Saw this story on the AP wire today. Thought you may be interested in the Afghan reaction to the decision. 

I was out of town today, so I’m sorry I didn’t get more posted here about the findings quicker. Here is the story we will have in the Saturday paper:

Marine officers won’t face charges

May 23, 2008 - 1:49PM

JENNIFER HLAD

DAILY NEWS STAFF

The Marines of Marine Special Operations Company F “acted appropriately” when they fired in response to an attack March 4, 2007, in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland said Friday.

The written statement from the commanding general of Marine Corps Central Command came in response to a January court of inquiry into the shootings, which Army officials said killed Afghan civilians. Army Lt. Gen. Frank Kearney with Special Operations Command Central expelled the Marine special operations company from Afghanistan after the incident.

Two Marines, Maj. Fred Galvin and Capt. Vincent Noble, were named in the court of inquiry into the events in Afghanistan’s Nangahar province on March 4 and March 9, 2007.

Both men were accused, but not charged, with conspiracy to make a false official statement, dereliction of duty, failure to obey a lawful order and making a false official statement.

“Appropriate administrative actions based on the findings of the court of inquiry” will be taken against Galvin, who served as the company commander at the time of the incidents; Noble, the platoon commander at the time; and Capt. Robert Olsen, the unit’s intelligence officer and second-in-command, according to the press release from Marine Corps Forces Central Command.

Galvin’s civilian attorney Mark Waple said he believed the actions would be related to the March 9, 2007, incident that hasn’t been publicly discussed in detail.

“This is a concurrence that all the Marines on the patrol did the right thing,” Waple said.

Galvin and Noble are still based at Camp Lejeune and assigned to the Marine Corps special operations command; Galvin is the unit’s senior training officer, and Noble is a platoon leader.

“Obviously, I am delighted about the findings,” said civilian attorney Knox Nunnally, who represented Noble before the Court of Inquiry. “From a legal standpoint, it was overwhelming that this was going to be the result.”

Lt. Col. Sean Gibson, a spokesman for Marine Corps Forces Central Command, said the finding of the Court of Inquiry will not be released to the public. Helland wasn’t available for comment, he said.

A message left Friday afternoon by The Associated Press with Afghanistan’s embassy in Washington was not immediately returned.

During the three-and-a-half week court of inquiry, two colonels and a lieutenant colonel heard from more than 45 witnesses and examined more than 12,000 pages of documents about what happened March 4 and 9.

On March 4, the company was traveling in a six-vehicle convoy on a busy highway when it was attacked with a vehicle-borne suicide bomb as it neared a bridge.

The first witness called in the inquiry, a former Marine who was serving with the unit at the time, told the panel he did not see or hear anyone shooting at the Humvees after the explosion, but that some of the Marine gunners did shoot at vehicles on the road.

“At the time, I knew there was an inherent danger in the area, but at the same time, I thought it was a little bit excessive,” then-Staff Sgt. Nathaniel Travers said.

But more than a dozen other witnesses - including Marines and a translator who was riding next to Travers - testified that they were involved in a “complex attack” and fired their weapons only when fired upon.

Travers told The Daily News on Friday that he was not suprised with the results.

“If they didn’t (find the Marines acted appropriately), it would look pretty bad for all of the upper echelon staff who rushed to get MSOC F out the door and into action in a kind of warfare they were not prepared to fight. Afghanistan is not Iraq, the training and experience base were insufficient, too much emphasis was placed on Direct Action and too little place on counterinsurgency basics, …” he wrote in an e-mail. “I testified true to my heart for my family, for my son. It doesn’t matter what the General’s verdict is, my conscience is clear, and I know I have set a moral standard for my son to live up to.”

The panel also heard testimony about the events of March 9, in which two Afghan civilians were injured and two vehicles damaged. However, testimony about those incidents was classified and closed to media and members of the public.

The proceedings ended Jan. 29, and Helland received the panel’s recommendations March 7. Friday, he released a statement saying the Marines acted appropriately “and in accordance with the rules of engagement and tactics, techniques and procedures in place at the time in response to a complex attack.”

The inquiry also identified administrative, manning and training issues, and those have been forwarded to the commander of Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command for action, the statement said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

AT A GLANCE

THE DECISION: Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, the commander of U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Central Command, decided not to criminally charge two Marine officers who led a unit involved in a shooting that left as many as 19 Afghans dead.

THE COURT OF INQUIRY: Helland made the decision based on the findings of the Court of Inquiry. The panel of three officers heard testimony from 47 witnesses.

THE ACCUSATION: Several Marines testified they were ambushed during an attack following a car bombing on their convoy March 4, 2007, in Nangahar Province. An Afghan human rights group said Marines reacted by shooting indiscriminately at pedestrians.

I e-mailed Nathaniel Travers about the findings, and thought I’d share his response with you:

“Of course they did. If they didn’t it would look pretty bad for all of the upper echelon staff who rushed to get MSOC F out the door and into action in a kind of warfare they were not prepared to fight.  Afghanistan is not Iraq, the training and experience base were insufficient, too much emphasis was placed on Direct Action and too little place on counterinsurgency basics, and Afghanis were slaughtered on the highway as a result. 

The (then) MSOC idea has a lot of growing up to do before it can ever be as effective as an ODA.  My brief experience with a collocated ODA showed me how premature the MSOC deployment was as far as the crucial Human Intelligence piece was concerned and probably a good reason MSOC F was sent to a rather calm area of operations.  However, given over-zealous Recon Marines and enough equipment to outfit an infantry battalion, damage was done that sent Human Intelligence and basic human relations efforts back to square one, 2001.  I testified true to my heart for my family, for my son.  It doesn’t matter what the General’s verdict is, my conscience is clear and I know I have set a moral standard for my son to live up to.”

MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. - Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, commander of U.S. Marine Corps Forces Central Command, has determined that with regard to the escalation of force incident on March 4, 2007, resulting in the deaths of Afghan civilians, the members of the U.S. Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Company-Fox convoy acted appropriately and in accordance with the rules of engagement and tactics, techniques and procedures in place at the time in response to a complex attack, according to a press release from Marine Corps Forces Central Command.

Helland made the decisions regarding the disposition of incidents involving (MSOC-F) in Afghanistan after a thorough review of the report of a Court of Inquiry, according to the statement.

The Court of Inquiry, composed of two U.S. Marine Corps colonels and one lieutenant colonel, met for three and a half weeks in January 2008 at Camp Lejeune. It examined facts and evidence concerning an incident on March 4, 2007, in which MSOC-F Marines allegedly fired on and killed Afghan civilians following an attack on their convoy. The Court also examined several incidents that occurred on March 9, 2007, which resulted in injury to two Afghan civilians and damage to two MSOC-F vehicles.

The Court reviewed more than 12,000 pages of documents and heard testimony from more than 45 witnesses, including Afghan witnesses who testified via video teleconference. The Court was not a criminal proceeding, but was investigatory in nature.

Administrative, manning and training issues relative to the March 4 and March 9, 2007, incidents that were brought to light during the Court of Inquiry have been forwarded to the commander of U.S. Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command for action, according to the statement.

Appropriate administrative actions based on the findings of the Court of Inquiry will be taken in the cases of Maj. Fred Galvin, Capt. Robert Olsen and Capt. Vincent Noble, according to the statement.

I talked to Lt. Col. Gibson again yesterday, and it doesn’t look like we will be hearing the results of the report anytime soon.

Because part of the actual report is classified, the whole thing has been classified. They will probably only release something after Lt. Gen. Helland makes a decision — and even then, they will only release the unclassified stuff. Plus, there is no telling how long it will take for the MarCent SJA to review the report, and then for Lt. Gen. Helland to review it and decide what to do. But, when something comes out — whenever that may be — I will post it here ASAP.

 The Court of Inquiry panel’s report reached U.S. Marine Corps Forces Central Command headquarters today.

The overall report is classified because of some classified information that is included in it, according to MarCent spokesman Lt. Col. Sean Gibson.

“The report contains the findings of fact, opinion and recommendations of the panel,” Gibson said in a press release.

After the MarCent staff judge advocate reviews the report, it will go to Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, commander of the U.S. Marine Corps Forces Central Command, who will make a decision about how to proceed.

We’re still waiting for word on the findings of the panel, and it may be another week or two before any information is released.

There is really no timeline for when the panel must issue their findings, and the report will go to Marine Corps Forces Central Command before anything is released, so it is difficult to gauge when we’ll hear the outcome. I believe that when it is announced, they will release some of the panel’s recommendations, along with information about what Lt. Gen. Helland decides to do. I will try to provide as much of that info in the paper as possible, but that and anything that can’t fit in print will be here on the blog.

I realized I never thoroughly blogged about the testimony of Haji Liwani Qumandan, a key Afghan witness.

Qumandan was driving the blue Prado SUV on March 4. He testified to via video teleconference from Jalalabad, through a translator. A Marine translator sat in the court room at Camp Lejeune to make sure the translation was accurate.

Qumandan is a tribal elder who said he has no official military training but participated in the jihad against the Russians. He was a group leader and led up to 100 volunteers, he said, and used a hunting gun and an AK-47. He also worked with Americans and was responsible for providing security for them, he said. He said he stopped fighting when the Russians left Afghanistan and never fought anyone else.

After that war, he moved to Pakistan and worked as a salesman, though he testified he did not sell drugs or weapons. He stayed in Pakistan becasue it was safer, and said he did not know any Al Qaeda members because he is “not involved in politics.” He moved back to Afghanistan after the current government came to power.

Qumandan said he does not own any weapons because he doesn’t need them. He also said he does not have guards at his huge family compound.

“Our district is very safe and secure,” he said.

March 4, Qumandan planned to take his father and nephew to Markoh bazaar to sell fertilizer, then go to Jalalabad to buy fuel. He does not normally pick up strangers in his car or use his vehicle as a taxi, he said.

Qumandan said he did not see or hear the explosion and stopped near the road because a large piece of construction equipment passed in front of him. He only noticed the convoy when the Marines began shooting at them, he testified.

Qumandan said he, his father and his brother were  hit and he was “absolutely in a very, very panicked state.” He said he did not see any Afghans with weapons that day.

The “American trucks were firing at us,” he testified. “I saw two trucks, American trucks, and they were shooting at me.”

“When I am thinking about that moment, it panicks me still,” he said, and said he doesn’t remember hearing or seeing the explosion because he was panicking.

“It was a very intense, very, very nervous moment for me,” he said.

Qumandan said he got out of the vehicle and was facing away from the road when he was hit twice between his shoulders and lower back. He said he laid down on the ground behind a small pile of dirt, then stood up after the shooting stopped. When he saw his father was dead, he passed out, he said.

The father and nephew’s bodies were removed from the vehicle by other tribal elders, and those bodies and the headless body of a man he described as very old were taken to his home. The father and nephew were buried in the family cemetary by 2 p.m. that day, partly because the bodies were in such bad shape from being hit so many times, Qumandan said.

Qumandan said his vehicle was badly damaged in the incident, so he sold it for “very little.” He had $10,000 worth of Afghanis in the car because he was planning to pay a man for fuel for his gas station, but the money was lost after the shooting, Qumandan said.

During his testimony, Qumandan repeatedly asked for compensation for the money he said he lost.

“I want that money,” he said. “I believe America is based on justice.”

He also repeatedly denied that anyone in the SUV had weapons, asking where the weapons would have gone, since none were found.

After the shooting, Qumandan said he was hospitalized, then went home. But people were coming every day for two months, and Afghan President Karzai called and offered condolences, he said.

Knox Nunnally, the civilian lawyer for Capt. Noble, asked Qumandan why he told an American investigator in May that there was an additional passenger in the car, but Qumandan denied saying that. He said some people thought the decapitated man had been in his SUV, but they were mistaken.

Qumandan said he never shot at Americans and that no one tried to kill Americans that day.

“I have no reason to fight Americans,” he said. “You guys are not interferring with our religion, and we are not interferring in yours.”

He fought the Russians, he said, because “the Russians believe in nothing.”

Qumandan also testified he does not normally drive because he has problems with his legs, is “mentally not that good” and has had heart surgery. But that day, there was no one at home, so he asked his sons to stay home instead of driving.

Nunnally asked him if he remembers telling a New York Times reporter “I heard the blast. I stopped the car.”

“I can’t even remember what I did yesterday,” Qumandan said.

In the NY Times article Nunnally referenced, Qumandan said “I know the army rules, and when I heard the blast I stopped my car, I was thinking in case they shoot me.” The article also says there were four people in the SUV that day: Qumandan, his father, his uncle and his nephew. To read the article in question, click here.

Before Qumandan testified, a soldier testified that his name had been run through American databases and he did not come up as associated with terrorism. But lawyers for Noble and Galvin asked Qumandan numerous questions about his possible involvement with terrorists, and in closing statements said Qumandan’s name had been spelled incorrectly when it was run through the databases.  

Those who followed the court of inquiry from the beginning will remember testimony about Marines throwing rocks at vehicles on Highway 1. I’ve gotten a few comments and questions about that, so I wanted to go back over what the Marines said and what was said about rock throwing later in the inquiry.

The first day of testimony, Staff Sgt. Travers told the panel that unlike in Iraq, where motorists generally pull off the road when they see a convoy coming, drivers in Afghanistan tend to stay in their lane, maintain their speed and continue driving toward the convoy. The morning of March 4, he said drivers were even ”less courteous” on the way back toward Jalalabad than they had been on the way out.

On the way back, before the explosion, Travers said he saw the gunner in vehicle two making “throwing motions” and saw an oncoming taxi swerve off the road. Travers said he later saw a hole in that vehicle’s windshield he believed was from the gunner throwing a rock. He also said he told the Marines in the Humvee — including the interpreter and Capt. Noble — “that’s the kind of stuff that’s going to get us blown up around here.”

Other Marines testified that the gunners did throw rocks at oncoming vehicles when they did not respond to hand and arm signals, and that the Marines used rocks instead of flares, which they used in Iraq but did not have in Afghanistan.

That same day, Staff Sgt. Jose Queiro, the gunner in vehicle 3, testified that ”the rocks were working.” The interpreter and the driver of vehicle 3 both testified they did not remember hearing Travers say anything about the rock throwing.

At least two Marines — Staff Sgt. Queiro and Staff Sgt. Sheik — testified they would have fired warning shots at some of the vehicles the gunners only threw rocks at, because of the drivers’ aggressive behavior.

And later in the inquiry, Sheik said the taxi Travers was referring to would have had to have a “boulder” thrown at it to cause the damage it sustained. An Army EOD specialist testified the damage to that windshield was consistent with IED blast damage.

Sheik also testified that he had heard about the rock throwing from soldiers, who said it was standard operating procedure. Retired Master Sgt. Elder said the rock throwing idea came from Army special operations soldiers.

“The rocks came from the ODA,” Elder said. “I went out on patrol with them and asked them how they kept the vehicles at bay,” since the drivers reacted differently than in Iraq. They said they threw rocks at the road and the hood of the vehicles, Elder told the Marines.

“I told them, ‘Here’s the method the ODA’s using — you may want to use it,” Elder said. “It worked.”

Even though the evidence-presenting part of the court of inquiry is over, the recommendations of the panel also will not be released for a few weeks, at which point Lt. Gen. Helland will announce how he plans to proceed.

Since the sheer volume of information and rules of the courtroom prevented me from blogging everything that happened, I will be posting some more notes about the proceedings in the next few days, and will post again when I hear anything about the results.