A Natural Experiment on Civilian Harm in Iraq

• In Event: Learning about Political Violence through Observational Data

Abstract

Do violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) increase civilian support for insurgencies? A quasi-natural experiment arising from the geography of Mosul, an Iraqi city that was governed by the Islamic State (IS) for more than three years until its recapture by Iraqi forces in 2017, presents a unique opportunity to answer this question. Since Mosul is divided by the Tigris River, the battle to retake the city from IS unfolded in two stages. The exposure of otherwise similar East and West Mosul neighborhoods to different levels of collateral damage as a result of plausibly exogenous changes in military tactics and personnel between the two operations enables an empirical test of the hypothesis that violations of IHL increase civilian support for insurgents as measured through a survey of a random sample of 1,400 residents of Mosul. We assess whether Mosul residents whose households experienced higher levels of collateral damage during the battle for Mosul (as measured through self-reported incidents of death, injury, and property destruction and through satellite imagery) are more likely to express support for IS than those who experienced lower levels of collateral damage.

Authors

• Mara Revkin, Duke University

• Benjamin Curtiss Krick, Duke University

• Jonathan Petkun, Yale Law School