New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don’t Kill as Many Pakistani Civilians as Claimed

By
Friday, May 28, 2010 at 12:17 pm

It’s the most controversial counterterrorism program there is. The CIA’s remotely piloted aircraft, operating with the tacit consent of the Pakistani government, fire missiles at suspected militants in the Pakistani tribal areas where U.S. ground troops are prohibited from operating and where the Pakistani military is often hesitant to tread. The United Nations’ special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings plans to formally request the Obama administration stop the program out of fears that civilians inevitably die in the strikes. Recent research from the New America Foundation finds that 30 percent of drone strike fatalities are Pakistani civilians. It’s an enormous issue in bilateral relations with a major non-NATO ally, and experienced counterinsurgents like David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum have warned that the incendiary attacks may create more militants than they kill. Even John Brennan, President Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, indicated on Wednesday that he shares Kilcullen and Exum’s fears and gives scrutiny to ensure that the much-valued program doesn’t become “a tactical success but a strategic failure.”

But a forthcoming study, led by Brian Glyn Williams, an associate professor at the University of Massachusetts, finds that the civilian death toll from the drones is lower than most media accounts present. “We came to the conclusion that the drones have a unique capability for targeting militants, as opposed to civilians,” Williams said in an interview.

Williams’ study, which he provided to The Washington Independent, has yet to be published. A writer for a blog affiliated with the International Herald Tribune, Farhat Taj, blogged some of the key details of his research today, but prematurely stated that the Combatting Terrorism Center at West Point will be publishing Williams’ work. Erich Marquardt, the editor of the center’s journal, said that he hasn’t even begun to review Williams’ submission yet.

Much like the New America Foundation study, Williams’ team relied on English-language media accounts of the drone strikes in Pakistan to compile a data base of how many civilians and militants were reported to be killed. He conceded from the start that such a reliance is a “serious limitation” of the study — news reports can, after all, be incorrect — but the tribal areas of Pakistan where the strikes occur are often off limits to Western researchers, and even their Pakistani counterparts. (Still, Williams plans on traveling to the tribal areas on June 10 to attempt a poll of local attitudes about the strikes.) His team took measures to mitigate that limitation: they only considered strikes that had been reported by multiple independent outlets and they erred on the side of treating the deaths of people in disputed militant status as either civilians or “unknown.”

Williams’ results, which he said have been peer-reviewed, are as follows:

According to our database, as of 1 April 2010, there have been a total of 127 confirmed CIA drone strikes in Pakistan, killing a total of 1,247 people. Of those killed only 44 (or 3.53%) could be confirmed as civilians, while 963 (or 77.23%) were reported to be “militants” or “suspected militants.”

That leaves just over 19 percent of reported deaths out of either category, as their status as civilians or combatants can’t be rigorously determined under Williams’ methodology. But he writes that “even if every single ‘unknown’ is assumed to in fact be a civilian, the vast majority of fatalities would remain suspected militants rather than civilians – indeed, by approximately a 3.4:1 ratio.”

Williams insists that he went into the study with an open mind. “We didn’t know what to think” about the drone program, he said, and he considers his research agnostic on the wisdom of the drone strikes (to say nothing of their legality). “We’re not necessarily trying to alter policy on this,” he said.

Both of the principle authors of New America’s drone strike survey, Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann, are on vacation, but they both still (generously) addressed my questions. All three researchers — Bergen, Tiedemann and Williams — appeared to agree that New America was more methodologically aggressive than Williams in counting as civilians all who could not be clearly identified as militants, which perhaps accounts for the variance in their results.

Bergen observed in a Blackberried message that although his civilian death tallies are higher than Williams’, he has observed that the drone program has increased its accuracy over time, “so the later the the date that the study begins the lower the rate [of civilian deaths] will be.” That’s in line with Brennan’s intimation (he never actually uses the word “drones”) that the drone strikes “are more precise and more accurate than ever before.”

Accordingly, Bergen now pegs the civilian death rate from the drone strikes at 20 percent. Williams pegs it at 3.53 percent. What no one knows, however, is how many outraged Pakistanis take up arms against the U.S. or its allies as a result. There are media reports suggesting that Faisal Shahzad, the naturalized U.S. citizen of Pakistani origin accused of attempting to detonate a car bomb in Times Square, claimed to investigators that his attempted terrorist act was vengeance for civilians killed by the drones. Leaving aside the question of the legality of the drones — which the State Department’s legal adviser claims to result from a September 2001 act of Congress that doesn’t mention the program — only policymakers can determine if the benefits of the drones outweigh the risks of blowback.

Follow Spencer Ackerman on Twitter


Comments

49 Comments

Apple strikes again: Lines form for the new IPAD | IPAD 3G WIFI 16GB 32GB 64GB
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 1:28 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Of Smartphone Owners, IPhone Users Are the Most Satisfied | Droid Reviews
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 1:33 pm

[...] N&#1077w Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don’t K&#1110&#406&#406 &#1072&#1109 Many Pakistani Civi… [...]


Pakistan mosque attacks kill 76 – Los Angeles Times - Most hotest, Most latest World News Online - Most latest World News Online
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 4:21 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


S.Africa’s ANC expects no strikes during World Cup | World Cup 2010
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 5:37 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Eric_Jaffa
Comment posted May 28, 2010 @ 5:00 pm

Is it OK for other countries to kill American mourners at a funeral, or is it only OK for the US to kill mourners at a funeral?


MadDogs
Comment posted May 28, 2010 @ 5:35 pm

The idea that Williams believes simply reading the English language media accounts would somehow allow him to count the number of civilians killed by US drone strikes is so laughable that I had to check my calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1st.

Next I suppose Williams will undertake a study to count the actual number of real Superheroes plying their trade here on Earth by counting them from his comic book collection.

As the old saying goes in my profession of IT, GIGO: Garbarge In, Garbage Out.

Williams' “study” was no such thing, and his reliance on “English language media accounts” for the numbers was not merely a “serious limitation”, but instead a ridiculously obvious fatal flaw that would flunk any 1st term wannabee reseacher.


Beauty Schools Seen As Attractive Choice | Waxing Beauty Wisdom
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 6:39 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted May 28, 2010 @ 5:41 pm

Obama declares everyone killed to have been terrorists. 100% WIN!!


Spending may trip up ‘don’t ask’ repeal – Los Angeles Times - Latest, top stories in the U.S. - Top Stories in the U.S.
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 7:24 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … Tools
Pingback posted May 28, 2010 @ 7:28 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … Knight Science Journalism Tracker » Blog Archive » CNN: Top Kill …BP Suspends “Top Kill” Again After “Junk Shot” Hasn't Stopped …Got news? That plot to kill pope » GetReligionFord May Say Goodbye to Mercury Brand – DailyFinance'Top Kill' works for now – Late Update – 05/28/2010 | Rickey.orgKill Spill, Pass Bill! « Climate ProgressBP update: “Top kill” started, stopped, restarted – Need to know …BP: “Top Kill” Mud Injections Suspended Last Night, Resume Tonight …World Cup 2010: West Ham United's Robert Green Insists He's Taking …Wear twins land at UCLA – ACC Insider – Wilmington Star News … View the Contact Powered by Tools [...]


Meditation Boosts The Human Brain Capabilities | Stress Relief Guided Meditation
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 1:50 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Only 3% of Drone Casualties Are Confirmed Civilians | FrumForum
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 3:20 am

[...] here to read more. AKPC_IDS += [...]


War Criminals in the CIA?, con’t « ????? ???
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 4:45 am

[...] Spencer Ackerman at the Washington Independent speaks of a new study led by Brian Glyn Williams positing that the strikes [...]


Kath
Comment posted May 29, 2010 @ 5:07 am

How? How is this possible. Those drone strikes are aimed at HOUSES and in Pakistan that is extended families. Several generations of women and children, elderly — all living together. So the definition of terrorist in the US equates to that of Gaza: collective assignment as terrorists and punishment as such?

“On June 22, the US struck at a house officials called a “suspected militant hideout,” burying a few locals inside. When others rushed to the scene to rescue them, they launched another missile, killing 13 apparently innocent Pakistanis. When they held a funeral procession on June 23, the US hit that too, ostensibly on the belief that Baitullah Mehsud might be among the mourners. He wasn’t, but the attack killed at least 80 more people…”

It took an obscene 23 attempts to kill Mehsud — ALL the people they murdered by “mistake” in those attempts were “terrorists”? Unbelievable. Prof. Williams is delusional.


Car insurance rates: Age Matters!
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 6:10 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Asiatic … [...]


Darpa’s Beady-Eyed Camera Spots the ‘Non-Cooperative’ | Cosmetology and Beauty Careers
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 7:20 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


» Study Finds Stock Market Harms Investment Incentives
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 8:33 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Drone Strikes and Civilian Casualties: Only One Statistic Matters
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 8:50 am

[...] Spencer Ackerman, who has obtained an advanced copy, reports: Much like the New America Foundation study, Williams’ team relied on English-language media accounts of the drone strikes in Pakistan to compile a data base of how many civilians and militants were reported to be killed. He conceded from the start that such a reliance is a “serious limitation” of the study — news reports can, after all, be incorrect — but the tribal areas of Pakistan where the strikes occur are often off limits to Western researchers, and even their Pakistani counterparts. [...]


Indoor Tanning Quadruples Risk Of Skin Cancer – The Consumerist | Tanning Beauty Wisdom
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 9:40 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Issues Surrounding Truck Accidents and Injuries | Make Money On Line
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 1:01 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


How To Study | Stock Software
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 1:37 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


What should i include in my web design portfolio? | Effective Affiliate Strategies
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 2:33 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Lovelalola
Comment posted May 29, 2010 @ 1:54 pm

Seriously, Spencer? I knew you had taken a partisan plunge once your team was elected, but this is downright Orwellian. “Just 19%?” 19% Of DEAD CIVILIANS, ffs. They don't' get another day, but you do, and this is what you choose to do with it? This is just sickening. Obama's continuation of the drone attacks is sickening. So is Williams sloppy and yet useful (to warmongers) rhetoric, and your acquiescence to the war machine. Shame on you all.


Wedding Hair » What are some nice hair styles?
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Drone Strikes, Civilian Deaths, and Terrorism | The Moderate Voice
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 4:57 pm

[...] has a piece up at The Washington Independent flagging an upcoming study that purports to show that U.S. drone strikes in northern Pakistan kill significantly fewer civilians than has been previously thought or [...]


Designing, Building and Using Larger Flywheels | Energy Storage Science Applied
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 5:13 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


British Airways criticise ‘impossibly’ short break between strikes | dress up bolg
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 5:30 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


JeffreyY
Comment posted May 29, 2010 @ 6:06 pm

How big is that category of “suspected” militants? We ought to care whether our suspicions are right or wrong. It's disappointing that Williams only counts “confirmed” civilians as civilians, but mere suspicion of militancy justifies killing people.


Is green tea good for your skin? | online money market accounts
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 8:40 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Should the Independent Tour Accident in Chile From Celebrity … | Chile Traveling
Pingback posted May 29, 2010 @ 10:20 pm

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


Norman Rogers
Comment posted May 29, 2010 @ 10:58 pm

I would think that if this study were to have any merit, one would have actually gone to the region to read, in the local dialects, the recorded deaths.

Sure, you could fabricate that. But, in every corner of the world, the records of deaths and births is supposed to be dispassionate and non-ideological. I would think that, in this propaganda age, that a reliance on English language media would come under serious scrutiny since there is, in fact, quite a propaganda operation being funded out there.

Oh, and as always, Ackerman, you are the idiot every village would love to have.


We found it! | Droid Reviews
Pingback posted May 30, 2010 @ 3:31 am

[...] N&#1077w Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don’t K&#1110&#406&#406 &#1072&#1109 Many Pakistani Civi… [...]


athEIst
Comment posted May 30, 2010 @ 4:41 am

When British ships anchored offshore in 1777-1780 and Hessians came ashore in rebel areas nearly 80% of those killed by the mercenaries were armed revolutionaries. Only 20% were civilians or Tories. Hessians didn't speak English or care who they killed. They were, Like Drones.


Are Antacids to Blame for Your Weight Gain? | Menopause Natural Help
Pingback posted May 30, 2010 @ 6:46 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don’t Kill as Many Pakistani Civilians as Claimed « The… [...]


Active Noise Cancelling - What's better.. Noise Isolating Headphones or Noise Cancelling Headphones?
Pingback posted May 31, 2010 @ 12:33 am

[...] New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don't Kill as Many Pakistani … [...]


FM newswire for June 3, interesting articles about geopolitics « Fabius Maximus
Pingback posted June 3, 2010 @ 10:45 am

[...] in, garbage out:  “New Study Suggests Drone Strikes Don’t Kill as Many Pakistani Civilians as Claimed“, Spencer Ackerman, Washington Times, 28 May 2010 — Shorter conclusion: English news [...]


I Love The Smell Of Drones In The Morning « Around The Sphere
Pingback posted June 4, 2010 @ 6:36 am

[...] Spencer Ackerman at The Washington Independent: It’s the most controversial counterterrorism program there is. The CIA’s remotely piloted aircraft, operating with the tacit consent of the Pakistani government, fire missiles at suspected militants in the Pakistani tribal areas where U.S. ground troops are prohibited from operating and where the Pakistani military is often hesitant to tread. The United Nations’ special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings plans to formally request the Obama administration stop the program out of fears that civilians inevitably die in the strikes. Recent research from the New America Foundation finds that 30 percent of drone strike fatalities are Pakistani civilians. It’s an enormous issue in bilateral relations with a major non-NATO ally, and experienced counterinsurgents like David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum have warned that the incendiary attacks may create more militants than they kill. Even John Brennan, President Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, indicated on Wednesday that he shares Kilcullen and Exum’s fears and gives scrutiny to ensure that the much-valued program doesn’t become “a tactical success but a strategic failure.” [...]


Civilian Casualties Create New Enemies, Study Confirms : Political Theatrics
Pingback posted July 7, 2010 @ 2:23 pm

[...] while some recent academic research suggests that across the border in Pakistan, the CIA’s drone strikes may not kill as many civilians as [...]


CIA Drone Guy Becomes New Top Spy [Espionage] | World's Greatest T-Shirt
Pingback posted July 22, 2010 @ 3:36 am

[...] are civilians. A different study, by the University of Massachusetts’s Brian Glyn Williams, found a far lower result, claiming that fewer than four percent of drone deaths can be “confirmed as civilian.” [...]


6gw.org Foreign Policy / Technology Warning / Af-Pak – Invisible Drones In The Land Of The Pure
Pingback posted August 2, 2010 @ 9:53 am

[...] a jagdpanzer driven by a crew of das crunken coeds corps (whiskey and beer – never fear!!), the phat facts have totally trashed that sad, played inappropriate handwringing in a Sickleschnitt style romping blitz of risible [...]


skin cancer treatments Los An
Comment posted January 10, 2011 @ 1:32 pm

Basal Cell Carcinoma is by far the most common type of skin cancer. This type of skin cancer occurs so frequently, that many cancer registries forgo collecting the case data because it would be overwhelming and it is not a particularly deadly form of skin disease. Still, the medical community estimates that about one million new cases of basal cell carcinoma are diagnosed in the United States every year.


Dog bark collar
Comment posted February 15, 2011 @ 3:47 pm

Thanks for the post. This keeps me informed about the topic.


Venapro
Comment posted February 16, 2011 @ 9:30 am

Thanks for ones marvelous posting! I genuinely enjoyed reading it, you could be a great author.I will make sure to bookmark your blog and may come back in the future. I want to encourage continue your great work, have a nice weekend!


Anonymous
Comment posted May 16, 2011 @ 7:58 pm

 We are all familiar with the traditional conventional cancer treatment like chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. Have you ever known any of those treatments to be relaxing, comfortable, or pleasant during the procedure? When you go with conventional treatment, not only do you feel pain, but you will feel sicker, weaker, and look 10 years older. Every patient I’ve seen right after they receive chemo or radiation, but look more like walking zombies! These patients can barely even walk without falling or assistance, they’ve got pale skin, as if there’s no blood flowing in them, eyes seem like they are bulging out because they are extremely thin, and even experience hair loss. It’s absolutely heartbreaking to see another human look the way they do. What is even more disgusting is that these doctors actual pat themselves on the back for a job well done on keeping these patients alive and happy! Absolute GARBAGE! I’m sure you all agree that if you’re like most people with cancer, you would rather die than to look and feel that way or to give up the quality of life which we all deserve.

skin cancer treatments Los Angeles


Anonymous
Comment posted May 16, 2011 @ 7:58 pm

 We are all familiar with the traditional conventional cancer treatment like chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. Have you ever known any of those treatments to be relaxing, comfortable, or pleasant during the procedure? When you go with conventional treatment, not only do you feel pain, but you will feel sicker, weaker, and look 10 years older. Every patient I’ve seen right after they receive chemo or radiation, but look more like walking zombies! These patients can barely even walk without falling or assistance, they’ve got pale skin, as if there’s no blood flowing in them, eyes seem like they are bulging out because they are extremely thin, and even experience hair loss. It’s absolutely heartbreaking to see another human look the way they do. What is even more disgusting is that these doctors actual pat themselves on the back for a job well done on keeping these patients alive and happy! Absolute GARBAGE! I’m sure you all agree that if you’re like most people with cancer, you would rather die than to look and feel that way or to give up the quality of life which we all deserve.

skin cancer treatments Los Angeles


lacoste polo
Comment posted July 7, 2011 @ 12:57 pm

Thanks for the author’s detailed introduction


3649240
Comment posted September 7, 2011 @ 1:01 pm

3649240 beers on the wall. sck was here


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.