Afghanistan War Produces High Civilians-Killed-Per-Bomb-Dropped Ratio
Professor Marc W. Herold
POSTED JANUARY 6, 2002 --
My argument regarding the high rate of Afghan civilian 'impact deaths' caused by U.S. bombing, mirrors though in magnified fashion, precisely what happened in Serbia almost two years ago. A policy update at the time from the World Policy Institute summarized the effects of NATO bombing :
"The high rate of civilian casualties caused by the NATO bombardment of Kosovo and Serbia further undermines any notion that the air war has a "humanitarian" purpose. Fred Kaplan of the Boston Globe has suggested that at least 1,200 civilians have been killed since NATO started its air war, and that the number of civilian casualties per ton of bombs dropped is greater than during the height of the Vietnam War. The reason for the higher civilian casualty rates is simple: more NATO bombing raids are taking place in heavily populated areas, so that even if most of the bombs are close to their intended targets, those that miss the mark and are more likely to hit adjoining apartment buildings, offices, hospitals, old age homes, public markets, and other places where civilians congregate. Add to this the fact that NATO has been consciously targeting civilian infrastructure, including bridges and electric power stations, and it is quite possible that the death toll from NATO bombing could mount for months and years to come, as people die of disease and starvation caused by the demolition of Serbia's economy (as has been happening for many years in Iraq). THE KILLING OF CIVILIANS BY NATO BOMBS IS NOT A "MISTAKE." IT IS A LOGICAL AND PREDICTABLE OUTGROWTH OF THE WAY NATO HAS CHOSEN TO WAGE THE WAR."1
The Afghan air war has been particularly destructive in terms of civilian impact deaths compared with three previous aerial bombing campaigns. The following Table 1 plots figures of civilians killed per 10,000 tons of bombs dropped. In an article in the Boston Globe [May 30, 1999], Fred Kaplan argued that the so-called 'kill ratio' in Serbia was about the same as in the Vietnam campaign---circa one civilian killed for every 10 tons of bombs dropped---whereas in the Iraq war, it was reportedly one-half that, though this seems to be a serious under-estimate.2 The index is, of course, at best suggestive since civilian casualties will reflect type of ordnance used, local demographic factors, topography, emplacement of military facilities, etc..
Table 1. Comparative Data on Range of Civilian 'Impact Deaths' per 10,000 tons of Bombs Dropped by U.S-U.K Forces in Selected Bombing Campaigns, 1969 - 2001
Sources: derived from a variety of sources. Derivation available by request from the author.
Note: the Afghan figure -- 2.6 civilians killed per 10 tons of bombs, is based upon my estimate of over 3,700 dead civilians. The only other estimate of overall casualties I have been able to locate is a figure not based upon any detailed calculation. The French daily, Le Monde [December 13, 2001], cited the figure of at least 1,000 civilian dead---or .7 dead civilians per 10 tons of bombs -- after two full months of aerial bombardment.3The article argues that the greatest casualties have been experienced in small villages rather than major cities like Kabul, where it claims only 60 casualties -- a highly dubious figure in my judgement [see Appendix 5].
After surveying numerous reports on civilian impact deaths caused by bombing, I estimate the following numbers : Cambodia @ 100,000; Iraq @ 3,000; Serbia @ 1,200; and Afghanistan @ 3,700. These translate into respective kill ratios [civilians killed per 10,000 tons of bombs] of : Afghanistan @ 2,643; Cambodia @ 1,852; Serbia @ 522; and Iraq @ 341.
Along with the U.S military planner's decision to bomb perceived military targets in urban areas, the use of weapons with great destructive blast and fragmentation power, necessarily results in heavy civilian casualties. The weapon of choice during the first three weeks of the air campaign was the 500 lb bomb which has a lethal blast range of 20 meters; later, the 2,000 lb pound became the weapon of choice and it has a lethal blast range of 34 meters.
In order to be safe from a 2,000 lb bomb, a person need be close to one half kilometer away. Notwithstanding the GPS 'brain', these precision-guided bombs frequently struck off target. For example, a 2,000 lb JDAM bomb dropped from a B-52 should hit within 13 meters of its target, but on Tuesday, December 4th, it fell within 100 meters of U.S forces, killing three Americans, six anti-Taliban fighters, and wounding another 40. By mid-December after nine weeks of the air war, U.S forces had used up about one-half of their 10,000 JDAM bomb inventory and was ordering more.4
| Characteristics | Mark 82 500 lb bomb | 1,000 lb JDAM bomb | 2,000 lb JDAM bomb |
| Officially reported accuracy range | 9 meters | 13-30 meters, 39 feet in tests | 13-30 meters, 39 feet in tests |
| Fragmentation range | 3,000 feet | 3,000 feet | |
| Blast shrapnel range | 600 ft. radius | 1,200 feet radius | |
| Effective casualty radius* | about 60 meters radius | Safety at least 400 meters from impact site | |
| Lethal blast range** | about 20 meters radius | 110 feet | |
| Crater upon impact | 12 feet or 4 meters | 35 feet wide | 50 feet wide and 36 feet deep |
| Price per unit | $19,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 |
| Manufacturers | Texas Instruments and Raytheon | Boeing Corp. and Lockheed Martin | Boeing Corp. and Lockheed Martin |
* meaning 50% of exposed persons will die
**meaning 100% mortality within this range
Footnotes
1 From World Policy Institute, Arms Trade Resources Center, Policy Updates [June 4, 1999].
2 Fred Kaplan, "Bombs Killing More Civilians Than Expected," Boston Globe [May 30, 1999]
3 Francoise Chipaux, "Afghanistan: Deux Mois de Frappes Auraient Fait au Moins un Miller de Vie Civiles," Le Monde [December 13, 2001].
4 "More Satellite Bombs Ordered," Paknews.com [December 13, 2001].