Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
3JUN

Hengaw: 310 civilians among 2,400 dead

3 min read
09:04UTC

The only organisation separating soldiers from civilians in Iran's death toll produces a ratio of 6.7 to 1. Shift one methodological assumption, and the ratio becomes 1.2 to 1.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

The 6.7:1 ratio is analytically meaningful only if the 2,090 classified as military or security were lawful combatant targets under IHL — and a significant fraction of Basij members almost certainly do not meet that threshold at any given moment.

Hengaw, a Kurdish human rights monitoring organisation based in Norway, reported 2,400 people killed in Iran: approximately 310 confirmed civilians and 2,090 military or security personnel. This breakdown is the most granular published by any source tracking the conflict and the only one attempting systematic distinction between civilian and combatant dead.

The implied ratio — 6.7 military or security personnel killed for every confirmed civilian — would, if accurate, place this campaign well below the civilian casualty rates of comparable modern air operations. NATO's 78-day bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 killed an estimated 489–528 civilians (per Human Rights Watch) against roughly 1,000 Yugoslav military personnel — a ratio below 2:1. The US-led Coalition campaign against the Islamic State from 2014 to 2019 produced civilian-to-combatant ratios that varied by theatre but rarely approached 6:1 in the Coalition's favour, according to Airwars monitoring data. A sustained ratio of 6.7:1 across five days and more than 2,000 targets would indicate discrimination between military and civilian targets at a rate with few modern precedents.

Two factors erode that reading. First, Hengaw's 310 confirmed civilians stands against HRANA's 1,097 — a gap of 787 people. The difference is methodological: Hengaw applies a higher evidentiary bar, counting only deaths it can independently categorise with enough information to distinguish civilian from combatant. HRANA counts all civilian deaths reported through its network, a lower threshold that captures more cases with less granularity per case. The true civilian figure falls somewhere in that range, and the range is wide enough to transform the analysis. At 310 civilians against 2,090 military, the ratio is 6.7:1. At 1,097 civilians, it drops to roughly 1.2:1 — a figure consistent with the most destructive air campaigns of the past three decades and far less favourable to Coalition claims of precision.

Second, Hengaw's monitoring infrastructure is strongest in Iran's western Kurdish-majority provinces — Kurdistan, Kermanshah, Ilam — where its networks have documented state violence against Kurdish populations for years. Its reach into Baluchistan, Khuzestan, or the central Iranian plateau, where different communities and communication networks operate, is less established. The strike that killed schoolchildren in Minab — where NPR satellite imagery revealed blast damage extending into adjacent residential blocks beyond the school — sits in Hormozgan province on Iran's southern coast, well outside Hengaw's core coverage area. With Iran's internet at 1% capacity for six days , the deaths that no network can reach are the ones that determine whether the true ratio is closer to 6.7 or to 1.2. That determination cannot be made while the bombs are still falling.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Hengaw's figures suggest roughly 6–7 soldiers or security personnel were killed for every civilian — which sounds like precision targeting. But Iran's Basij militia, which makes up a large portion of that security figure, consists partly of part-time volunteers who hold ordinary civilian jobs. Under the laws of war, you can only lawfully target someone while they are actively participating in combat. A Basij member at home or at their civilian workplace when a strike occurred would legally count as a civilian death, even if the military records them as a combatant.

Deep Analysis
Synthesis

The near-equivalence of the Iranian state Foundation of Martyrs total figure (1,045) and HRANA's civilian-only figure (1,097) suggests the state body is either suppressing its military casualty count — avoiding public acknowledgement of security force losses for domestic political reasons — or that both organisations are drawing from the same degraded reporting network, producing artificially convergent figures for structurally different reasons. Either explanation undermines the independent reliability of both sources.

Root Causes

The Basij's organisational structure — a mass volunteer paramilitary of between 100,000 and 300,000 active members who maintain civilian employment — creates a structural ambiguity in IHL classification. Unlike professional soldiers who are continuously targetable as combatants, Basij members are lawful targets only during periods of direct participation in hostilities under Additional Protocol I, meaning their status shifts with their activity rather than their affiliation.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    If a substantial fraction of the 2,090 classified as security personnel were Basij members not actively participating in hostilities at the time of strikes, the effective civilian toll is materially higher than the 310 confirmed figure, with corresponding IHL liability implications for targeting authorities.

    Medium term · Assessed
  • Consequence

    The three-source divergence in methodology will prevent any single authoritative death toll from emerging during the conflict, sustaining competing narratives that each party will deploy selectively to support its legal and political position.

    Short term · Assessed
  • Precedent

    Accepting Hengaw's civilian/military classification without scrutiny sets a precedent for treating dual-status militia deaths as combatant casualties, which would lower the legal bar for future strikes on irregular forces with civilian employment — beyond the Iran context.

    Long term · Suggested
First Reported In

Update #20 · Hormuz sealed; Senate war powers bill fails

Hengaw· 5 Mar 2026
Read original
Causes and effects
This Event
Hengaw: 310 civilians among 2,400 dead
Hengaw's military-to-civilian breakdown is the only granular casualty data available, but the 787-person gap between its 310 confirmed civilians and HRANA's 1,097 means the ratio could range from 6.7:1 to 1.2:1 — a spread that encompasses both a historically discriminate air campaign and one consistent with the most destructive modern precedents.
Different Perspectives
China's foreign ministry
China's foreign ministry
Spokesman Lin Jian rejected Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's 25 August warning that Iranian oil buyers face an "economic D-Day", saying sanctions do not help and that Beijing would safeguard its own rights and interests. China's Iranian crude imports had already halved for unrelated reasons.
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Iraq's government and Erbil authorities
Erbil authorities said 10 explosive-laden drones were shot down over the city on 1-2 September with no casualties. Iraq's government condemned the attacks without naming Iran as their source, and neither Washington nor Baghdad confirmed the IRGC's claim to have hit US bases there.
Bahrain Defence Force
Bahrain Defence Force
The General Command said air defences intercepted several Iranian missiles and drones on 1-2 September and called the use of such weapons against civilians and private property a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
Kuwait's Fire Force and foreign ministry
KUNA reported a hostile Iranian drone struck a residential complex in Kuwait City on 2 September; Fire Force spokesman Brigadier General Mohammad Al-Gharib said losses were confined to property. Kuwait's foreign ministry called the attack a clear breach of its sovereignty.
Jordan's Armed Forces
Jordan's Armed Forces
Petra carried a statement that air defences intercepted eight missiles violating Jordanian airspace early on 31 August and 10 of 13 fired on 1 September. The statement named no target and did not address the IRGC's claim to have struck Camp Titin and killed US personnel.
CENTCOM
CENTCOM
CENTCOM's 1 September target list named IRGC air defence, radar, maritime and mine-laying sites in Iran but no tanker, after Axios reported anonymous officials describing a Trump-approved "tanker for tanker" drone policy. A CENTCOM spokesman declined to confirm the policy and referred questions to policymakers.