全球智库信息集成服务系统

Assessments reveal what happened

• The military's data and records that support assessments of civilian harm can be incomplete.
• Intelligence efforts focus on the enemy, limiting the resources available to understand the broader civilian picture.
• The military's standard for finding a civilian casualty report to be credible is higher than advertised.
• Combatant commands planning for high-intensity conflict against near-peer adversaries are unprepared to address civilian-harm issues.

More-extensive investigations can reveal why

• Investigations are the most comprehensive tool for documenting and fully understanding civilian-harm incidents.
• Neither investigations nor credibility assessment reports enable learning within the force.
• Investigations can carry the stigma of a disciplinary process.

Responses to civilian-harm incidents can include the provision of ex gratia payments to the affected community and individuals

• Such responses provide assistance to those affected by the tragedy of war, advance the U.S. mission on the ground, build rapport with local communities, and reinforce the U.S. relationship with the host-nation government.
• DoD's responses to civilian harm have historically been inconsistent and confusing.
• DoD's interim regulations are just part of what should be a more comprehensive response policy that addresses all civilian-harm response options.

DoD is not adequately organized, structured, or resourced to sufficiently mitigate and respond to civilian-harm issues

• There are not enough personnel dedicated to civilian-harm issues full-time, and those who are responsible for civilian-harm matters often receive minimal training on the duties that they are expected to perform.
• DoD is not organized to monitor and analyze civilian casualty trends and patterns over time.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), from its most-senior leaders to military operators in the field, has expressed a strong commitment to complying with the law of war and to mitigating civilian harm for legal, moral, and strategic reasons and for reasons related to mission-effectiveness. But above and beyond its law of war obligations, DoD implements policies and procedures at multiple levels to mitigate civilian harm during armed conflict. In this report, researchers from the RAND Corporation and CNA conduct an independent assessment of DoD standards, processes, procedures, and policies relating to civilian casualties resulting from U.S. military operations. In particular, the researchers examine DoD's efforts to assess, investigate, and respond to civilian harm, as well as DoD's resourcing and structure to address such issues. The researchers outline their findings and recommendations for how DoD can improve in these areas.

• Chapter One

  Introduction

• Chapter Two

  Assessments of Civilian Harm

• Chapter Three

  Investigations of Civilian Harm

• Chapter Four

  Responses to Civilian Harm

• Chapter Five

  DoD Resourcing and Structure to Address Civilian Harm

• Chapter Six

  Recommendations

• Appendix

  Geographic Combatant Command Procedures for Civilian Casualty Assessments