March, 17 2013, 01:23pm EDT
The War in Iraq; 10 Years and Counting
IRAQ
The US/UK-led invasion of March 2003 has brought a decade of high and low intensity armed conflict to Iraq. But this conflict is not yet history. It remains entrenched and pervasive, with a clear beginning but no foreseeable end, and very much a part of the present in Iraq. In major regions of the country armed violence continues to exact a remorseless toll on human life, young and old, male and female, across society.
Since the beginning of 2003 the Iraq Body Count project (IBC) has been continuously tracking, analysing and maintaining a public record of civilian deaths on its website iraqbodycount.org.
The figures below provide a statistical overview of the conflict which outlines its human toll. Numbers are derived from over 31,500 deadly incidents analysed for information including time and location, perpetrators and weapons used, with demographic records for those victims (around 40% of the total) for whom such information could be obtained.
IN SUM:
IBC has documented 112,017 - 122,438 civilian deaths from violence between 20 March 2003 and 14 March 2013.
A complete account of violent deaths that includes Iraqi and foreign combatants (including coalition forces), as well as previously unreported civilian deaths still being extracted by IBC from the Iraq War Logs released by WikiLeaks, would include:
+ 39,900 (combatants killed of all nationalities);
+ 11,500 civilians (likely to be added from the Iraq War Logs); yielding about 174,000 as the number of people documented killed in violence in Iraq since 2003.
IBC has recorded an additional 135,089 civilians injured, along with incident and demographic details where known. However IBC only records injured in incidents where there were also deaths, and (unlike for deaths) official Iraqi figures are consistently higher than IBC's. In May 2012 the Iraqi Ministry of Health reported that there had been 250,000 injured since 2003. (See https://aknews.com/en/aknews/3/306941)
IN DETAIL:
The most intense period for civilian deaths was at the war's very beginning, when more than 6,700 were killed in just 3 weeks of 'Shock and Awe' (from 20th March to the seizure of Baghdad on 9th April: a rate of 320 per day for 21 days).
The most violent month after the invasion was July 2006, with 3,266 violent deaths. The most sustained period for high-level violence was during the fourth and fifth years from March 2006 to March 2008, when 'sectarian' killings peaked and some 52,000 died.
Annual civilian deaths since 2003 (counting from 20 March-19 March each year):
- 14,007 in year one
- 12,001 in year two
- 17,026 in year three
- 31,418 in year four
- 20,930 in year five
- 7,829 in year six
- 4,747 in year seven
- 4,133 in year eight
- 4,433 in year nine
- ~4250 in year ten
The majority of civilian deaths during the first year (at least 55%) were directly caused by US/Coalition forces, who were reported as directly causing around 7% of all deaths in the subsequent period until their formal withdrawal on 31st December 2011.
Current deaths per year for civilians in Iraq (at between 4 and 5 thousand) are still of the same order as the total number of US and Coalition military killed over the entire 10 year period (now 4,804 according to https://icasualties.org). Overall there have been 25 Iraqi civilian deaths for every one US and coalition forces death.
Iraqi victims of the war come from all walks of life. IBC was able to determine the occupation of nearly 23,600 victims, covering some 700 professions. By far the greatest number were police who, along with journalists, are also most likely to have their profession mentioned, and hence to have been most completely recorded.
IBC's documented occupational groupings, and the number of deaths reported for each, include:
- 10,238 police (excluding paramilitaries)
- 2,783 neighbourhood and private security
- 1,605 officials and public sector workers
- 751 community and religious leaders
- 288 journalists and media workers
- 265 medics and health care workers
Among slightly more than 50,000 victims about whom IBC could obtain demographic information, men numbered 38,441 (77%), women 4,373 (8.7%), and children 4,191 (8.4%). The weapons that kill women and children tend to be different from those used to kill adult males, who are more often directly or even individually targeted. (For a detailed account of the demographics of victims and the weapons that killed them, see IBC co-authored articles in the New England Journal of Medicine, PLoS Medicine, and Lancet - see Note 3)
During these ten years 41,636 civilians were killed by explosives (including in 13,441 suicide attacks), and a further 5,725 by air attacks (usually also involving explosive munitions), and 64,226 by gunfire. There were 81 very large-scale bomb attacks over the post-invasion period, each claiming on average 85 lives and leaving about 200 wounded (from 6,879 killed, 16,340 wounded). The worst year for these events was 2007, with 20 such incidents, half of them in Baghdad. (For a review of these incidents up to Oct 2007, see https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/biggest-bombs/)
Baghdad, the country's capital and its political and administrative centre, and also by far its most populous city, has seen the greatest loss of life overall, with 58,252 lives lost (48% of all deaths), and continues to see the largest number of deaths year on year. But when measured against the size of its population, it takes second place to the province of Diyala (capital: Baquba), with civilian violent death rates of 8 per thousand against Diyala's 9 per thousand. Other highly-affected provinces include Anbar (which includes the city of Fallujah) with 6 deaths per thousand and Salah al-Din (capital: Tikrit) with 5 per thousand. Moreover, these last three were the areas with the highest rates of violence (measured against population size) in 2012.
There has been an underlying anti-occupation / anti-government conflict throughout the period, identifiable both by the weapons it uses and its targets, with civilians caught either in the crossfire or targeted for their connection to the government. While deaths generally attributed to sectarian conflict have dropped 10-fold since their height during 2006-2008, deaths linked to anti-government actors have remained roughly steady at around 1,000--3,000 per year throughout, in recent years accounting for around a quarter of deaths (many of these being police).
This anti-government conflict forms a significant part of the violence now entrenched in Iraq, which has shown no diminution in recent years. While military forces were able to bring war to Iraq, it has not left with them.
A proper understanding of the war's human consequences, both past and present, remains to be established. This human question cannot be stated only in terms of numbers. When people die, it is not enough merely to establish how many died but to know who died. This knowledge is taken as a given for coalition soldiers killed, but as far as Iraqi civilian victims are concerned, only a tiny minority of their names or identities are part of the public record.
Of IBC's current total of 122,438 documented civilian deaths, only 8,647 (7%) are even nominally identified. Each has their own page on the IBC website, but the identification of the vast majority is a task for the future, one which will require much broader participation, including from within the Iraqi population.
Iraq Body Count (IBC) is a citizens' initiative devoted to recording the violent civilian deaths that have resulted from the 2003 military intervention in Iraq. Its public database includes deaths caused by US-led coalition forces and paramilitary or criminal attacks by others. The project was founded in January 2003 by volunteers from the UK and USA who felt a responsibility to ensure that the human consequences of military intervention in Iraq were not neglected.
LATEST NEWS
Trump's Billionaire Education Secretary Makes 'Backroom Deal' to Shaft Low-Income Borrowers
Amid a cost-of-living crisis, millions of low-income borrowers may now be forced to spend several hundred more dollars a month paying for student loans.
Dec 09, 2025
As student debt exacerbates the financial struggles of millions of Americans, the Trump administration has taken a major step toward killing the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness program.
On Tuesday, the Department of Education announced that it had reached a settlement with the state of Missouri to end the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) program, which allowed more than 7 million mostly low-income Americans to reduce their federal student loan payments.
Rather than setting monthly payments based on income, the SAVE program bases them on how much borrowers earn and the size of their families, which is referred to as an income-driven repayment option, or IDR. SAVE cut most enrollees' monthly loan payments in half and left 4.5 million of them, mostly those earning between 150–225% of the federal poverty level, paying $0 per month.
In March 2024, a coalition of 11 states led by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach sued in federal court to stop the SAVE plan. The next month a similar lawsuit was filed by another coalition of seven states led by Missouri's former attorney general, Andrew Bailey.
In February, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the states, blocking 8 million borrowers from accessing lower payments under the program. Now President Donald Trump's administration which aggressively opposes student loan forgiveness, has agreed to settle the lawsuit, effectively killing SAVE.
“For four years, the Biden administration sought to unlawfully shift student loan debt onto American taxpayers, many of whom either never took out a loan to finance their postsecondary education or never even went to college themselves, simply for a political win to prop up a failing administration,” said Undersecretary of Education Nicholas Kent. "The Trump administration is righting this wrong and bringing an end to this deceptive scheme. The law is clear: if you take out a loan, you must pay it back."
The settlement also includes a provision requiring that, for the next 10 years, the Department of Education notify the state of Missouri at least 30 days in advance before instituting broad-based student debt relief.
As the Debt Collective, a membership-based debtors' union, explained in a post on social media: "30 days is enough notice that Missouri will find standing to sue for relief before it even happens. So not only is Trump gutting the SAVE plan, they're essentially putting a moratorium on cancellation for the next 10 years with this agreement."
"What Republicans admit is that the executive administration does have authority to cancel federally held student debt," the group added. "They just want to make it so that it will be administratively and practically impossible to deliver it because of this technicality. It's stealing in advance."
SAVE was already slated to end in 2028 following July's passage of Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which replaced it with a pair of less generous income-based repayment plans that require many debtors to pay hundreds more per month. The deadline to switch to one of the new plans will now move up, though the administration has not yet clarified when borrowers will have to switch.
The Debt Collective predicted that the end of SAVE "means many more debtors will likely be forced to default on their loans," which the group added "is bad for millions of families and our economy."
According to an analysis of federal student loan data from the American Enterprise Institute, a libertarian think tank, more than 12 million borrowers in the US are already in default or otherwise behind on their student loan payments.
Since their introduction, former President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness policies have been chipped away at bit by bit through litigation. In 2023, the conservative US Supreme Court struck down the administration's plans to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt for millions of Americans, ruling that the plan exceeded the administration's executive authority. A year later, it halted SAVE as well while it considered the merits of the Missouri lawsuit.
The group Protect Borrowers, which supports student loan forgiveness, argues that SAVE is "not a novel use of executive power," noting that Congress gave the Education Department the authority to create IDRs in 1993 and that several other programs have been created since.
"This settlement is pure capitulation—it goes much further than the suit or the 8th Circuit order requires," said Persis Yu, the group's deputy executive director and managing counsel. "The real story here is the unrelenting, right-wing push to jack up costs on working people with student debt.”
A September survey by Data For Progress found that student loans make it more difficult for many borrowers to keep up with other bills amid a growing cost-of-living crisis: 42% of respondents said their debt payments had a negative impact on their ability to pay for food or housing. More than a third, 37%, said it had a negative impact on their ability to cover healthcare costs for themselves or their dependents, while the majority, 52%, said it had a negative impact on their ability to save for retirement.
“While millions of student loan borrowers struggle amidst the worsening affordability crisis as the rising costs of groceries, utilities, and healthcare continue to bury families in debt," Yu said, "billionaire Education Secretary Linda McMahon chose to strike a backroom deal with a right-wing state attorney general and strip borrowers of the most affordable repayment plan that would help millions to stay on track with their loans while keeping a roof over their head."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Leads Call for Senate to Force RFK Jr. to Answer for 'War on Science'
"Failure to conduct an oversight hearing on Secretary Kennedy's actions would be an abdication of our responsibility—both from a moral perspective and as a matter of sound public health policy."
Dec 09, 2025
On the heels of a federal panel appointed by US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. voting to reverse a recommendation that newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine, Sen. Bernie Sanders led a Tuesday call for the HHS leader to be hauled before a relevant congressional committee to answer for his actions that "undermine the health and well-being of the American people and people throughout the world."
In a letter signed by Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee and Sanders (I-Vt.), its ranking member, the lawmakers wrote to Republican Chair Bill Cassidy (La.), a medical doctor, to argue that "Kennedy has waged an unprecedented war on science and vaccines that have saved millions of lives," and demand his testimony.
The letter highlights Kennedy directing the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "to publish false information on its website suggesting that childhood vaccines cause autism," ousting a CDC director "who refused to rubber-stamp his dangerous and unsubstantiated" recommendations, spreading misinformation about the measles vaccine during an outbreak, and defunding research "that will leave us woefully unprepared for future pandemics and public health emergencies."
Kennedy has also "packed a critical scientific body, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), with vaccine deniers, completely upending the rigorous scientific process for reviewing and recommending vaccines to the public despite a commitment he made to you that ACIP would be 'maintained without changes,'" the letter continues, citing last week's hepatitis B vote.
"Mr. Chairman: Holding an oversight hearing on Secretary Kennedy’s ill-conceived actions is more important now than ever," argued Sanders and Democratic Sens. Angela Alsobrooks (Md.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (Del.), Maggie Hassan (NH), John Hickenlooper (Colo.), Tim Kaine (Va.), Andy Kim (NJ), Ed Markey (Mass.), Chris Murphy (Conn.), and Patty Murray (Wash.).
"Under Secretary Kennedy;s leadership, over 1,700 people have been infected with measles. Whooping cough cases are surging nationwide, and concerns about a severe flu season continue to grow. Vaccination rates across the country are falling. Children are dying from illnesses that vaccines could have prevented," the senators stressed.
"Secretary Kennedy's response to these crises has been to spread misinformation, end campaigns encouraging flu vaccinations, fire officials who disagree with him, and place individuals with significant conflicts of interest in positions of power—completely undermining Americans' faith in our nation's public health institutions," they wrote.
The senators pointed out that "dozens of scientific and medical groups" have called for Kennedy's resignation or removal, as have more than 1,000 current and former HHS staffers. They also noted a September warning from nine former CDC directors that the secretary "is endangering every American's health," a similar joint statement the following month by ex-surgeons general, and another this month from a dozen previous Food and Drug Administration commissioners.
The letter also references Cassidy's comments about ACIP, the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and Kennedy's supposed commitment during the confirmation process to come before the HELP Committee on a quarterly basis, which hasn't happened.
"Failure to conduct an oversight hearing on Secretary Kennedy's actions would be an abdication of our responsibility—both from a moral perspective and as a matter of sound public health policy," the letter argues, calling for his testimony as soon as possible.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Clear Breach': Watchdog Hits FIFA With Ethics Complaint Over Made-Up Trump 'Peace Prize'
Multiple rights organizations have slammed FIFA for giving Trump a "peace prize" given what they describe as his "appalling" human rights record.
Dec 09, 2025
International soccer organization FIFA has now been hit with an ethics complaint over its widely criticized decision to award President Donald Trump its first-ever "FIFA Peace Prize" last week.
The Athletic reported on Monday that FairSquare, a watchdog organization that monitors human rights abuses in the sporting world, filed an eight-page complaint with FIFA’s Ethics Committee alleging that FIFA president Gianni Infantino has repeatedly violated the organization's own code of ethics, which states that "all persons bound by the code remain politically neutral... in dealings with government institutions."
The complaint then documents multiple cases in which Infantino allegedly broke the political neutrality pledge, including his public lobbying for Trump to receive a Nobel Peace Prize; a November interview at the America Business Forum in which Infantino called Trump "a really close friend," and hit back at criticisms that the president had embraced authoritarianism; and Infantino's decision to award Trump with a made-up "peace prize" after failing to help him secure a more prestigious version.
FairSquare zeroed in on Infantino's remarks during the 2026 World Cup draw last week in which he told Trump that "you definitely deserve the first FIFA Peace Prize for your action for what you have obtained in your way, but you obtained it in an incredible way, and you can always count, Mr. President, on my support."
The organization remarked that "any reasonable interpretation of Mr. Infantino’s comments would conclude that he a) encouraged people to support the political agenda of President Trump, and b) expressed his personal approval of President Trump’s political agenda." This was a particularly egregious violation, FairSquare added, because Infantino was "appearing at a public event in his role as FIFA president."
Even without Infantino's gushing remarks about Trump, FairSquare said that "the award of a prize of this nature to a sitting political leader is in and of itself a clear breach of FIFA’s duty of neutrality."
FairSquare isn't the only organization to criticize Trump receiving a "peace prize" from the official governing body behind the World Cup.
Human Rights Watch was quick to blast FIFA last week for giving Trump any sort of peace prize given what it described as the administration’s “appalling” human rights record.
Jamil Dakwar, human rights director at the ACLU, also said that Trump was undeserving of the award, and he noted the administration “has aggressively pursued a systematic anti-human rights campaign to target, detain, and disappear immigrants in communities across the US—including the deployment of the National Guard in cities where the World Cup will take place.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


