100,000 Iraqis Dead: Should We Believe It?

When a recent study of Iraqi deaths was published in the esteemed medical journal The Lancet, it caused quite a commotion. I must admit, even I was somewhat sceptical of the 100,000 casualty figure. So who were the people who did this study, how did they do it, and is the figure reliable?

In order to address the question of how many Iraqi deaths have occurred, a team of public health researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, the Columbia University School of Nursing, and the College of Medicine at Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad undertook an epidemiologic survey of "excess Iraqi" deaths since the March, 2003 invasion. This high-powered research team combined epidemiologic expertise with a background in studying people in disaster and emergency situations and an in-depth knowledge of Iraq. Members of the team have carried out research and consulting in many parts of the world, including Iraq, sub-Saharan Africa, and Eastern Europe and have worked with such organizations as the World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.

The results of the research by this team have surprised many. The researchers estimated that there were 98,000 more deaths in the 18 months after the invasion than there would have been if Iraqis had died at the same rate as during the 15 months prior to invasion.

[NB: I can just hear the Bush apologists shouting, "You said it was 100,000 but the study only found 98,000 deaths, so you are full of #$%&!"]

Stephen Soldz, a psychoanalyst and researcher, examines the study in detail and concludes:

"In the absence of this confirmation, this study remains the best estimate of Iraq deaths. Its finding are truly horrifying. Recent reports indicate that the US is placing a far greater reliance on air power as a way of reducing Coalition casualties. If this study's findings are at all accurate, the result of these policies will be even higher Iraqi civilian casualties. The continued US war in Iraq cannot be justified on any conceivable humanitarian grounds when many tens of thousands of Iraqis are being killed and many more injured. Surely, this study should be a wake up call for all those, regardless of their opinions about the original justifiability of the war, who sincerely are concerned about the fate of the Iraqi people. The looming attacks on Falluja and Ramadi suggest that, in the absence of world outrage restraining this Coalition action, the death and injury toll will soon be rising far higher."

Stephen Soldz (ssoldz@bgsp.edu) is a faculty member at the Institute for the Study of Violence of the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis. He is a member of Roslindale Neighbors for Peace and Justice and founder of Psychoanalysts for Peace and Justice, and maintains the Iraq Occupation and Resistance Report web page. He doesn't sound like an idiot, and his article is convincingly presented.

Ultimately, even the authors admit that the 98,000 figure is open to further revision if and when anyone else ever does a more thorough investigation.

But that's exactly the problem - the only people interested in doing such counting are people with zero or limited access to the necessary data. US Army general Tommy Franks said "We don't do body counts" (even though the Geneva Convention requires it of an occupying force) and the Bush administration even pressured the new Allawi government to drop plans for such a count.

NB: While the tally from the Iraq Body Count website remains the most commonly quoted figure, though their method involves ONLY COUNTING DEATHS WHICH HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY TWO SEPARATE MEDIA SOURCES. In other words, their current estimate of between 14,000 and 16,000 (and remember, that's already five times 9/11) should be considered a very conservative figure.