British special forces were allowed to ‘get away with murder’ in Afghanistan, an investigation has heard

British special forces soldiers used extreme methods against militants in Afghanistan, including covering a man with a pillow before shooting him with a pistol, as well as killing unarmed people, according to testimony released Wednesday by an investigation into the actions of British forces during the war. there.

In a conversation with a fellow soldier in March 2011, one officer said he confirmed that “during these operations, ‘all males of combat age are said to be killed’ on target regardless of the threat they pose, and this includes those who are not carrying weapons.” In testimony given during a closed hearing.

British Ministry of Defence Announce In 2022, a commission will begin an investigation into allegations that the British armed forces committed war crimes in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013. In 2023, it will start certain The allegations relate to Special Forces forces.

Hundreds of pages of certificate The report, released on Wednesday, which includes email exchanges, letters and witness statements by senior officers and soldiers, painted a disturbing picture of an elite fighting force with a culture of impunity, placing the body count above all other criteria.

A member of the British contingent said the troops appeared “above suspicion” during the long years of fighting in Afghanistan, which was “a golden pass that allows them to get away with it.”

Like all witnesses, the identity of that soldier has not been revealed. Many statements and other documents have been heavily redacted to obscure names, units, and locations of operations.

But even as these details were withheld, there were revealing descriptions of junior officers who raised concerns with their superiors about tactics used during night raids on militants.

In an email exchange dating back to February 2011, a soldier told a senior officer about a raid in which a lone Afghan fighter, who had been ordered back inside a building, returned with a weapon, even though he was much outnumbered. The soldier wondered whether SAS units were ordering Afghans to bring their weapons, “thus setting the terms for their execution?”

“Good point,” his boss replied. “There appears to be a casual disregard for life, counterinsurgency principles and reliable reporting.”

Counterinsurgency refers to the counterinsurgency doctrine used by American, British, and other NATO forces during most of the war in Afghanistan. Among other concerns, the brutal killing of Afghan fighters and civilians was seen as destroying trust between foreign forces and the civilian population.

In another exchange, the same senior officer described how the SAS seemed to be returning to “good tactics.”

When he raised a question in an email about whether SAS units were creating scenarios that would allow them to kill Afghan fighters, another officer replied: “These Afghans are so stupid that they deserve to die.” The first officer said he viewed the response as a “spontaneous comment on his part that reflects the fact that the way the killing of the Afghans has been described is not correct.”

The Ministry of Defense said it was “appropriate to await the outcome” of the investigation “before making further comments.”

Allegations of war crimes committed by British forces in Afghanistan are not new. They have been highlighted in Media reportsmost notably from BBC investigative programme panorama. US Special Operations Forces have also been accused of repeated instances of misconduct in Afghanistan, including… Civilians killed in raids And then try to cover it up.

The behavior of the British elite forces caused a political dispute last fall when the Conservative Party was choosing a new leader. Robert Jenrick is one of the candidates He claimed without evidence They said they were “killing terrorists, not arresting them,” and said this was because a European human rights court would force Britain to release them.

Mr Jenrick came under sharp criticism from two other candidates, Tom Tugendhat and James Cleverly, both former soldiers. Mr. Tugendhat said his comments showed a “fundamental misunderstanding of military operations and the law of unarmed conflict.”

Some of these disclosures came to light because of the fierce rivalry between the SAS, or Special Air Service, the British Army’s special forces unit, and the SBS, or Special Boating Service, its counterpart in the Royal Navy. SAS forces arrived in Afghanistan in 2009, many fresh from the war in Iraq, and took over the task of hunting down Taliban militants from the SBS. SBS soldiers and their commanders have raised many concerns about their methods.

Many witnesses expressed frustration that there was a culture of covering up misdeeds by falsifying operational reports. In the case of the Afghan man whose head was covered with a pillow, “it was clear that photographs would be taken of the deceased along with weapons that the ‘fighting age male’ may not have been in place when he was killed.” The soldier told the investigation.

Another soldier said in a February 2011 email that when people raised their concerns, they were met with the response: “What doesn’t everyone understand about how important these operations are?” “The men appear to be above suspicion,” he wrote. “amazing.”

Some have warned that British forces are at risk of the same embarrassment as their American allies, who were mutilated in 2010 by the United States. Leaked military records Six years of the Afghanistan war were documented by WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy group set up by Julian Assange.

“If we don’t believe it, no one else will believe us, and when the next WikiLeaks leaks happen, we will be dragged along with them,” one officer said in an email.