« Well now. . . .ther's shootin' in Syria | Main | So now we're dangerous. . . »

November 26, 2005

The "Taliban Bodies" Report. . . Gumbad Revisited

U.S. Central Command has released their Executive Summary-Investigation into the Gumbad Incident (previously I had used the name reported by the press, Gonbaz) where the corpses of two Taliban fighters were burned by soldiers from the 508th Infantry (Airborne) and that information was subsequently broadcast by Psychological Operations troops in order to "smoke out" more suspected Taliban hiding in the area.

I previously blogged about this incident as the story broke. All previous posts are in their own category here, or if you prefer to read them in order, use these links.

Oh Brother. . .
Ok, time to elaborate. . .
So what's really going on. . . (The Interview with Stephen Dupont)
Martinkus, Dupont and The Truth. . .
TIME begins to correct the record. . .

On to the report:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Investigation into the Gumbad Incident

BACKGROUND
On Sept. 30, Soldiers from Company B, 1st Battalion, 508th Infantry (Airborne), Regional
Command South, Combined Joint Task Force-76 (CJTF-76) engaged the enemy near
Gumbad, in the Shah Wali Kot district in northern Kandahar Province. The Gumbad area
has been a location of known enemy activity. The engagement left one U.S. Soldier,
one Afghan National Army soldier, two Taliban fighters dead, and several wounded in
action. Twenty-four hours after the combat action, local nationals from Gumbad village
had yet to retrieve the enemy combatant remains.

The following environmental and operational conditions existed:

· The temperature in that area exceeded 90 degrees with no shade nearby.
· The rocky terrain was such that it prevented the Soldiers from burying the
remains.
· The hilltop where the enemy combatant remains were located afforded the best
tactical advantage for follow on combat operations.
· The unit believed that it would remain at this position for another 48 hours.
· Enemy forces were still suspected to be in the area, but were at that time not
located.

On Oct. 1, at approximately 1400 hours, an officer from the unit decided to burn the
bodies for hygiene reasons and to protect his Soldiers. At the time of this decision, his
battalion commander was meeting with village leaders in Gumbad village to brief them
on the combat actions of the previous day and to coordinate with them the retrieval of
the remains of the enemy combatants. (The battalion commander was unaware of the
fact that the officer had directed the burning of the enemy remains). At approximately
1600 hours, the battalion commander contacted the officer to let him know that the
villagers were moving to the position to retrieve the enemy remains. It was at this time
when the battalion commander was advised of his subordinate’s directive to burn the
remains -- he immediately ordered that the remains be extinguished. The unit
complied. When the villagers reached the position, they found the remains were not
able to be moved. They returned to Gumbad and let the battalion commander know that
they would dispose of the remains the next day.

Several hours after the burning of the enemy remains had started, a psychological
operations loudspeaker team, after hearing about the burning of remains on the tactical
radio, decided to use that information in two subsequent messages directed towards
both the village and towards an adjacent mountainous area where the enemy was
suspected to be hiding.

So there you have it. The actual facts of the incident which vary considerably from the initial reporting and the subsequent play the issue received in the Main Stream Media. Rather than a deliberate offense to Islam, the bodies were burned for hygienic reasons, and the PsyOps operative utilized battlefield information to affect a "Words not Bombs" approach to dealing with hiding Taliban fighters still in the area.

The report goes on to address the legality of the burning of the bodies, refuting claims that the Airborne troop's actions were a violation of the Geneva Convention. The report also admits that the soldiers involved do not normally receive training in the procedures for cremation of battlefield remains and notes that the officers involved exercised poor judgment in their decision-making and reporting process.

1) CJTF-76 investigation revealed that U.S. Coalition forces did not violate the Law of War.
2) The Law of War requires the internment of enemy remains by burial or cremation. In particular, Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention allows for the cremation of enemy remains for hygiene reasons and religious purposes.
3) CJTF-76 Soldiers are given basic training on the Law of War which only covers that enemy combatants may be buried or cremated, but does not go into the procedures that are to be followed. Procedures for cremation are much more extensive than what the Soldiers on the ground understood.
4) While not a violation of the Law of War, the burning of remains is not an acceptable practice according to Islamic religious beliefs and customs. CJTF-76 acknowledges that Islamic custom calls for the burial of the dead within 24 to 72 hours of death and that any burial should be conducted by Muslims.
5) The Soldiers at Gumbad did not have a thorough knowledge of the local Afghan traditions with respect to burial. This incident was the first time that this unit had killed enemy combatants at close range and had to determine what to do with the remains.
6) Finally, CJTF-76 investigation shows that there was no intent to desecrate, only to hygienically dispose of the enemy remains. The weather was hot, the remains were heavily damaged by gunfire, laying exposed for over 24 hours and beginning to rapidly decompose. The unit planned to remain on that hill for 48 to 72 more hours and thus made the decision to dispose of the remains in this manner for hygiene reasons only. The investigation also found that there was no action taken to hide this incident. When ordered to extinguish the remains by a senior officer who was at the time coordinating with local villagers to take custody of the enemy remains for burial, the unit complied immediately.
7) Based on the criminal investigation, there was no evidence to substantiate the allegation of desecration or any violation of the Law of War. However, there was evidence of poor decision-making and judgment, poor reporting and lack of knowledge and respect for local Afghan customs and tradition. Two Soldiers displayed poor judgment during this incident. They have received General Officer Memorandums of Reprimand.

It's unfortunate that the officers involved are going to have their careers curtailed because they now have GOM'R's in their personnel file, everyone makes mistakes, and these officers believed they were acting in the proper manner with regard to battlespace hygiene and in accordance with the Geneva Convention (Sections 17 and 120 are relevant to this issue, unfortunately, the soldiers did not fully exercise the provisions of Section 120; they failed to ascertain the identity of the Taliban corpses), but that's the Army and they were the officers in charge.

Personally, I think it's asking a bit much for every soldier on the line to be thoroughly versed in the Muslim culture, but we're trying to fight the proverbial "sensitive war" here I guess. The media over-reaction to the incident insured that someone was going to get the shaft despite their commitment to the mission of actually rooting out the Taliban remnants, which should have been the story in the first place and not some fabricated story about "intentional desecration".

With regard to the PsyOps operation on the scene, this activity took place hours after the burning of the bodies and was the result of the PsyOps operatives learning of the event and deciding to use the event to draw out Taliban forces hiding among a civilian population. Despite the seeming humaneness of using "words not bombs" to deal with the situation at hand, the report finds that the PsyOps operatives went too far and their messages were in violation of standing policy:

1) CJTF-76 investigation revealed that U.S. psychological operations forces did broadcast two loudspeaker messages designed to incite fleeing Taliban to fight. These messages mentioned the burning of enemy remains and were in violation of standing policies for the content of loudspeaker messages.
2) The criminal investigation revealed that there was no evidence to substantiate that the remains were burned for the purpose of providing content for the loudspeaker message. However, the investigation did reveal that the loudspeaker operator did willfully violate known standards for message content and standards for reporting his activities during the conduct of missions. Additionally the operator and his supervisor failed to follow documentation and reporting procedures surrounding this incident. Their conduct falls well below the acceptable standards of behavior for Soldiers.
3) As a result of these actions, two Soldiers who displayed poor judgment and sub-standard performance during this incident received non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Additionally, both were issued General Officer Memorandums of Reprimand – the most serious administrative action that the command can impose. The command also directed that the two Soldiers and the unit commander be reassigned to other duties for rehabilitative reasons.

Again, it's unfortunate that these soldiers got GOM'Red for the incident, but considering the political hay and inflammation that the initial media reports created in the region (sound familiar?), someone was going to get punished, again we're seeing the "sensitive side of war".

When this story first came to my attention via Dan at Riehl World View, I knew I smelled a rat in the reports first coming in which linked the two events. The Centcom report confirms what I sniffed out at the time, that the incidents were "separate" although "related":

Two Separate but Related Incidents. While the initial media report presented the impression that the burning of enemy combatant remains and the broadcast of offensive loudspeaker messages were one action, CJTF-76 investigation revealed that the incident at Gumbad was comprised of two separate, but related actions: first, the hygienic disposal of remains subsequent to the firefight in Gumbad; and second, the broadcast of information pertaining to the burning of enemy combatant remains.

What's unfortunate about the reporting from Stephen Dupont and John Martinkus was their depiction of the U.S. Soldiers as "intentionally desecrating" the Taliban Bodies and their connection of two separate events into one inflammatory event. While it's my belief that Stephen Dupont acted in good faith in his reporting and his attempts to objectively record an event that was certainly important, Dupont's story was hijacked by a known anti-war activist and a "reporter" who operates from a distinct and visible bias, the distortion of the facts by Martinkus was picked up by AP and other news outlets and by midday, the story was broadcast and printed worldwide as an "intentional desecration" perpetrated by U.S. soldiers even as Dupont himself was trying to correct Martinkus's distortion.

I find it highly doubtful that the MSM will go to any lengths whatsoever to fully correct the record with this incident, when objective reporting and fact-checking pointed to the same conclusions reached by Centcom the MSM reluctantly gave it buried mentions and didn't fully correct the inflammatory reporting of Martinkus. In fact, the MSM has already begun to repeat its policy of inflammation by now reporting mainly on the reprimands of the troops and not the larger charges that were fabricated by Martinkus and which the troops were cleared of. Some are even still playing the incident as one solitary incident of desecration rather than two "separate but related" incidents.

So now we have another case closed of "false but accurate" reporting with regard to the War on Terror. Once again we've seen the media get hijacked by the anti-war activist left that mostly seeks only to portray the U.S. and her actions in the worst possible light. Once again we see the media ignore common sense rather than use it to sniff out the truth of the situation.

The reporting by Martinkus twisting and manipulating Stephen Dupont's on-the-scene coverage disturbs me, both in the content of the reporting and the glee with which the MSM picked it up and ran with it. Just like the Korans (not) flushed at Gitmo, the media has disregarded the truth in favor of a biased and partisan position designed to damage U.S. - Islamic relations and risk undoing the good work of our military in order to make a few headlines and grab some viewers, regardless of the consequences.

Hopefully the next time that Martinkus files a report critical of the U.S. Military, the MSM will examine the evidence and report only the true facts and not the propaganda of the anti-war left. I won't hold my breath though.

--Jason

NOTE: This seems like a good time to throw in a link to Urban Legends about the Iraq War without the need for a separate post.

---

---

Posted by JasonColeman at November 26, 2005 11:03 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.jasoncoleman.com/MT/mt-tb.cgi/263

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The "Taliban Bodies" Report. . . Gumbad Revisited:

» Remember This One from Riehl World View
As I recall, several of us were on top of the Taliban burning bodies incident - Jason has a thorough round up on the final CENTCOM report. [Read More]

Tracked on November 27, 2005 2:01 AM

» Burning Taliban - The Resolution from euphoricreality.net
One of our biggest stories this fall was about the Airborne unit in Afghanistan that burned two dead Taliban corpses. (An update was posted here). Jason Coleman, who I referenced numerous times in both posts as having exhaustively deconstructed th... [Read More]

Tracked on November 27, 2005 3:27 PM

» The "Taliban Bodies" Report from Hyscience
You'll recall the media circus over the burning of Taliban bodies in Afghanistan; now there's a final report on the incident ... [Read More]

Tracked on November 27, 2005 3:46 PM

Comments

Posted by: *flo* at November 27, 2005 12:09 PM

Posted by: hobo at November 27, 2005 11:01 PM

Posted by: hobo at November 27, 2005 11:25 PM

Posted by: Jason Coleman at November 28, 2005 12:26 PM

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 1, 2005 3:43 PM

Posted by: American Daughter at December 2, 2005 3:00 PM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)