U.S. air strikes targeting the Islamic State group have killed as many as 300 civilians in Syria over the past two years, according to an Oct. 26 Amnesty International report. Amnesty now calls for the investigation and disclosure of findings regarding civilian casualties in Syria, but the U.S. has not yet responded to the Sept. 28 memorandum that the group sent to the U.S. Department of Defense. Do you think the Department of Defense should prioritize the investigation of these claims, and what measures should the U.S. take to avoid civilian casualties in its mission against ISIS?

Amina Fahmy ’17
Even in the fight against ISIS, it is absolutely unacceptable that U.S. airstrikes have killed Syrian civilians, and the U.S. should conduct an investigation in order to take measures to avoid civilian casualties. First, it is tragic that innocent lives have been lost, and the U.S. has a responsibility to protect them. Second, when Americans kill civilians, even when they are not the intended targets, anti-American sentiment grows more rampant and support for ISIS strengthens —  and understandably so. It is only natural to want to support the organization promising to destroy the entity that has killed your innocent loved ones. For this reason, I do not think it is the best idea to release findings from any potential investigation, lest ISIL use the information as a promotional tool. 
Amina Fahmy ’17 is majoring in International and Global Studies, as well as Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies. She is the Middle East section editor of the Brandeis International Journal and an IMES Undergraduate Departmental Representative.
Remy Pontes ’17
Since 2015, the United States has spent an estimated $10 billion on thousands of coalition airstrikes against Islamic State targets throughout the Middle-East and northern Africa, resulting in hundreds of civilian casualties. Though I do believe that the Department of Defense should be held accountable and that such an inquiry would be both righteous and beneficial, the Department of Defense should not prioritize an investigation into these matters because the report would most likely affirm U.S. attempts to combat the terrorist organization. Unfortunately, there is no military solution to the crisis, and the only realistic way to avoid civilian casualties is to stop the bombing campaign altogether. Alternatively, the U.S. must implement political solutions such as cutting off ISIS’ financial assets, continuing to construct cessation of hostilities agreements, promoting an arms embargo in the region and supporting proposals to resettle refugees.
Remy Pontes ’17 is majoring in Anthropology, as well as Sociology. He is the president of Brandeis Peace Action.
Ziyang Chen ’18
This reminds me of a movie that I saw last summer, “Eye In The Sky,” a story of how the moral, ethical and legal implications of drone warfare are tested when a simple capture could have deadly results. “Never tell a soldier that he does not know the cost of war,” the movie quotes. In the same way, the Department of Defense must be fully aware of the civilian casualties, yet it chooses not to disclose its investigations. The Department of Defense should prioritize the investigation. Admittedly, the intention for air strikes against ISIS is good. Nevertheless, it cannot justify the lost lives of 300 civilians in Syria. International law may be one way to regulate the U.S. in avoiding civilian casualties in its mission. According to the Rome Statute, intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population or against individual civilians not directly taking part in hostilities should be considered a war crime. Still, international law cannot protect civilians who are killed either incidentally or accidentally on its own. Overall, the U.S. should always use its moral intuition to avoid civilian casualties.
Ziyang Chen ’18 is majoring in International and Global Studies, as well as Politics. She is an IGS Undergraduate Departmental Representative.
Ravi Simon ’19
Signature strikes are drone attacks whose targets are unknown but are deemed to be enemy combatants by virtue of their behavior. The CIA will take into account criteria such as the age, gender, activities and other sorts of characteristics of people, and then decide whether to kill them. For example, these drone strikes can target convoys of vehicles that bear the characteristics of Al Qaeda or ISIS leaders on the run. Policies such as signature strikes are largely responsible for unnecessary civilian casualties in Syria. The purpose of intervention has been largely to spare the suffering of civilians under the terroristic rule of the Islamic State. It is hypocritical to engage in policies such as signature strikes, therefore, and instrumentalize the lives of innocents. Nevertheless, this reality must not obscure the fact that American intervention is a necessary facet of our foreign policy and a justified war on terror. The Islamic State is responsible for genocide, ethnic cleansing and a large percentage of the approximately 400,000 people who have died since 2011 in Syria. Civilians will necessarily be hurt in the process of destroying the Islamic State, but that does not justify needless collateral damage. 
Ravi Simon ’19 is the Europe section editor for the Brandeis International Journal and a member of the Brandeis Academic Debate and Speech Society. He is also a staff writer for the Justice.