Pentagon Claim That War Crimes Must Be 'Intentional' Called 'Flatly Wrong'
'There are laws—even in the heat of warfare—which must be followed. And no one is above them,' says Physicians for Human Rights
The U.S. Department of Defense on Friday released its redacted report on the military's deadly October 2015 airstrike on a Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, which found that the bombing was a mistake--and thus, not a war crime--a conclusion which human rights groups called "an affront" to justice and accountability.
The report follows an announcement on Thursday that the Pentagon would not file any criminal charges against 16 people it found associated with the bombing that killed 42 people.
During a press conference on Friday, General Joseph Votel, head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said that the individuals responsible for the airstrike "were trying to do the right thing. They were trying to support their Afghan partners."
"The investigation determined that all members of both the ground force and the AC-130 air crew were unaware that the aircraft was firing on a medical facility throughout the engagement," Votel said. "The investigation ultimately concluded that this tragic incident was caused by a combination of human errors, compounded by process and equipment failures."
MSF held a briefing with Votel on Thursday to discuss the Pentagon's findings. MSF president Meinie Nicolai said Friday that the briefing "amounts to an admission of an uncontrolled military operation in a densely populated urban area, during which U.S. forces failed to follow the basic laws of war."
"It is incomprehensible that, under the circumstances described by the U.S., the attack was not called off," Nicolai said, adding that the punishments announced Thursday were disproportionately inadequate for the destruction of a protected medical facility, the deaths and wounding of dozens of people, and the loss of critical medical access to people in Kunduz.
Donna McKay, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights, added in a press release, "The decision to dole out only administrative punishments and forego a thorough criminal investigation of October's deadly strike in Kunduz is an affront to the families of the more than 40 men, women, and children who died that night, punished merely for being in a hospital, a supposed safe haven in a time of war."
And John Sifton, the Asia policy director of Human Rights Watch, told the New York Times on Friday that Votel's "assertion that a war crime must be deliberate, or intentional, is flatly wrong."
"Unfortunately, they made a wrong judgment in this particular case and ended up targeting this Doctors Without Borders facility," Votel said. "The fact that this was unintentional...takes it out of the realm of actually being a deliberate war crime against protected persons or locations."
That logic did little to quell outrage from critics.
As McKay said, "There are laws--even in the heat of warfare--which must be followed. And no one is above them. Period. While the Kunduz strike may have been a mistake, some mistakes may be criminal...today, justice for the patients who died in their beds, the doctors and nurses and hospital staff killed while doing their jobs, was denied."
Naureen Shah, director of Amnesty International's Security with Human Rights program, added that the reports "demonstrate the need for an independent investigation, outside of the chain of command, to determine what happened in Kunduz and to assess potential criminal wrongdoing," a demand that Amnesty and MSF, among other groups, have consistently called for since the bombing.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, the U.S. military changed its narrative no less than four times in as many days to evade culpability, while evidence continued to mount that officers knew they were targeting an active hospital.
As Glenn Greenwald wrote for The Intercept on Friday, "none of that matters. The only law to which the U.S. government is subject is its own interests."
Meanwhile, in Syria, a clinic in Aleppo was bombed, likely by either Russian or Syrian government forces--the same day as the Pentagon announced it would only mete out administrative punishments to the 16 personnel.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry issued a statement expressing "outrage" over the Aleppo airstrikes.
"On the list of those with even minimal credibility to denounce that horrific airstrike," Greenwald writes, "Kerry and his fellow American officials do not appear."
FINAL DAY! This is urgent.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just hours left in our Spring Campaign, we're still falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The U.S. Department of Defense on Friday released its redacted report on the military's deadly October 2015 airstrike on a Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, which found that the bombing was a mistake--and thus, not a war crime--a conclusion which human rights groups called "an affront" to justice and accountability.
The report follows an announcement on Thursday that the Pentagon would not file any criminal charges against 16 people it found associated with the bombing that killed 42 people.
During a press conference on Friday, General Joseph Votel, head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said that the individuals responsible for the airstrike "were trying to do the right thing. They were trying to support their Afghan partners."
"The investigation determined that all members of both the ground force and the AC-130 air crew were unaware that the aircraft was firing on a medical facility throughout the engagement," Votel said. "The investigation ultimately concluded that this tragic incident was caused by a combination of human errors, compounded by process and equipment failures."
MSF held a briefing with Votel on Thursday to discuss the Pentagon's findings. MSF president Meinie Nicolai said Friday that the briefing "amounts to an admission of an uncontrolled military operation in a densely populated urban area, during which U.S. forces failed to follow the basic laws of war."
"It is incomprehensible that, under the circumstances described by the U.S., the attack was not called off," Nicolai said, adding that the punishments announced Thursday were disproportionately inadequate for the destruction of a protected medical facility, the deaths and wounding of dozens of people, and the loss of critical medical access to people in Kunduz.
Donna McKay, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights, added in a press release, "The decision to dole out only administrative punishments and forego a thorough criminal investigation of October's deadly strike in Kunduz is an affront to the families of the more than 40 men, women, and children who died that night, punished merely for being in a hospital, a supposed safe haven in a time of war."
And John Sifton, the Asia policy director of Human Rights Watch, told the New York Times on Friday that Votel's "assertion that a war crime must be deliberate, or intentional, is flatly wrong."
"Unfortunately, they made a wrong judgment in this particular case and ended up targeting this Doctors Without Borders facility," Votel said. "The fact that this was unintentional...takes it out of the realm of actually being a deliberate war crime against protected persons or locations."
That logic did little to quell outrage from critics.
As McKay said, "There are laws--even in the heat of warfare--which must be followed. And no one is above them. Period. While the Kunduz strike may have been a mistake, some mistakes may be criminal...today, justice for the patients who died in their beds, the doctors and nurses and hospital staff killed while doing their jobs, was denied."
Naureen Shah, director of Amnesty International's Security with Human Rights program, added that the reports "demonstrate the need for an independent investigation, outside of the chain of command, to determine what happened in Kunduz and to assess potential criminal wrongdoing," a demand that Amnesty and MSF, among other groups, have consistently called for since the bombing.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, the U.S. military changed its narrative no less than four times in as many days to evade culpability, while evidence continued to mount that officers knew they were targeting an active hospital.
As Glenn Greenwald wrote for The Intercept on Friday, "none of that matters. The only law to which the U.S. government is subject is its own interests."
Meanwhile, in Syria, a clinic in Aleppo was bombed, likely by either Russian or Syrian government forces--the same day as the Pentagon announced it would only mete out administrative punishments to the 16 personnel.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry issued a statement expressing "outrage" over the Aleppo airstrikes.
"On the list of those with even minimal credibility to denounce that horrific airstrike," Greenwald writes, "Kerry and his fellow American officials do not appear."
The U.S. Department of Defense on Friday released its redacted report on the military's deadly October 2015 airstrike on a Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, which found that the bombing was a mistake--and thus, not a war crime--a conclusion which human rights groups called "an affront" to justice and accountability.
The report follows an announcement on Thursday that the Pentagon would not file any criminal charges against 16 people it found associated with the bombing that killed 42 people.
During a press conference on Friday, General Joseph Votel, head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said that the individuals responsible for the airstrike "were trying to do the right thing. They were trying to support their Afghan partners."
"The investigation determined that all members of both the ground force and the AC-130 air crew were unaware that the aircraft was firing on a medical facility throughout the engagement," Votel said. "The investigation ultimately concluded that this tragic incident was caused by a combination of human errors, compounded by process and equipment failures."
MSF held a briefing with Votel on Thursday to discuss the Pentagon's findings. MSF president Meinie Nicolai said Friday that the briefing "amounts to an admission of an uncontrolled military operation in a densely populated urban area, during which U.S. forces failed to follow the basic laws of war."
"It is incomprehensible that, under the circumstances described by the U.S., the attack was not called off," Nicolai said, adding that the punishments announced Thursday were disproportionately inadequate for the destruction of a protected medical facility, the deaths and wounding of dozens of people, and the loss of critical medical access to people in Kunduz.
Donna McKay, executive director of Physicians for Human Rights, added in a press release, "The decision to dole out only administrative punishments and forego a thorough criminal investigation of October's deadly strike in Kunduz is an affront to the families of the more than 40 men, women, and children who died that night, punished merely for being in a hospital, a supposed safe haven in a time of war."
And John Sifton, the Asia policy director of Human Rights Watch, told the New York Times on Friday that Votel's "assertion that a war crime must be deliberate, or intentional, is flatly wrong."
"Unfortunately, they made a wrong judgment in this particular case and ended up targeting this Doctors Without Borders facility," Votel said. "The fact that this was unintentional...takes it out of the realm of actually being a deliberate war crime against protected persons or locations."
That logic did little to quell outrage from critics.
As McKay said, "There are laws--even in the heat of warfare--which must be followed. And no one is above them. Period. While the Kunduz strike may have been a mistake, some mistakes may be criminal...today, justice for the patients who died in their beds, the doctors and nurses and hospital staff killed while doing their jobs, was denied."
Naureen Shah, director of Amnesty International's Security with Human Rights program, added that the reports "demonstrate the need for an independent investigation, outside of the chain of command, to determine what happened in Kunduz and to assess potential criminal wrongdoing," a demand that Amnesty and MSF, among other groups, have consistently called for since the bombing.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, the U.S. military changed its narrative no less than four times in as many days to evade culpability, while evidence continued to mount that officers knew they were targeting an active hospital.
As Glenn Greenwald wrote for The Intercept on Friday, "none of that matters. The only law to which the U.S. government is subject is its own interests."
Meanwhile, in Syria, a clinic in Aleppo was bombed, likely by either Russian or Syrian government forces--the same day as the Pentagon announced it would only mete out administrative punishments to the 16 personnel.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry issued a statement expressing "outrage" over the Aleppo airstrikes.
"On the list of those with even minimal credibility to denounce that horrific airstrike," Greenwald writes, "Kerry and his fellow American officials do not appear."