America's Secret Air War in Iraq
by
Tom Engelhardt
and Nick Turse
by Tom Engelhardt and
Nick Turse
DIGG THIS
Just last week,
in a typical air strike of the Iraq War, two missiles were fired
at targets somewhere in the city of Ramadi, capital of al-Anbar
province in the heartland of the Sunni insurgency, in the course
of a battle with American forces stationed there. According to newspaper
accounts, "18
insurgents" were killed.
Air power
has, since World War II, been the American way of war. The invasion
of Iraq began, after all, with a dominating show of air power that
was meant to "shock and awe" – that is, cow not just Saddam
Hussein's regime, but the whole "axis of evil" and other countries
the Bush administration had in its mental gun sights. Among the
largest of America's "permanent" megabases in Iraq is Balad
Air Base with the sorts of daily air-traffic pile-ups that you
would normally see over Chicago's O'Hare Airport. And yet, as Tomdispatch.com
has written numerous
times over these last years, reporters in Iraq almost determinedly
refuse to look up or report on the regular, if intermittent, application
of American air power especially to heavily populated neighborhoods
in Iraq's cities.
Now, the Bush
"surge" is officially beginning. Little about it is strikingly new
or untried except possibly the unspoken urge to ratchet up
the use of air power in Iraq, the only thing a Pentagon with desperately
overstretched ground forces really has to throw into the escalation
breach (as in recent months it has drastically escalated the use
of air power in Afghanistan). Pepe Escobar, the superb globe-trotting
correspondent for Asia
Times, has recently warned that the new Bush administration
"plan" signals "the dire prospect... of a devastating air war over
Baghdad" in which "Iraqification-cum-surge" will prove "a disaster
mostly for every Baghdadi caught in the crossfire."
Just last
week, Julian E. Barnes of the Los
Angeles Times reported that the U.S. Air Force has the Iraqi
itch and is getting ready to scratch it. Air Force commanders are
preparing for a "heightened role in the volatile region." They are,
he reported, already "gearing up for just such a role in Iraq as
part of Bush's planned troop increase" an expansion of air
power that "could include aggressive new tactics designed to deter
Iranian assistance to Iraqi militants… [and] more forceful patrols
by Air Force and Navy fighter planes along the Iran-Iraq border
to counter the smuggling of bomb supplies from Iran."
Until now,
U.S. air power in Iraq has been a non-story if you weren't
an Iraqi. In the coming months, however, it may force its way onto
the front pages of our papers and onto the nightly TV news
but not if the Pentagon has anything to say about it. Doing some
journalistic sleuthing, Nick Turse has discovered just how secretive
the Pentagon has been about offering any significant information
on the size, scope, and damage involved in its air operations over
Iraq. The story of this secret American air war is now told for
the first time and at this website. ~ Tom
Bombs
over Baghdad:
The
Pentagon's Secret Air War in Iraq
By Nick
Turse
A secret
air war is being waged in Iraq often in and around that
country's population centers about which we can find out
little. The U.S. military keeps information on the munitions expended
in its air efforts under tight wraps, refusing to offer details
on the scale of use and so minimizing the importance of air power
in Iraq. But expert opinion holds that the forms of aerial assault
being employed in that country, though hardly covered in our media,
may account for most of the U.S. and coalition-attributed Iraqi
civilian deaths there since the 2003 invasion.
While some
aspects of the air war remain a total mystery, Air Force officials
do acknowledge that U.S. military and coalition aircraft dropped
at least 111,000 pounds of bombs on targets in Iraq in 2006. This
figure, 177 bombs in all, does not include guided missiles and
unguided rockets fired, or cannon rounds expended; nor, according
to a U.S. Central Command Air Forces (CENTAF) spokesman, does
it take into account the munitions used by some Marine Corps and
other coalition aircraft or any of the Army's helicopter gunships.
Moreover, it does not include munitions used by the armed helicopters
of the many private
security contractors flying their own missions in Iraq.
Air War,
Iraq: 2006
In statistics
provided to Tomdispatch, CENTAF reported a total of 10,519 "close
air support missions" in Iraq in 2006, during which its aircraft
dropped 177 bombs and fired 52 "Hellfire/Maverick missiles." These
air strikes presumably included numerous highly publicized missions
ranging from the January
air strike outside the town of Baiji that reportedly "killed
a family of 12," including at least three women and three young
children, to the December attack
on an insurgent safehouse in the Garma area, near Fallujah, that
reportedly killed "two women and a child" in addition to five
guerillas. Then there were the even less well remembered events,
such as those on July 28th when, according to official
reports, an Air Force Predator unmanned aerial vehicle destroyed
an "anti-Iraqi forces" vehicle with Hellfire missiles, while Air
Force F-16 Fighting Falcons "expended a GBU-12, destroying an
anti-Iraqi forces location," both in the vicinity of the city
of Ramadi.
The latter
weapon, Guided Bomb Unit-12, a laser-guided bomb with a 500-pound
general-purpose warhead, was the most frequently used bomb in Iraq
in 2006, according CENTAF statistics provided to Tomdispatch. In
addition to the ninety-five GBU-12s "expended," sixty-seven satellite-guided,
500-pound GBU-38s and fifteen 2,000-pound GBU-31/32 munitions were
also dropped on Iraqi targets last year, according to official Air
Force figures.
One weapon
conspicuously left out of this total is rockets such as
the 2.75-inch Hydra-70 rocket which can be outfitted with various
warheads and is fired from fixed-wing aircraft and most helicopters.
The number of rockets fired is withheld from the press so as,
according to a CENTAF spokesman, not to "skew the tally and present
an inaccurate picture of the air campaign." The number of rockets
fired may be quite significant as, according to a 2005 press
release issued by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who helped secure
a $900 million Hydra contract from the Army for General Dynamics,
"the widely used Hydra-70 rocket… has seen extensive use in Afghanistan
and Iraq… [and] has become the world's most widely used helicopter-launched
weapon system." Early last year, Sandra
I. Erwin of National Defense Magazine noted that the
U.S. military was looking to the Hydra to serve as a low-cost
weapon for Iraq's urban areas. "The Army already buys and stockpiles
thousands of the 2.75-inch Hydra rockets, and is seeking to equip
as many as 73,000 with the laser kits, under a program called
'advanced precision kill weapon system,' or APKWS. The Navy would
purchase 8,000 for Marine Corps helicopters," she wrote.
The number
of cannon rounds fired some models of the AC-130
gunship, for instance, have a Gatling gun that can fire up
to 1,800 rounds in a single minute is also a closely guarded
secret. The official reason given is that "special forces often
use aircraft such as the AC-130" and since "their missions and
operations are classified, so therefore these figures are not
released."
Repeated
inquiries concerning another reporter's statistics on cannon rounds
fired by CENTAF aircraft prompted the same official to emphatically
state in an email: "WE DO NOT REPORT CANNON ROUNDS." His superior
officer, Lt. Col. Johnn Kennedy, the Deputy Director of CENTAF
Public Affairs, followed up, noting:
Glad
to see you appreciate the tremendous efforts [my subordinate]
has already expended on you. Trust me, it's probably much more
significant than the relentless pursuit of the number of cannon
rounds.
But the
number of cannon rounds and rockets fired by U.S. aircraft is
not an insignificant matter, according to Les
Roberts, formerly an epidemiologist for the World Health Organization
in Rwanda during that country's civil war and an expert on the
human costs of the war in Iraq. According to Roberts, who was
last in Iraq in 2004 (where, he says, he personally witnessed
"the shredding of entire blocks" in Baghdad's Sadr City by aerial
cannon fire), "rocket and cannon fire could account for most coalition-attributed
civilian deaths." He adds, "I find it disturbing that they will
not release this [figure], but even more disturbing that they
have not released such information to Congressmen who have requested
it."
Non-CENTAF
military officials were equally tight-lipped about such munitions
at least with me. A Public Affairs officer from U.S. Central
Command told me that the Command didn't track such information.
When I questioned a coalition spokesman in Baghdad about the number
of rockets and cannon rounds fired by Army and Marine Corps helicopters
in Iraq in 2006, I was told, "We cannot comment on your inquiry
due to operational security."
I then pointed
out that just last month, in National
Defense Magazine, Col. Robert A. Fitzgerald, the Marine
Corps' head of aviation plans and policy, was quoted as saying that,
in 2006, "Marine rotary-wing aircraft flew more than 60,000 combat
flight hours, and fixed-wing platforms completed 31,000. They dropped
80 tons of bombs and fired 80 missiles, 3,532 rockets and more than
2 million rounds of smaller ammunition."
When asked
if this admission had endangered operational security, the spokesman
responded, "I cannot comment on the policies or release authority
of a Marine colonel."
While the
Marine Corps' statistics presumably include totals of munitions
used in Afghanistan, where American air power has played a large
role in the fighting, they do remind us that the minimal figures
given out by CENTAF don't give an accurate picture of the air
war in Iraq. These particular totals are, according CENTAF, "separate
from the data provided" to Tomdispatch on Iraqi bomb and missile
expenditure in 2006.
"Relentless
Pursuit"
Since the
U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the American air war in Iraq, often
targeting urban areas, has been given remarkably short shrift
in the media. In 2004, Tom Engelhardt, writing at Tomdispatch,
called attention to this glaring absence. Seymour Hersh's seminal
piece of reportage, "Up
in the Air," published in the New Yorker in late 2005,
ushered in some mainstream attention to the subject. Articles
by Dahr Jamail, an independent journalist who covered the American
occupation and war in Iraq, before
and after
the Hersh piece, are among the smattering
of pieces
that have offered glimpses of the air campaign and its impact.
To date, however, the mainstream media has not, to use the words
of Lt. Col. Kennedy, engaged in a "relentless pursuit of the number
of cannon rounds" fired or any other aspect of the air war or
its consequences for the people of Iraq.
While we
will undoubtedly never know the full extent of the human costs
of the U.S. air campaign, just a few dogged reporters assigned
to the air-power beat might, at the very least, have offered some
sense of this one-sided air war. Since this has not been the case,
we must rely on the best available evidence. One valuable source
is a national cross-sectional cluster sample survey of mortality
in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. Carried out by epidemiologists
at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health
and Iraqi physicians organized through Mustansiriya University
in Baghdad, it estimated 655,000 "excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence
of the war." The study, published in the British medical journal,
The Lancet, in October 2006, found that from March 2003
to June 2006, 13% of violent deaths in Iraq were caused by coalition
air strikes. If the 655,000 figure, including over 601,000 violent
deaths, is anywhere close to accurate and the study offered
a possible range of civilian deaths that ran from 392,979 to 942,636
this would equal approximately 78,133 Iraqis killed by
bombs, missiles, rockets, or cannon rounds from coalition aircraft
between March 2003 when the invasion of Iraq began and last June
when the study concluded.
There are
indications that the U.S. air war has taken an especially grievous
toll on Iraqi children. According to statistics provided to Tomdispatch
by The Lancet study's authors, 50% of all violent deaths
of Iraqi children under 15 years of age, between March 2003 and
June 2006, were due to coalition air strikes.
The Lancet
study used well-established survey methods, which have been proven
in conflict zones from Kosovo to the Congo, and interviewers actually
inspected death certificates from 92% of the households surveyed
where they were requested (which they did 87% of the time). The
Iraq Body Count Project,
a group of researchers based in the United Kingdom who maintain
a public database of Iraqi civilian deaths resulting from the war,
carefully restricts itself to the sparser media reports of civilian
fatalities that come out of Iraq. While a much lower number (currently
the range of media-reported deaths stands at: 55,44161,133)
than The Lancet's findings, an analysis of their carefully
limited data also offers a glimpse of the human costs of the air
war.
Statistics
provided to Tomdispatch by the Iraq Body Count Project show that
since the U.S. invasion in 2003, coalition air strikes have, according
to media sources alone which as we know have covered the
air war poorly caused between 15,59317,067 Iraqi civilian
casualties, including 3,6254,093 deaths. Last year, media
reports listed between 169200 Iraqis killed and 111112
injured in twenty-eight separate coalition air strikes, according
to the IBC project.
These numbers
also appear to be on the rise. In an email message to Tomdispatch
last month, John Sloboda, the co-founder and spokesperson for
the IBC Project, notes that the "vast majority [of lethal air
strikes] have been in the last half of the year."
When asked
about the modest air power casualty figures provided by the Iraq
Body Count Project and whether CENTAF accepts them, Lt. Col. Kennedy
dodged the question, telling Tomdispatch, "We do not track such
numbers and so cannot comment on the Project's efforts or validity."
He had a similar answer when it came to The Lancet study's
findings.
Asked about
the assertion that the second half of 2006 was much deadlier for
Iraqis due to U.S. air strikes and the possible reasons for this,
Kennedy waxed eloquent, "War, by its very nature has ebbs and
flows, and we constantly review the application of airpower to
best support the forces on the ground in theater. We view this
as simply part of our contract to the warfighters. As we do not
discuss operational aspects of missions, I'll decline further
comment."
Kennedy went
on to say that the U.S. makes "every effort" to "minimize collateral
damage regardless of whether the enemy is on open ground or within
the confines of a city." Just days ago, in the Los
Angeles Times, Lt. Gen. Carrol H. "Howie" Chandler, the
Air Force's Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Plans and Requirements,
expanded on this line of thought, noting, "I wouldn't automatically
write off air power in an urban environment for fear of collateral
damage… We have the capability with precision targeting and the
new weapons to operate in an urban environment."
Sarah Sewall,
who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense from 1993
to 1996 and is now Director for the Carr Center for Human Rights
Policy at Harvard, agrees that air power has a role to play in
urban operations, and may even mitigate civilian harm in certain
instances. She warns, however, "I have a lot of skepticism about
the applicability of air power for all types of problems and particularly
for the types of problems that we see commonly, on a day to day
basis, in Iraq today." As she told Tomdispatch, "The problem comes
when you think it is the functional equivalent of ground forces."
The Pace
Quickens
In 2005, CENTAF
reported using 404 bombs and missiles in Iraq. In 2006, an apparent
lull (whether in lethal attacks or just in their reporting) in the
first half of the year seems to have given way to a rise in deadly
attacks during the second half. Only days into 2007, the U.S. military
had already conducted air strikes in three nations Afghanistan,
Iraq and Somalia. And in Iraq, the air war may be increasing in
pace and ferocity. For example, on January 9th, the U.S. unleashed
its air power on Baghdad's Haifa Street, a "mostly Sunni Arab enclave
of residential buildings and shops." According to the Washington
Post, "F-15 fighter jets strafed rooftops with cannons,
while the Apache[ helicopter]s fired Hellfire missiles." Elsewhere
in Iraq that day, according to Air Force reports, F-16s strafed
targets near Bayji with cannon fire, while others dropped GBU-38s
on targets near Turki Village; and F-15Es provided "close-air support"
to troops near Basrah.
That same
evening, back in the U.S., a broadcast of Fox News Channel's "Special
Report with Brit Hume" offered a brief glimpse of the air war
in a story by reporter David Macdougall who was, said Hume, "embedded
with the Air Force in a location we cannot identify, where not
only fighter jets, but bombers roared into the air headed for
other targets in Iraq." Macdougall reported that the B-1B Lancer,
the long-range bomber that carries the largest payload of weapons
in the Air Force was, for the first time in over a year, again
being employed in combat in Iraq.
"These B-1
bombers were central to the raid. We're told they flew a ten-hour
mission, and by the looks of their empty bomb bays, these planes
dropped thousands of pounds of munitions. They bombed 25 targets
deep inside Iraq," he said. At one of these sites, he reported,
Army troops sent in after the air strike reportedly found a "command
and control center, insurgent hospital, and a closet-sized room
covered in blood." We may never know if that "room covered in
blood" was a torture center, part of the hospital, or if it became
"covered" in the same manner that caused the 280 Iraqi civilian
casualties from air strikes reported in the media, and the many
more that undoubtedly went unreported and ignored, last year.
This is yet another facet of the air war that will remain a mystery.
The Secret
Air War
While reporting
on the air war has often been barely evident, except as the odd
paragraph in daily round-up battle pieces from Iraq (which rely
mainly on military handouts or press briefings), the gaps in our
knowledge about the air war have been facilitated by the U.S.
military's failure to be honest and forthcoming with both data
and doctrine. In this respect, the military has been the media's
enabler.
Given CENTAF's
knowledge that, no matter how "smart" their munitions or how precise
their targeting, noncombatants, especially in urban neighborhoods,
are sure to die in air strikes, I had a question for Lt. Col. Kennedy:
Could he explain how CENTAF decided what was an acceptable level
of civilian casualties it was willing to sacrifice for military
aims? His answer: "Not in a sufficient manner that you would be
happy with."
Kennedy's
response echoed a running theme in his replies to my questions.
At one point in our exchanges, he actually suggested that an article
on the air war in Iraq was not "a viable story" and told me not
to contact him again until I was under contract to produce an
article that met his standards. He later claimed that his viability
comment was due to my "apparent freelance status" and the fact
I had not provided "a copy of any contract, nor contacts with
a publisher."
"When you
provide such information I'll be happy to entertain your questions,"
he wrote. After providing proof that I was, indeed, a journalist,
he deigned to answer me again, concluding, "This is the last email
I will respond to from you."
Kennedy
was just one of a number of U.S. military officials who thwarted
attempts to uncover the barest outline of the real extent and
nature of the American air war and its toll on Iraqis. Aside from
the Air Force's daily release of airpower
summaries of dubious worth, the military's efforts have kept
almost all substantive aspects of the air war essentially a secret
from Americans at home.
During the
Vietnam War, the United States conducted a clandestine air war
in Cambodia, lied about it to the press, and hid it from the American
public. In Iraq, the military has, these last years, engaged in
a different kind of secretive air campaign, but their methods
of keeping it a mystery appear to have certain similarities. A
few years ago, at a meeting at a Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace event, Les Roberts, a co-author of The Lancet study
and now on faculty at Columbia University's Program on Forced
Migration and Health, recalls a Pentagon spokesman's declaration
that, aside from some sites in Najaf and al-Anbar province, the
military had refrained from any attacks on mosques in Iraq. Roberts
said that the spokesman's rhetoric differed markedly from the
facts on the ground, recalling that "just weeks before I had seen
helicopter gunships destroy a beautiful Mosque about an hour south
of Baghdad."
When I asked
Lt. Col. Kennedy why CENTAF did not track figures on civilian
casualties of the air war, he laid the blame on higher headquarters,
namely the Office of the Secretary of Defense: "Go ask OSD as
we do not set policy here," he wrote.
"I think
that it's a red herring," Sewall, the former Pentagon official,
told Tomdispatch. "They spend a tremendous amount of energy using
computer models to predict where the glass shards are going to
go, and then they don't actually care about whether or not that
effort to control the direction of the glass shards results in
killing fewer people, because they've never bothered to find out
whether it, in fact, succeeded in killing fewer people." As she
pointed out in a telephone interview, it is "a rather absurd position."
"If
they wanted to, they could certainly, as a matter of their own internal
procedures, do it," Sewall said of tracking civilian casualties.
"I think it's inexcusable that they don't do a better job."
February
8, 2007
Tom
Engelhardt [send him mail]
is editor of TomDispatch.com,
a project of the Nation
Institute. He
is the author of several books, including The
Last Days of Publishing: A Novel, The
End of Victory Culture, and most recently, Mission
Unaccomplished (Nation Books), the first collection of Tomdispatch
interviews. His new blog is The
Notion. Nick Turse is the associate editor and research director
of Tomdispatch.com. He has written for the
Los
Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Nation,
the Village Voice, and regularly for Tomdispatch.
Copyright
© 2007 Nick Turse
Tom
Engelhardt Archives
|