UNCLASSIFIED 

1 

Department of Defense 

 

Annual Report on Civilian Casualties In Connection With United 

States Military Operations in 2020 

Submitted pursuant to Section 1057 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-91), as amended 

The estimated cost of this report for the Department of Defense is approximately $19,000 for Fiscal Year 2021. 

This includes $0 in expenses and $19,000 in DoD labor. 

Generated on 2021April29 8-09B2AD8
UNCLASSIFIED 

2 

Section 1057 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115-

91), as amended, states the following: 

Annual Report on Civilian Casualties in Connection With 

United States Military Operations 

(a) ANNUAL REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than May 1 each year, the Secretary of 

Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on civilian casualties 

caused as a result of United States military operations during the preceding year. 

(b) ELEMENTS.—Each report under subsection (a) shall set forth the following: 

(1) A list of all the United States military operations, including each specific 

mission, strike, engagement, raid, or incident, during the year covered by such report that 

were confirmed, or reasonably suspected, to have resulted in civilian casualties. 

(2) For each military operation listed pursuant to paragraph (1), each of the 

following: 

(A) The date. 

(B) The location. 

(C) An identification of whether the operation occurred inside or outside of a 

declared theater of active armed conflict. 

(D) The type of operation. 

(E) An assessment of the number of civilian and enemy combatant casualties, 

including a differentiation between those killed and those injured. 

(3) A description of the process by which the Department of Defense investigates 

allegations of civilian casualties resulting from United States military operations, 

including how the Department incorporates information from interviews with witnesses, 

civilian survivors of United States operations, and public reports or other 

nongovernmental sources. 

(4) A description of— 

 (A) Steps taken by the Department to mitigate harm to civilians in conducting 

such operations; and 

 (B) In the case of harm caused by such an operation to a civilian, any ex 

gratia payment or other assistance provided to the civilian or the family of the civilian. 

(5) A description of any allegations of civilian casualties made by public or nongovernmental sources formally investigated by the Department of Defense. 

(6) A description of the general reasons for any discrepancies between the 

assessments of the United States and reporting from nongovernmental organizations 

regarding non-combatant deaths resulting from strikes and operations undertaken by the 

United States. 

(7) The definitions of ‘combatant’ and ‘noncombatant’ used in the preparation of 

the report, which shall be consistent with the laws of armed conflict. 

(8) Any update or modification to any report under this section during a previous 

year. 

(9) Any other matters the Secretary of Defense determines are relevant. 

(c) USE OF SOURCES.—In preparing a report under this section, the Secretary of 

Defense shall take into account relevant and credible all-source reporting, including information 

from public reports and nongovernmental sources. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

3 

(d) FORM.—Each report under subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, 

but may include a classified annex. The unclassified form of each report shall, at a minimum, be 

responsive to each element under subsection (b) of a report under subsection (a), and shall be 

made available to the public at the same time it is submitted to Congress (unless the Secretary 

certifies in writing that the publication of such information poses a threat to the national security 

interests of the United States). 

(e) SUNSET.—The requirement to submit a report under subsection (a) shall expire on 

the date that is seven years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

 
UNCLASSIFIED 

4 

Department of Defense Report on Civilian Casualties In 

Connection With United States Military Operations in 2020 

This report is submitted pursuant to Section 1057 of the National Defense Authorization Act 

(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 (Public Law 115-91), as amended. 

This report primarily provides information about U.S. military operations in 2020 that were 

assessed to have resulted in civilian casualties. This report also contains updates to information 

the Department of Defense (DoD) provided in the reports submitted to Congress in prior years 

pursuant to Section 1057 of the NDAA for FY 2018, as amended (“Section 1057 reports”). 

Some of the information provided in prior reports about U.S. military operations in 2017-2019 

has been repeated in this report because the information was relevant to U.S. military operations 

in 2020. 

This report is publicly available at Defense.gov. 

As noted in Section 1 of Executive Order 13732 of July 1, 2016, United States Policy on Preand Post-Strike Measures To Address Civilian Casualties in U.S. Operations Involving the Use 

of Force, the protection of civilians is fundamentally consistent with the effective, efficient, and 

decisive use of force in pursuit of U.S. national interests. Minimizing civilian casualties can 

further mission objectives; help maintain the support of partner governments and vulnerable 

populations, especially during counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations; and enhance 

the legitimacy and sustainability of U.S. operations critical to U.S. national security. As a matter 

of policy, U.S. forces therefore routinely conduct operations under policy standards that are more 

protective of civilians than is required by the law of war. 

U.S. forces also protect civilians because it is the moral and ethical thing to do. Although 

civilian casualties are a tragic and unavoidable part of war, the U.S. military is steadfastly 

committed to limiting harm to civilians. This commitment is reflected in DoD’s consistent 

efforts to maintain and promote best practices that reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, 

take appropriate steps when such casualties occur, and draw lessons from DoD operations to 

enhance further the protection of civilians. Section 2 of Executive Order 13732 catalogues the 

best practices DoD has implemented to protect civilians during armed conflict, and directs those 

measures be continued in present and future operations. During 2020, all operations listed below 

were conducted consistent with the best practices identified in Section 2 of Executive Order 

13732. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

5 

I. U.S. MILITARY OPERATIONS DURING 2020 CONFIRMED, OR 

REASONABLY SUSPECTED, TO HAVE RESULTED IN CIVILIAN 

CASUALTIES 

During 2020, U.S. forces continued to be engaged in a number of military operations, some of 

which were assessed to have resulted in civilian casualties. This section provides information 

regarding: a) Operation INHERENT RESOLVE (OIR) and other U.S. military actions related to 

Iraq and Syria; b) Operation FREEDOM’S SENTINEL in Afghanistan, including support to the 

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)-led Resolute Support (RS) mission; c) U.S. military 

actions in Yemen; d) U.S. military actions in Somalia; and e) U.S. military actions in Nigeria. 

This section provides information about each operation, as well as a list of each specific mission, 

strike, engagement, raid, or incident during 2020 that was assessed to have resulted in civilian 

casualties. Each instance that was assessed to have resulted in civilian casualties identifies the 

date, location, type of operation, and DoD’s assessment of the number of civilians injured and 

killed in that instance. A previous report used the term “a declared theater of active armed 

conflict,” as that term was understood in the context of 10 U.S.C. § 130f. 10 U.S.C. § 130f has 

since been amended and no longer includes the term “a declared theater of active armed 

conflict.” The term “a declared theater of active armed conflict” is also not defined in relevant 

DoD doctrine. For the purposes of this report, the term “a declared theater of active armed 

conflict” will be considered to mean, for calendar year 2020, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, 

Yemen, and Nigeria. Thus, all U.S. military operations and particular instances listed below that 

resulted in civilian casualties occurred in a declared theater of active armed conflict. 

DoD’s practice for many years has been not to tally systematically the number of enemy 

combatants killed or wounded during operations. Although the number of enemy combatants 

killed in action is often assessed after combat, a running “body count” would not necessarily 

provide a meaningful measure of the military success of an operation and could even be 

misleading. For example, the use of such metrics in the Vietnam War has been heavily 

criticized. We have therefore provided other information that is intended to help provide 

context, such as information regarding the objectives, scale, and effects of these operations. 

A longstanding DoD policy is to comply with the law of war in all armed conflicts, however 

characterized. All DoD operations in 2020 were conducted in accordance with law of war 

requirements, including law of war protections for civilians, such as the fundamental principles 

of distinction and proportionality, and the requirement to take feasible precautions in planning 

and conducting attacks to reduce the risk of harm to civilians and other persons and objects 

protected from being made the object of an attack. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

6 

DoD assesses that there were approximately 23 civilians killed and approximately 10 civilians 

injured during 2020 as a result of U.S. military operations. Subsections A through E below and 

the accompanying classified annex provide additional information. 

As stated above, this report also contains updates to information submitted to Congress in last 

year’s Section 1057 report. Since last year, more reports of civilian casualties from U.S. military 

operations in 2014-2019 have been received and assessed, and additional updates identified since 

last year’s Section 1057 report have been included in this report. DoD continues to assess new 

reports after they are received and reconsiders previous assessments if new relevant information 

comes to light. 

The assessments of civilian casualties listed below are based on reports of civilian casualties that 

DoD has been able to assess as “credible.” DoD components conducting assessments deem a 

report as “credible” if, based on the available information, it is assessed to be more likely than 

not that civilian casualties occurred. Section II of this report describes in more detail the 

processes for conducting these assessments. 

A. Operation INHERENT RESOLVE and other U.S. military actions related to Iraq 

and Syria 

Operation INHERENT RESOLVE. Working by, with, and through local partner forces, 

Combined Joint Task Force–Operation INHERENT RESOLVE (CJTF-OIR) maintained 

pressure on ISIS to prevent its re-emergence in designated areas of Iraq and Syria. The U.S.-led 

Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, with CJTF-OIR as its military arm, continues to eliminate ISIS 

smuggling, finance, media, intelligence, and logistics networks throughout the area. These 

efforts also help set conditions to increase regional stability. 

In addition to efforts to defeat ISIS, the U.S. military in 2020 undertook certain actions in Iraq in 

the exercise of the United States’ inherent right of self-defense in response to an escalating series 

of armed attacks by Iran and Iran-supported militias on U.S. forces and interests. These actions 

sought to deter Iran from conducting or supporting further attacks against the United States or 

U.S. interests, and to degrade Iran and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Qods Forcesupported militias’ ability to conduct attacks. These actions include an operation on January 2, 

2020, against leadership elements of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Qods Force. 

In 2020, CJTF-OIR received 369 new reports of potential civilian casualty incidents occurring 

from 2014 to 2020. Reports are received from CJTF-OIR ground units and aircrews, as well as 

from media organizations, social media, private individuals, and non-governmental organizations 

(NGOs). The U.S. military takes reports of civilian casualties seriously. Between 2014 and 

2020, NGOs conveyed a total of 2,531 reports. CJTF-OIR reviewed each of the 2,531 NGOconveyed reports and assessed that U.S. military operations resulted in civilian casualties in 351 
UNCLASSIFIED 

7 

of these reports. Of the remaining NGO-conveyed reports, 120 reports remain under assessment, 

and 2,060 reports were either determined to be duplicates of previously assessed reports or were 

assessed not to be credible, i.e., the available information did not support an assessment that 

civilian casualties more likely than not resulted from U.S. military operations. For example, a 

report of civilian casualties would be assessed as not credible if U.S. military operations were not 

conducted at the reported time or place or if the reported casualties related to the incident were 

assessed to be enemy combatants rather than civilians. 

As of February 2021, CJTF-OIR assessed that one report of civilian casualties during 2020 was 

credible, with approximately one civilian killed as a result of U.S. military operations in Iraq. 

The following table contains additional details about the instance during 2020 assessed to have 

resulted in a civilian casualty. 

 Date of 

Incident 

Location Operation 

 Type 

Civilians 

Injured 

Civilians 

Killed 

1 13-Mar-20 Karabala, Iraq Air 0 1 

 TOTAL 0 1 

CJTF-OIR routinely receives new reports of civilian casualties related to U.S. military operations 

from earlier years, continues to assess reports that were not completed in previous years, and reconsiders previous assessments if new relevant information comes to light. Since last year’s 

Section 1057 report for U.S. military operations in 2019, CJTF-OIR assessed that no additional 

reports of civilian casualties during 2019 were credible. However, CJTF-OIR identified updates 

to information reported in previous Section 1057 reports. These updates are regarding twelve 

civilian casualty incidents in 2017 and 2018, with approximately 50 civilians killed and 

approximately 22 civilians injured, that were inadvertently not reported in the past.1 The 

following table contains details about the additional assessments. 

 

1 The first update is to the Section 1057 report submitted in 2020 and is regarding portions of that report addressing 

U.S. military operations in 2018. Two additional civilian casualty incidents in 2018 were assessed to be credible but 

were inadvertently not included in the report DoD submitted in 2020. The table published in the Section 1057 report 

submitted in 2020 should have included these two incidents in addition to the seven incidents that were identified, 

for a total of nine incidents, with approximately 10 civilians killed and approximately 1 civilian injured. These 

incidents are reflected on the relevant table in this report as incident numbers 10 and 11. With these additional 

assessments, CJTF-OIR had assessed by the time the data for the report submitted in 2020 was compiled that a total 

of 21 reports of civilian casualties during 2018 were credible, with approximately 39 civilians killed and 

approximately 17 civilians injured as a result of U.S military operations in Iraq and Syria. 

The second update is to the Section 1057 report submitted in 2019 and is regarding portions of that report addressing 

U.S. military operations conducted in 2017. Six additional civilian casualty incidents in 2017 were assessed to be 

credible but were inadvertently not included in the report DoD submitted in 2019. These incidents are reflected on 

the relevant table in this report as incident numbers 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. With these additional assessments, CJTFOIR had assessed by the time the data for the report submitted in 2019 was compiled that a total of 176 reports of 
UNCLASSIFIED 

8 

 Date of 

Incident 

Location Operation 

Type 

Civilians 

Injured 

Civilians 

Killed 

1 6-Jan-17 Al-Zira, Iraq Air 3 16 

2 9-Jan-17 Mosul, Iraq Air 0 2 

3 12-Jan-17 Mosul, Iraq Air 10 12 

4 27-Feb-17 Al-Qaim, Iraq Air 1 1 

5 21-Mar-17 Al Islah az Zira’I, Iraq Air 0 1 

6 3-May-17 Al Islah az Zira’I, Iraq Air 2 2 

7 8-Jun-17 Mosul, Iraq Air 0 1 

8 13-Aug-17 Fardous, Syria Air 0 1 

9 13-Aug-17 Ar Raqqah, Syria Air 6 12 

10 20-Jan-18 Al Bahrah, Syria Air 0 1 

11 9-Feb-18 Al Bahrah, Syria Air 0 1 

 TOTAL 22 50 

Although military operations to defeat ISIS are a Coalition effort, coordinated between many 

nations, this report only lists civilian casualties attributed to the use of U.S.-operated weapons. 

For example, if a munition fired from a U.S. aircraft resulted in civilian casualties, the civilian 

casualties would be included in this report even if the particular airstrike was planned by a staff 

composed of personnel from multiple nations and was guided to the target by a foreign Joint 

Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC). 

Therefore, the information in this report may not completely match publicly available 

information released by U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM). CJTF-OIR, as a matter of 

strategy and policy, considers all civilian casualties to be the combined result of “Coalition” 

action, and not of a single nation, since Coalition personnel from multiple countries take part in 

every strike in some manner. In DoD’s view, this collective effort is the most appropriate way to 

view civilian casualty incidents related to CJTF-OIR action in Iraq and Syria. 

 

civilian casualties during 2017 were credible, with approximately 801 civilians killed and approximately 209 

civilians injured as a result of U.S. military operations in Iraq and Syria. 

The third update is to the Section 1057 report submitted in 2020 and is regarding portions of that report addressing 

U.S. military operations conducted in 2017. Three additional civilian casualty incidents in 2017 were assessed to be 

credible but were inadvertently not included in the report DoD submitted in 2020. These incidents are reflected on 

the relevant table in this report as incident numbers 1, 3, and 9. With these additional assessments, CJTF-OIR had 

assessed by the time the data for the report submitted in 2020 was compiled that a total of 200 reports of civilian 

casualties during 2017 were credible, with approximately 912 civilians killed and approximately 241 civilians 

injured as a result of U.S. military operations in Iraq and Syria. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

9 

On a monthly basis, CJTF-OIR publicly releases a civilian casualty report. For each assessed 

report of civilian casualties, this monthly report includes the following information: 

 The date and location in which the civilian casualties reportedly occurred and the source 

of the report (e.g., a military unit’s own after-action reporting, media report, NGO report, 

or a posting on social media). 

 Whether the report of civilian casualties was assessed to be “credible” or not, and if not, 

the general reasons why the report was assessed to be “not credible” (e.g., no Coalition 

strikes were conducted in the geographic area that corresponds to the report of civilian 

casualties, or the report contained insufficient information regarding the time, location, or 

details needed to determine whether civilian casualties more likely than not resulted from 

U.S. military operations). 

If it is assessed that it is more likely than not that civilian casualties occurred, this monthly report 

often provides additional information such as: 

 The target of the operation (e.g., an ISIS sniper position, armed ISIS fighters in a 

vehicle, an ISIS weapons cache, or an ISIS command and control facility). 

 A description of how civilian casualties occurred (e.g., vehicle with civilians entered 

target area after weapons were released to hit multiple ISIS vehicle shooting at friendly 

ground forces; civilians were in the proximity of ISIS fighters, ISIS weapons systems, or 

launch sites for ISIS attacks during the strike). 

Finally, this monthly report also includes a cumulative assessment of the estimated number of 

civilian casualties that have resulted from CJTF-OIR operations and identifies the number of 

reports of civilian casualties that remain to be assessed. 

B. Operation FREEDOM’S SENTINEL in Afghanistan 

In 2020, U.S. military efforts in Afghanistan continued as part of the U.S. South Asia Strategy to 

support the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan’s (GIRoA) efforts to obtain a 

durable political settlement to end the ongoing civil conflict, mitigate the threats posed by violent 

extremist organizations (VEO), and promote stability in Afghanistan. U.S. forces conducted a 

U.S. counterterrorism mission against terrorist groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and SyriaKhorasan Province (ISIS-K), and participated in the NATO-led Resolute Support (RS) mission 

to train, advise, and assist the Afghan Ministries of Defense (MoD) and Interior (MoI) and their 

forces. The overarching U.S. objective in 2020 remained ensuring that Afghanistan would never 

again used as a “safe haven” from which terrorists could launch attacks against the United States, 

our allies, or our interests abroad. 

U.S. targeting in early 2020 focused on keeping the Taliban at the negotiating table to seek an 

end to the Afghan war. Following the signing of the U.S.-Taliban agreement on February 28, 
UNCLASSIFIED 

10 

2020, the United States worked with parties to the conflict in an effort to reduce violence in 

Afghanistan. In September 2020, representatives from the GIRoA and the Taliban began 

Afghanistan Peace Negotiations (APN) in Doha, Qatar, in accordance with the February U.S.-

Taliban agreement. Nonetheless, the level of violence remained above seasonal norms for most 

of the year, as the Taliban conducted attacks to try to increase its leverage during APN. 

Last year, RS received 165 reports of civilian casualties related to operations involving U.S. 

forces in Afghanistan in 2020. Reports are received from ground units and aircrews, as well as 

from Afghan Ministries, international organizations (IOs), media organizations, social media, 

private individuals, and NGOs. The U.S. military takes reports of civilian casualties seriously. 

RS personnel reviewed each reported incident and assessed that U.S. military operations resulted 

in civilian casualties in seven of those incidents. The remaining IO- and NGO-reported incidents 

were determined to be duplicates of previously assessed reports or were assessed as not credible, 

i.e., the available information did not support an assessment that civilian casualties more likely 

than not resulted from U.S. military operations. For example, a report of civilian casualties 

would be assessed as not credible if U.S. military operations were not conducted at the reported 

time or place or the reported casualties related to the incident were assessed to be enemy 

combatants rather than civilians. 

As of February 2021, RS assessed that seven reports of civilian casualties during 2020 were 

credible, with approximately 20 civilians killed and approximately 5 civilians injured as a result 

of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan. The following table contains additional details about 

each instance during 2020 that was assessed to have resulted in civilian casualties. 

 Date of 

Incident 

Location Operation 

 Type 

Civilians 

Injured 

Civilians 

Killed 

1 9-Jan-20 Kapisa, Afghanistan Air 0 2 

2 15-Jan-20 Parwan, Afghanistan Ground 2 0 

3 25-Jan-20 Balkh, Afghanistan Air 0 6 

4 28-Jan-20 Balkh, Afghanistan Air 0 1 

5 6-Feb-20 Logar, Afghanistan Ground 1 0 

6 8-Feb-20 Paktiya, Afghanistan Air 2 2 

7 17-Feb-20 Herat, Afghanistan Air 0 9 

 TOTAL 5 20 

C. U.S. military actions in Yemen 

USCENTCOM received 11 new reports of civilian casualties related to U.S. military operations 

in Yemen from years prior to 2020. As of April 2021, one report about one incident in 2019 and 

one report about one incident in 2017 were found to be credible. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

11 

The following table contains additional details about the one instance during 2019 assessed to 

have resulted in one civilian casualty. 

 Date of 

Incident 

Location Operation 

 Type 

Civilians 

Injured 

Civilians 

Killed 

1 22-Jan-19 Al Bayda, Yemen Air 0 1 

 TOTAL 0 1 

The following table contains additional details about the one instance during 2017 assessed to 

have resulted in civilian casualties. USCENTCOM assessed that between 4 and 12 civilians 

were killed during this incident, however the assessment was not able to determine a more 

precise number. Twelve civilians killed is reported here. 

 Date of 

Incident 

Location Operation 

 Type 

Civilians 

Injured 

Civilians 

Killed 

1 29-Jan-17 Al Bayda, Yemen Ground 0 12 

 TOTAL 0 12 

D. U.S. military actions in Somalia 

U.S. military operations in Somalia support regional partners and deny terrorist groups such as 

al-Shabaab control of ungoverned spaces that the group could use to plot and conduct attacks 

against the Somali people and the U.S. homeland. Working “by, with, and through” our Somali 

partners, U.S. military efforts in Somalia during 2020 degraded al-Shabaab’s ability to conduct 

large-scale attacks and disrupted the group’s planning and conduct of external operations within 

the region. Persistent pressure on terrorist groups such as al-Shabaab is necessary to support the 

Government of Somalia’s efforts to establish a more stable environment and to provide the 

security, governance, and economic growth required for long-term stability and prosperity. 

In 2020, U.S. Africa Command (USAFRICOM) received or identified 71 reports concerning 26 

potential incidents of civilian casualties resulting from U.S. operations in Somalia. These reports 

came from external sources such as news media, social media accounts, NGOs, and reports 

submitted using an electronic form on USAFRICOM’s website. Nine reports about nine 

incidents that purportedly occurred in 2019 were duplicate reports already received or identified 

and assessed as not credible. One report about one incident that occurred in 2019 was a 

duplicate report already assessed and reported as credible in last year’s Section 1057 report, with 

approximately three civilians killed and approximately two civilians injured. Three reports about 
UNCLASSIFIED 

12 

three potential incidents in 2019 were received in 2020 and were assessed as not credible 

because no U.S. military operations took place at the reported times or locations. 

The remaining 58 reports concerned 13 potential incidents of civilian casualties in 2020. As of 

January 27, 2021, USAFRICOM has assessed 55 reports concerning 12 potential incidents. 

Three reports related to one incident from 2020 remain under review. One report related to one 

incident was assessed as not credible because no U.S. military operation took place at the 

reported time or location. Forty-three reports concerning nine incidents were assessed as not 

credible based on review of operational data and reporting, video surveillance, other data from 

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) assets, and information derived through 

multiple sources of intelligence. Eleven reports related to two incidents in 2020 were assessed as 

credible, with approximately one civilian killed and approximately five civilians injured as a 

result of U.S. military operations in Somalia. The following table contains additional details 

about each instance during 2020 assessed to have resulted in civilian casualties. 

 Date Location Operation 

 Type 

Civilians 

Injured 

Civilians 

Killed 

1 2-Feb-20 Jilib, Somalia Air 3 1 

2 17-Feb-20 Jilib, Somalia Air 2 0 

 TOTAL 5 1 

Additionally, as an update to the Section 1057 report for U.S. military operations in 2019, the 

assessment into a report of civilian casualties in Somalia that remained under review at the time 

of that report has since been completed, and assessed as not credible. 

All of the reports of potential civilian casualties that USAFRICOM assessed in 2020 were from 

public sources such as news media and social media accounts, with a few reports received from 

NGOs or through the electronic form on USAFRICOM’s website. In one specific report, an 

NGO provided additional information to an already ongoing assessment into the February 2, 

2020, incident in Jilib, Somalia. This information assisted USAFRICOM in determining the 

number of civilians harmed. 

Beginning in April 2020, USAFRICOM began issuing a quarterly report on its website detailing 

the status and results of ongoing or completed assessments into reports of civilian casualties. 

USAFRICOM also created an electronic form on its website through which individuals can 

submit reports of civilian casualties to the command. Multiple languages may be used to fill out 

the electronic form. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

13 

E. U.S. military actions in Nigeria 

During 2020, USAFRICOM conducted a successful hostage rescue mission in Nigeria. 

USAFRICOM has not received or identified any reports of civilian casualties associated with 

this mission. 

II. DOD PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING REPORTS OF CIVILIAN 

CASUALTIES FROM U.S. MILITARY OPERATIONS 

As reflected in Section 2 of Executive Order 13732, United States Policy on Pre- and Post-Strike 

Measures To Address Civilian Casualties in U.S. Operations Involving the Use of Force, of 

July 1, 2016, the U.S. military, as appropriate and consistent with mission objectives and 

applicable law, including the law of war, has a practice of reviewing or investigating incidents 

involving civilian casualties, including by considering relevant information from all available 

sources, such as other agencies, partner governments, and NGOs, and taking measures to 

mitigate the likelihood of future incidents of civilian casualties. 

When assessing reports of civilian casualties, DoD considers whether any members of the 

civilian population were wounded or killed as a direct result of U.S. military operations. For the 

purposes of such assessments, DoD does not include members of the civilian population who 

have forfeited the protections of civilian status by engaging in hostilities. Information about 

different classes of persons under the law of war, including “civilians” and “combatants,” can be 

found in Chapter IV of the DoD Law of War Manual (June 2015, Updated December 2016), 

which is available at https://ogc.osd.mil/images/law_war_manual_december_16.pdf. 

Over the past several years, DoD has continued to refine its practices and procedures for 

reviewing reports of civilian casualties. Under current practices and procedures, the command or 

another entity identified by the command (such as a special board or team) seeks to assess all 

reports of civilian casualties that may have resulted from the command’s operations once reports 

become known. The command or entity considers reports available from any source, including 

after-action reporting of military units, and information provided by external sources, such as 

NGOs, the news media, social media, and individuals who were present during the operation, 

including military personnel and local civilians. In assessing the report, the command or entity 

seeks to review all readily available information from a variety of sources, and may seek 

additional information that is not readily available, for example by searching social media and 

conducting interviews. Sources of information may include, but are not limited to, operational 

planning data and reporting, video surveillance and other data from ISR assets, witness 

observations (including those of partnered forces) where available, news reports, and information 

provided by NGOs and other sources, such as local officials or social media. In reviewing the 
UNCLASSIFIED 

14 

report, the command or entity seeks to assess whether civilian casualties more likely than not 

occurred. 

Specific processes for reviewing or investigating incidents have varied over the years and may 

continue to vary by geographic combatant command and by operation. DoD uses different 

processes due to host nation requests, different mission objectives, different operational designs, 

different available resources, and different organizational designs and command relationships 

within various areas of responsibility. As just one example, some commands do not have access 

to areas on the ground where civilian casualties may have occurred. Commands also work to 

improve their processes over time and adapt to the ever-changing fog and friction of war. 

Under current practices and procedures, after reviewing the available information, a competent 

official determines whether the report of civilian casualties is “credible,” meaning it is more 

likely than not that civilians were injured or killed as a result of U.S. military operations. Certain 

commands may use alternate terms such as “substantiated” and “unsubstantiated” rather than 

“credible” and “not credible,” but all assessments apply the “more likely than not” standard. 

When civilian casualties are assessed to have more likely than not occurred, the assessment 

further estimates the number of civilian casualties that occurred, and differentiates whether they 

were injured or killed. As noted above, a report may be found to be “not credible,” if, for 

example, (1) there was no U.S. military action within a reasonable distance and/or within a 

reasonable timeframe as that identified in the report; (2) the report provides insufficient 

information to identify a location or date of the incident; or (3) a review of all reasonably 

available information, including operational data and reporting, video surveillance, other data 

from ISR assets, information derived through multiple sources of intelligence, and any 

information provided in the report, leads to the determination that it is more likely than not that 

civilian casualties did not occur as a result of U.S. military operations. 

If warranted, a commander or other competent official may direct a more extensive investigation 

to find additional facts about the incident and to make relevant recommendations, such as 

identifying process improvements to reduce the likelihood of future civilian casualty incidents. 

Command-directed investigations are conducted in accordance with applicable Military 

Department procedures, such as Army Regulation 15-6 or procedures for an Air Force 

Commander-Directed Investigation. A new DoD-level policy issuance, currently under 

development, will establish additional Department-wide guidance for reviewing and assessing 

reports of civilian casualties. 

In some cases, DoD has not been able to assess a report due to insufficient information provided 

or because reports are still pending review. However, DoD continues its assessments, and 

existing assessments are reconsidered if new relevant information becomes available. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

15 

DoD acknowledges that there are differences between DoD assessments of civilian casualties 

and reports from other organizations, including NGOs. DoD personnel engage with 

representatives from NGOs and IOs regularly to discuss reports and assessments of civilian 

casualties, including at both action officer and leadership levels. These differences result from a 

variety of factors. For example, NGOs and media outlets often use different types of information 

and methodologies than DoD to assess whether civilian casualties have occurred. Some 

organizations conduct on-the-ground assessments and interviews, while others rely heavily on 

media reporting. Although such information can be valuable, this information alone can be 

incomplete, and it is important to ensure its validity. DoD assessments seek to incorporate all 

available information, including information provided by NGOs and IOs, as well as additional 

information and tools that are not available to other organizations – such as operational planning 

data and intelligence sources. As noted above, DoD reconsiders existing assessments if new 

relevant information becomes available, such as new information received from NGOs or other 

outside organizations. 

III. DOD PROCESSES FOR CONSIDERING EX GRATIA PAYMENTS OR 

OTHER FORMS OF RESPONSE TO CIVILIAN HARM 

An “ex gratia payment” may be one of several possible response options that might be 

appropriate for DoD to take when U.S. military operations injure or kill a civilian or damage or 

destroy civilian property. Other possible response options could include an acknowledgement of 

responsibility, medical care, or other appropriate measures that may be consistent with mission 

objectives and applicable law. Such actions help to express condolences, sympathy, or goodwill, 

and are used to support mission objectives. Such actions are not required by law, not an 

admission of wrongdoing, and not for the purpose of compensating the victim or the victim’s 

family for their loss. 

When commanders identify a situation in which it is appropriate to extend an ex gratia payment, 

DoD has authority and funds to do so. Section 1213 of the NDAA for FY 2020 authorized the 

use of not more than $3,000,000 for each calendar year from the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense (OSD), Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide account, for ex gratia payments for 

damage, personal injury, or death that is incident to the use of force by the U.S. Armed Forces, a 

coalition that includes the United States, or a military organization supporting the United States 

or such coalition. Section 1213 additionally specifies that it shall be construed as the sole 

authority to make ex gratia payments for property damage, personal injury, or death that is 

incident to the use of force by the U.S. Armed Forces. In June 2020, DoD published new 

Department-wide interim regulations to implement the authority provided under Section 1213. 

Commanders rely on these regulations to evaluate incidents and to determine whether offering an 

ex gratia payment in a particular case would be appropriate and consistent with mission 

objectives and applicable law. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

16 

Additionally, another DoD-level policy issuance is under development that will provide further 

guidance on the range of responses that might be appropriate for DoD to take when U.S. military 

operations injure or kill a civilian or damage or destroy civilian property. 

DoD did not offer or make any such ex gratia payments during 2020. 

IV. STEPS DOD TAKES TO MITIGATE HARM TO CIVILIANS 

U.S. forces take extraordinary efforts to reduce the harmful impact of military operations on 

civilians. In conducting military operations, all commands and forces assigned to Combatant 

Commands (CCMDs) adhere to the law of war, Secretary of Defense-approved rules of 

engagement, instructions promulgated by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and joint 

doctrine that establish policies, processes, and procedures that help to protect civilians and 

minimize civilian casualties. Below are examples of steps, among other efforts, DoD has taken 

in 2020 to help protect civilians during military operations. 

Policies, processes, and procedures: All CCMDs conducting military operations adhere to 

Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff Instructions (CJCSIs) that contain guidance to help protect 

civilians and minimize civilian casualties, including CJCSI 3160.01C, No-Strike and the 

Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology. Like other DoD issuances, CJCSI 3160.01C is 

routinely updated, including through lessons learned from U.S. military operations, and a new 

update of this document is anticipated in 2021. As an example of how seriously the Joint Force 

takes the process of improving targeting procedures, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 

has also established a committee of senior targeting representatives from the Joint Staff, the 

Military Services, the CCMDs, and DoD Combat Support Agencies, and representatives of 

participating partner nations, to propose, review, debate, analyze, and prioritize targeting issues 

of mutual concern and, when appropriate, to decide on and implement common advancements. 

CCMDs also usually have several boards, bureaus, centers, cells, and/or working groups that 

contribute to efforts to reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties. Much effort to reduce the 

likelihood of civilian casualties occurs during the targeting process. CCMDs employ groups 

focused on the targeting process, such as a Target Development Working Group, a Joint 

Targeting Working Group, and a Joint Targeting Coordination Board. Although the primary 

purpose of these groups and board is to achieve an intended outcome against an enemy target, 

these entities also review and evaluate the targets to minimize the potential for civilian 

casualties. Additionally, proposed targets are reviewed for compliance with the law of war. For 

example, a judge advocate will review a proposed target to advise the command and the Target 

Engagement Authority whether the proposed target is a valid military objective under the law of 

war. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

17 

Other working groups that are not as directly involved in the targeting process can also 

contribute to efforts to minimize civilian casualties or to respond to reports that U.S. forces 

caused civilian casualties. For example, an Information Operations Working Group can help 

generate warnings for civilians to avoid military objectives or areas of active combat. 

Furthermore, as mentioned earlier in the report, DoD components conduct U.S. military 

operations consistent with Section 2 of Executive Order 13732, United States Policy on Pre- and 

Post-Strike Measures To Address Civilian Casualties in U.S. Operations Involving the Use of 

Force, of July 1, 2016, which catalogues the best practices DoD implements to protect civilians 

during armed conflict. For ease of reference, Section 2 of Executive Order 13732 is reproduced 

as follows. 

“Sec. 2. Policy. In furtherance of U.S. Government efforts to protect civilians in U.S. 

operations involving the use of force in armed conflict or in the exercise of the Nation’s 

inherent right of self-defense, and with a view toward enhancing such efforts, relevant 

departments and agencies shall continue to take certain measures in present and future 

operations. 

(a) In particular, relevant agencies shall, consistent with mission objectives and applicable 

law, including the law of armed conflict: 

(i) train personnel, commensurate with their responsibilities, on compliance with legal 

obligations and policy guidance that address the protection of civilians and on 

implementation of best practices that reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, 

including through exercises, pre-deployment training, and simulations of complex 

operational environments that include civilians; 

(ii) develop, acquire, and field intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems 

that, by enabling more accurate battlespace awareness, contribute to the protection of 

civilians; 

(iii) develop, acquire, and field weapon systems and other technological capabilities 

that further enable the discriminate use of force in different operational contexts; 

(iv) take feasible precautions in conducting attacks to reduce the likelihood of civilian 

casualties, such as providing warnings to the civilian population (unless the 

circumstances do not permit), adjusting the timing of attacks, taking steps to ensure 

military objectives and civilians are clearly distinguished, and taking other measures 

appropriate to the circumstances; and 
UNCLASSIFIED 

18 

(v) conduct assessments that assist in the reduction of civilian casualties by identifying 

risks to civilians and evaluating efforts to reduce risks to civilians. 

(b) In addition to the responsibilities above, relevant agencies shall also, as appropriate and 

consistent with mission objectives and applicable law, including the law of armed conflict: 

(i) review or investigate incidents involving civilian casualties, including by considering 

relevant and credible information from all available sources, such as other agencies, 

partner governments, and NGOs, and take measures to mitigate the likelihood of future 

incidents of civilian casualties; 

(ii) acknowledge U.S. Government responsibility for civilian casualties and offer 

condolences, including ex gratia payments, to civilians who are injured or to the families 

of civilians who are killed; 

(iii) engage with foreign partners to share and learn best practices for reducing the 

likelihood of and responding to civilian casualties, including through appropriate training 

and assistance; and 

(iv) maintain channels for engagement with the International Committee of the Red Cross 

and other NGOs that operate in conflict zones and encourage such organizations to assist 

in efforts to distinguish between military objectives and civilians, including by 

appropriately marking protected facilities, vehicles, and personnel, and by providing 

updated information on the locations of such facilities and personnel.” 

During 2020, the operations listed above were conducted consistent with Section 2 of Executive 

Order 13732. For example, pre-deployment training for U.S. military units during 2020 included 

instruction on the law of war, rules of engagement, and other policies related to protecting 

civilian populations. CCMDs conducting military operations also took feasible precautions to 

reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, conducted assessments that assist in the reduction of 

civilian casualties, and acknowledged U.S. responsibility for civilian casualties. 

Operational Pauses: U.S. forces, working in coordination with Coalition members and partner 

forces, implement, in appropriate circumstances, operational pauses to allow for the safe passage 

of civilians and other non-combatants from areas of hostilities. 

Civilian Casualty Cells: CCMDs or appropriate subordinate commands also employ “civilian 

casualty cells” to address civilian casualty issues, such as responding to reports that U.S. or 

Coalition military operations caused civilian casualties. CCMDs and other operational 

commands continue to review civilian casualty assessment processes and refine policies and 

procedures. 
UNCLASSIFIED 

19 

Technological Advancements: DoD pursues the latest advances in precision-guided weapons and 

ISR technology. The majority of strikes in 2020 used state-of-the-art weaponry and technology 

to characterize the target area as precisely as possible and to employ the weapons’ capabilities 

against the enemy while reducing effects on nearby collateral concerns. DoD Components with 

target engagement authority have also made process improvements to identify and eliminate 

contributing factors that have the potential to lead to civilian casualties, including through 

regular reviews of weapons employment across various commands to identify additional areas of 

improvement and to disseminate best practices and lessons learned. Additionally, commanders 

are leveraging emerging technologies that enhance battlefield situational awareness, reduce the 

probability of potential civilian casualties, and enable better integration of fires. Lastly, mission 

planners seek to minimize risk to civilians by employing the most appropriate munition 

available, including, at times, non-lethal capabilities, to accomplish the mission. 

Doctrinal Updates: The Joint Staff is conducting a periodic review of DoD’s methodology for 

conducting combat assessments, as reflected in CJCSI 3162.02A, Methodology for Combat 

Assessment, and plans to publish an updated version of the instruction in 2021. This instruction 

established DoD’s collateral damage assessment methodology to help commanders better 

understand the effects of U.S. military operations and identify improvements. The collateral 

damage assessment methodology outlines steps to assess collateral damage and establishes databasing and graphic production standards. Additionally, and as mentioned above, the Joint Staff 

anticipates releasing an updated version of CJCSI 3160.01C, No-Strike and the Collateral 

Damage Estimation Methodology, in 2021. 

Receipt of Information Regarding Civilian Casualties: In October 2020, DoD posted a webpage 

to provide information on how individuals can submit information to DoD about civilian 

casualties that may have resulted from U.S. military operations. This webpage lists the email 

and postal mailing addresses of the combatant commands and can be accessed at 

https://policy.defense.gov/OUSDP-Offices/Reporting-Civilian-Casualties/. 

Public Reporting of Civilian Casualties: In addition to this report, through which DoD annually 

releases information regarding civilian casualties that result from U.S. military operations, 

certain commands also release related information through other mechanisms and on a more 

frequent basis. 

Civilian Casualties Working Group: DoD established a Civilian Casualties Working Group to 

promote coordination within DoD on civilian casualty issues. This effort is covered in more 

detail in the report submitted to Congress pursuant to Section 936 of the NDAA for FY 2019. 

Studies and Analysis: In December 2017, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff directed an 

assessment of civilian casualties that resulted from U.S. air or artillery strikes in 
UNCLASSIFIED 

20 

USCENTCOM’s and USAFRICOM’s respective areas of responsibility from 2015 to 2017. The 

study made findings and provided recommendations related to policy, doctrine, operational 

planning, and technological investments. This effort is covered in more detail in the report 

submitted to Congress pursuant to Section 936 of the NDAA for FY 2019. 

More recently, OSD has entered into an agreement for two additional studies conducted by a 

Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC). The first study began in late 

2019 and is titled “Understanding Civilian Harm in Raqqa.” This study focused on the 2017 

Battle of Raqqa, with the objective of identifying recommendations to inform DoD on ways 

civilian harm could be reduced in future military operations. The second study was conducted 

pursuant to Section 1721 of the NDAA for FY 2020, and began in early 2020. This study is 

intended to provide the Secretary of Defense and Congress with an independent assessment of 

the standards, processes, procedures, and policy relating to civilian casualties that are currently in 

place across DoD, and of changes that are currently under development, and will provide 

recommendations to inform the further development of and improvements to policies related to 

civilian casualties. Both of these studies are near completion.

Engagement with NGOs: DoD engages with representatives of NGOs that operate in conflict 

zones as well as with delegates of the International Committee of the Red Cross to hear their 

respective perspectives regarding how civilians are affected by armed conflict, and to inform 

DoD’s approaches to mitigating and responding to civilian harm. Consistent lines of 

communication are maintained between NGOs and DoD, including across multiple levels of 

command. 

In recent years, officials in OSD have periodically hosted roundtable engagements with 

representatives of NGOs to discuss a broad variety of matters relating to civilian casualties. For 

example, these roundtables have discussed topics such as civilian casualty assessments and 

investigations; post-harm acknowledgment and ex gratia condolence payments; DoD 

engagement with NGOs; protections of civilians and civilian objects; partnered operations and 

civilian casualties; and civilian harm in the context of specific regional conflicts as well as 

potential large scale combat operations. These engagements have helped to advance a mutual 

understanding between DoD and NGOs regarding efforts that the U.S. military takes to mitigate 

and respond to civilian harm during operations. 

V. CONCLUSION 

DoD continues to move forward the development of a Department-wide policy issuance that will 

address the priority areas identified in Section 936 of the NDAA for FY 2019, as well as other 

issues identified by DoD. This effort was described in DoD’s Section 936 report to Congress in 

2019, and is ongoing. A January 31, 2020, memorandum from the Department’s then-official 
UNCLASSIFIED 

21 

responsible for coordinating DoD policy relating to civilian casualties to other senior DoD 

officials, provides additional information regarding issues that this policy issuance will address. 

This memo is publicly available at https://media.defense.gov/2020/Feb/20/2002252367/-1/-

1/1/DEVELOPMENT-OF-A-DOD-INSTRUCTION-ON-MINIMIZING-AND-RESPONDINGTO-CIVILIAN-HARM-IN-MILITARY-OPERATIONS.PDF.