Contemporary conflicts are marked by support relationships between partners for the purpose of achieving common goals, namely partnered military operations. These have been seen to amplify positive or negative repercussions of conflict, like civilian harm and restraint from such. This study explores what influences restraint in partnered military operations by examining the effect of civilian casualty tracking, and asking how does the implementation of civilian casualty tracking mechanisms affect restraint in partnered military operations? This study builds on liberal internationalism, attributing restraint to external pressures. This thesis hypothesises that restraint in a partnered military operation will be higher, the more comprehensive the civilian casualty tracking. Using the method of within-case comparative analysis, resembling a structured focused comparison, the hypothesis is tested on the case of Afghanistan. Results indicate support for the theorized relationship, as low comprehensiveness of civilian casualty tracking is correlated with low restraint, while comprehensive civilian casualty tracking is correlated with higher restraint. The correlation is in line with the expected direction, yet not perfect, indicating that other variables may influence restraint in interaction effects. Further research is needed to determine causal factors and trace underlying mechanisms.