Collateral damage: A conceptual history Event as iCalendar

Dr Thomas Gregory | University of Auckland

Civilian casualties are often viewed as a tragic but unavoidable consequence of war. While belligerents are prohibited from intentionally targeting civilians, they are permitted to knowingly kill and injure civilians in certain circumstances. Providing that civilian casualties are merely foreseen and not intended and the harm caused is not disproportionate to the anticipated gain, then this "collateral damage"could be considered perfectly lawful and even morally permissible.

This paper is interested in how this conceptual language has shifted over time, focusing particular attention on recent attempts by coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq to abandon the term. Drawing on an array of tactical directives and lessons learned reports, this paper will trace the emergence of a new idea that treats civilian casualties as a "strategic setback" – a problem that is no longer incidental to the war effort but something that could potentially jeopardise the success of military operations. The aim of this paper, then, is to explore the historical shift in terminology, the rationale behind this shift and its implications for how we think about civilian casualties.