Atrocity victimization and the costs of economic conflict crimes in the battle for Baghdad and Iraq
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Economic conflict crimes are defined in this paper as violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, as well as domestic law, associated with military and political conflict and producing significant monetary as well as other forms of suffering for civilians. Criminologists are well positioned by disciplinary emphasis to document and explain military and political violence resulting in economic conflict crimes. Criminal victimization associated with the US-led invasion of Iraq imposed an enormous toll on civilians. Yet there is little attention by criminologists or others to the profound economic costs to Iraqis, whether through lost property, life, or opportunities. We cautiously estimate that the economic losses for households in the city of Baghdad alone were almost US$100 billion, and more than three times this amount for the entire country, with Sunni groups experiencing significantly greater losses than others. So far as we know, our article presents the first estimates of civilian losses from economic conflict crimes that followed the US-led invasion of Iraq. These losses were widespread and systematic, the hallmarks of crimes against humanity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".