in Iraq.

Regardless, the Amel incident underscores the deepening complexities for US troops as they wade farther into neighborhoods, living side by side with Iraqis as part of the plan to secure Baghdad.

Residential alleyways and streets are now becoming battlefields. Infantrymen, trained mainly to engage and kill the enemy and protect themselves from attacks, are being asked to tackle a sectarian war in which the battlefields are neighborhoods and the enemy is becoming harder to spot.

"The problem with the Army is that they are here to fight and it's all about combat power when it's no longer that kind of a war," says a US military officer stationed in Iraq and who is critical of many aspects of the Baghdad security plan.

There is no question that the number of Iraqi civilians killed at the hands of US troops is a mere fraction of those falling every day to car bomb and suicide attacks. But when Iraqis do get caught in American crossfire for whatever reason, those deaths, and the often confusing aftermath of investigations and the paperwork for compensation, only serve to fuel the anger and animosity of Iraqis toward US troops.

Four years into the war, human rights groups complain there is a lack of transparency and adequate compensation by the US military to the families of victims in incidents such as the one in Amel.

"The data is so tightly held [by the US military] that we have a hard time wrapping our heads around the extent of the problem," says Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at New York-based Human Rights Watch.

And, experts say, the lack of information about incidents in which civilians are killed is preventing the Army from learning from its mistakes, and preventing such incidents in the future. "The information is not making it into lessons learned," says Mr. Garlasco.

Earlier this month, US government documents released by court order to the American Civil Liberties Union showed that only one-third of the families of 479 Iraqi civilians killed by US soldiers between 2003 and 2006 received compensation after filing for claims, while very few incidents were forwarded for further investigation.

The incident in Amel may be a case study in the confusion that rules throughout Baghdad. Khalid Abdel-Jawad, a civil engineer who is a fluent-English speaker, says he's still finding it hard to understand why the US military killed two of his best friends and their mother and continues to hold his wounded teenage brother.

It all started sometime before midnight on Sunday, April 15, when many residents of Amel's 803 block were roused from bed by the sound of gunfire and explosions.

Permissions