51吃瓜

With mass-casualty events from Raqqa to Mosul, some think the US military is scrapping rules designed to protect innocents.

In a desolated patch of Mosul, Iraq, people are still digging through the rubble. Rescuers wear masks to cover the stench, while anxious family members grow desperate about missing loved ones.

The full story of聽what happened in the al-Jidideh neighborhood isn鈥檛 yet clear, but the toll is unmistakable. A New York Times 箩辞耻谤苍补濒颈蝉迟听 stumbling across charred human limbs, still covered in clothing, while a man stood nearby holding a sign with 27 names鈥攅xtended family members either missing or dead.

All told, 200 or more civilians may be dead there following a US airstrike on the densely populated neighborhood. The military has acknowledged the strike, but says it鈥檚 still investigating the deaths. If the allegations are true, this was by far our deadliest attack on innocents in decades.

The carnage comes amid a push by the US and its Iraqi allies to reclaim Mosul, Iraq鈥檚 second most populous city, from the Islamic State (or ISIS).

That鈥檚 making life terrifying for the city鈥檚 residents, who鈥檝e endured years of depredations from ISIS only to fall under US bombs鈥攁nd to face possible human rights abuses from Iraqi soldiers they don鈥檛 trust. 鈥淣ow it feels like the coalition is killing more people than ISIS,鈥� the UK鈥檚 Telegraph newspaper.

Unfortunately, that may not be so far from the truth. AirWars, which tracks civilian casualties in Iraq and Syria, counted of civilian deaths from coalition airstrikes in March alone. That鈥檚 about triple the count from February.

In fact, AirWars estimates, more US coalition strikes are now causing civilian casualties than strikes by Russia, which was loudly (and appropriately) accused of war crimes for its bombing of Aleppo, Syria last year.

Is this the simple result of the fight heating up in Mosul? Not quite.

In the same month, at least were reported killed by a US airstrike outside Raqqa, Syria鈥攚here the real battle with ISIS hasn鈥檛 even begun yet鈥攁nd up to 50 more may have died when the .

Instead, some observers suspect the 聽designed to limit civilian casualties in war zones. They deny this, but the Times reports that field commanders appear to be exercising to launch strikes in civilian-heavy areas than before.

During the campaign, Trump himself famously promised to 鈥渂omb the s鈥斺�� out of ISIS. That sounds extreme, and it is.

But it鈥檚 only a few steps beyond the Obama administration鈥檚 approach of gradually expanding our air wars outside the public eye. Trump鈥檚 just taking it to another level by putting virtually all key foreign policy decisions in military hands, while gutting resources for diplomacy and humanitarian aid.

The human costs of this will be enormous. The political costs will be, too.聽The US has been 鈥渂ombing the s鈥斺�� out of Iraq for decades now, which has consistently created more terrorists than it鈥檚 killed. Extremists are flourishing in Iraq. The same can鈥檛 be said for the civilians now burying their dead in Mosul.

Of course, ISIS is guilty of its own innumerable atrocities. But the war-torn sectarian politics that gave rise to the group are a direct result of this military-first foreign policy. There鈥檚 simply no reason to believe that reducing Iraq鈥檚 cities to rubble will give way to less extremism in their ashes.

Iraqis will still have to wrest their country back from ISIS. But if it鈥檚 ever going to get back on its feet, what the country truly needs is a political solution. That鈥檚 going to require a surge of aid, diplomacy, and honest brokering鈥攁ll of which are in short supply now.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author鈥檚 own and do not necessarily reflect 51吃瓜鈥檚 editorial policy.

Photo Credit:聽