Written question asked by Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (Liberal Democrat) on Wednesday, 23 January 2002, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Wednesday, 6 February 2002. It was answered by Adam Ingram (Labour) on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 on behalf of the Ministry of Defence.
Ministry of Defence
- Question
- To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when, since January 1999, coalition aircraft patrolling the (a) northern and (b) southern no-fly-zones in Iraq have hit targets that were different from the intended target, stating in each case (i) the nature of the intended target, (ii) the nature of the actual target hit, (iii) the estimated number of civilians killed and (iv) the reason why the unintended target was hit; and if he will make a statement.
- Answer
-
Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when, since January 1999, coalition aircraft patrolling the (a) northern and (b) southern no-fly zones in Iraq have hit targets that were different from the intended target, stating in each case (i) the nature of the intended target, (ii) the nature of the actual target hit, (iii) the estimated number of civilians killed and (iv) the reason why the unintended target was hit; and if he will make a statement. [31016] Mr. Ingram: All targets attacked in self defence by coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones are military elements of the Iraqi Integrated Air Defence System. On the rare occasions where ordnance has failed to hit the intended target, it has almost invariably landed on open ground. It is extremely difficult to assess collateral damage, or numbers of civilian casualties caused by the remainder, despite the painstaking Battle Damage Assessment (BDA) that the coalition carries out every time ordnance is released. However, it is possible to demonstrate categorically that many of the Iraqi claims of collateral damage and civilian casualties are untrue. There have, for example, been several instances when Iraqis have claimed civilian casualties when coalition aircraft have not been flying, or when BDA has confirmed that only military targets were hit. Indeed, there is good evidence that, on several occasions where Saddam has made claims of civilian casualties, it has been caused by Iraqi artillery shells or missiles, recklessly fired at coalition aircraft, falling to earth in built up areas. In all cases of failure to hit the intended target by ordnance released from UK aircraft, the failure was caused by ordnance malfunction. We do not hold information for coalition partners. Coalition aircraft only attack military targets in self-defence. We make every effort to select targets and to employ precision guided munitions in order to minimise the possibility of collateral damage and civilian casualties. Despite these efforts, regrettably, on occasions civilians may have suffered as a result of coalition activity. However, this would be completely avoided if the Iraqis desisted from attacking coalition aircraft.
Secondary information
- Type
- Written question
- Reference
- 31016; 379 c997W;379 c992-3W
- Session
- 2001-02
- Subjects
- Death Bombings Casualties Civilians Iraq International cooperation Peacekeeping operations Military aircraft Military alliances
- Link
- View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2016-10-07 17:01:08 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_776160
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_776160
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_776160