The Lancet-artikel, rapport og en irakisk kommentar
Frem for at diskutere denne rapport frem og tilbage (altså den rapport, der vurderer at op mod 600.000 irakere siden 2003 har mistet livet i krigen dernede), vil jeg opfordre folk til rent faktisk at læse den og danne sig deres eget indtryk.
Healing Iraq skriver om undersøgelsen:
In comparison, the much-criticised Iraq Body Count relies only on media reports (mostly Western and often by conflating 2 different sources) for their maximum body count of 48,639 civilians. I have said and will say again that the media reports only a tiny fraction of deaths in the country, usually the victims of car bombings or other significant violent events.Den gode tandlæge har flere gode observationer, og hans indlæg er vel værd at læse i sin helhed.
The collaborative study by the John Hopkins University, The School of Medicine at the Mustansiriya University, and the MIT Center for International Studies, pubished in The Lancet, is not the same. It is not an actual body count. This is an estimate of the total number of excess deaths over the last 3 years.
It uses cluster samples (uniform groups of samples in a specific geographical areas) as opposed to simple random samples. This is usually much more cost-effective and easier and in this case it’s, unfortunately, the only available method to get an estimate.
Simply put, the methods used by the study are valid, but in Iraq’s case, where the level of violence is not consistent throughout the country, I feel that the study should have been done differently. 654,965 excess civilian deaths is an absurd number. My personal guesstimate would be half that number, but the total count is not the point now.
(...)
One problem is that the people dismissing – or in some cases, rabidly attacking – the results of this study, including governmental officials who, arguably, have an interest in doing so, have offered no other alternative or not even a counter estimate. This is called denial. When you have no hard facts to discredit a scientific study, or worse, if you are forced to resort to absurd arguments, such as “the Iraqis are lying,” or “they interviewed insurgents,” or “the timing to publish this study was to affect American elections,” or "I don't like the results and they don't fit into my world view, therefore they have to be false," it is better for you to just shut up. From the short time I have been here, I am realising that some Americans have a hard time accepting facts that fly against their political persuasions.
Now I am aware that the study is being used here by both sides of the argument in the context of domestic American politics, and that pains me. As if it is different for Iraqis whether 50,000 Iraqis were killed as a result of the war or 600,000. The bottom line is that there is a steady increase in civilian deaths, that the health system is rapidly deteriorating, and that things are clearly not going in the right direction. The people who conducted the survey should be commended for attempting to find out, with the limited methods they had available. On the other hand, the people who are attacking them come across as indifferent to the suffering of Iraqis, especially when they have made no obvious effort to provide a more accurate body count. In fact, it looks like they are reluctant to do this.
Healing Iraq var i øvrigt indtil for nylig fundamentalt positiv overfor invasionen i 2003 of Saddams indsættelse. Som så mange andre irakere har også Zeyad dog efterhånden fået nok, som det fremgår af hans p.t. seneste indlæg:
Another close friend of mine has been killed in Baghdad. We had lunch together in Baghdad just days before I left.Link til rapporten The Human Cost of War.
I can't concentrate on anything any more. I should not be here in New York running around a stupid neighbourhood, asking people about their 'issues'.
I now officially regret supporting this war back in 2003. The guilt is too much for me to handle.
Link til kommentaren på Healing Iraq.