As Israel faces increasing pressure from activists, international organizations, and the U.S. president to enhance civilian protection amidst the Gaza conflict, a key Pentagon official has articulated the strategic advantages of doing so. Chris Maier, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (SOL/IC), reminded reporters at an August 23 event that Israel suffered the loss of over 1,200 individuals in Hamas’s attack on October 7. However, he emphasized, “At the same time, how the Israelis are conducting the operation in Gaza — I think we’ve been very open — has concerned us at times.”
Maier disclosed that there have been “dozens” of conversations between U.S. and Israeli military officials at various levels, including Secretary of Defense, regarding the manner in which Israeli forces are engaging in combat. He pointed out that civilian harm is a persistent issue, which carries significant strategic implications.
While not dismissing the commitment to human rights, Maier indicated that images of civilian casualties and malnourished children in Gaza could weaken U.S. support for Israel and hinder Israel’s ability to cultivate and safeguard other relationships, particularly with groups and governments sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
“How you conduct military operations in Gaza really resonates with how the rest of the international community views U.S. support for Israel, as well as their own support for Israel,” he stated at a Defense Writers Group meeting. “Conversely, this perception also influences what’s acceptable in terms of support for Hamas. Therefore, we continue to emphasize the principles of avoiding civilian harm.”
Reports indicate that the death toll in Gaza has surpassed 40,000, including thousands of children, prompting several countries to sever diplomatic ties or withdraw military aid to Israel. These developments have sparked significant protests against Israel in the U.S., its closest ally. Israel maintains that it is taking all possible measures to protect civilians, asserting that Hamas uses them as human shields.
Maier acknowledged the complexity of the operational environment in which Israel is fighting, noting the challenges posed by well-hidden adversaries amid a dense civilian population. Earlier this month, Pentagon Press Secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder revealed that Hamas has embedded itself within civilian structures, creating an extensive tunnel system underneath Gaza, comparable in size to New York City.
“I think it’s particularly hard to ask the Israelis to exercise complete discretion given their military objective of dismantling Hamas in its operational areas,” Maier remarked. “It’s hard to imagine a more complex environment for applying the principles concerning civilian harm.”
However, he stressed that it would be “foolish” to assume such conditions won’t arise in the future, underscoring the need for lessons learned regarding civilian harm mitigation from the current operations. “We need to integrate the challenges of this environment into how we develop our warfighting capabilities, informed by civilian harm principles,” he stated.
America’s Own Efforts on Civilian Casualties
Maier’s reflection on Israeli operations comes two years into the Pentagon’s introspection on civilian casualties. In August 2022, the Defense Department unveiled a new “Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan,” which was instituted following futile procedures that resulted in civilian deaths across many conflicts in the Middle East and Southwest Asia, including a notorious strike in Afghanistan in August 2021 that killed ten noncombatants. Echoing Maier’s message, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin emphasized in a 2022 letter attached to the policy that “the protection of civilians is a strategic priority as well as a moral imperative.”
“Our efforts to mitigate and respond to civilian harm directly reflect our values and contribute to achieving mission success,” Austin wrote.
The action plan highlighted several directives for the U.S. military extending beyond existing legal frameworks, such as incorporating guidance on civilian harm addressing across armed conflict into doctrine and operational plans to ensure preparedness for mitigating and responding to civilian harm in future engagements.
In his remarks, Maier provided an update on U.S. efforts toward civilian harm mitigation, noting that progress has been “fairly good.” He mentioned the placement of harm mitigation specialists throughout the operational framework, including combatant commands and the intelligence community. Their role is not limited to humanitarian aims but also encompasses assessing broader strategic implications of specific tactical actions: determining whether an action in one area complicates strategic maneuverability elsewhere.
“This isn’t about constraining our military; it’s about adding expertise to enhance understanding of the operational environment,” Maier emphasized.
The Department of Defense is also working on establishing a new “data enterprise” to better compile information on civilian harm mitigation and has begun integrating civilian harm principles into large-scale exercises with allies.
Overall, it has become evident, Maier said, that a reassessment was necessary, partly due to the anticipated structure of future conflicts, particularly possibly in the Indo-Pacific region, which will not resemble previous engagements.
“Probably gone are the days when our prior counterterrorism experience allowed us to scrutinize individual targets over extended periods and operate at a different tempo than we do today,” he explained.
Future large-scale conflicts may necessitate the potential launch of thousands of strikes per hour, prompting the Pentagon to rely on artificial intelligence and automation—capabilities that need to be integrated into the focus on civilian harm.
For a contrasting perspective on the Pentagon’s endeavors, Maier pointed to Moscow’s approach.
“As we were developing the action plan, the Russian attack on Ukraine provided a vivid illustration of what transpires when one adheres to what we term the ‘Russian way of war,’ which involves extreme brutality with little regard for the civilian environment—effectively utilizing the civilian landscape to achieve brutal objectives.”
Ukraine has mobilized evidence of Russian attacks on civilians to galvanize not only local resistance but also international support—critical in its fight against the significantly larger Russian military.
Maier deemed Russia’s methodology “suboptimal, from a strategic perspective.”
