The United Kingdom’s approach to civilian harm mitigation and response contains important examples of good practice in its policies and select recent military campaigns. An assessment as to the extent to which these good practices are embedded within institutional policy, training, and decision-making is challenged by an overall lack of transparency around the UK’s approach. Where elements of the approach can be reviewed publicly, there are also some evident gaps. The UK does not, for instance, appear to consistently track or investigate allegations of civilian harm according to the same standard as its allies and independent monitors. In the past, the UK has had systems in place to offer voluntary compensation payments to civilians harmed by military operations, particularly during earlier conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In recent operations, these mechanisms have been removed and legislation has been introduced to limit options for civilians to seek compensation, meaning there is now no effective reparations mechanism in the UK. Overall, the UK’s approach to protecting civilians during military operations could benefit from greater clarity, coordination, and transparency. Creating CHMR-focused policies that build on existing human security policy, combined with improvements in tracking harm, investigating incidents, and providing post-harm responses are necessary to strengthen the UK’s civilian protection efforts going forward.
