« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Did Blackwater's Rules of Engagement Work Against It in Nisour Square?
The New York Times has a piece out today adding new details about the September 16 Blackwater shootings in Nisour Square. Relying largely on 12 Iraqis described as eyewitnesses, Iraqi investigators and a U.S. official familiar with one of the American investigations, the account suggests Blackwater's rules of engagement worked against both the Blackwater convoy and the Iraqis left dead and wounded.
The State Department's rules of engagement for Blackwater call for a series of escalating measures starting with signaled and verbal warnings to halt and progressing to the use of deadly force.
The Iraqi Interior Ministry account of the shooting is familiar by now: a car carrying a young family was ordered to stop by a traffic policeman so a Blackwater convoy could pass through. But the car rolled forward, resulting in Blackwater guards killing the driver, his wife and their young child -- and sparking the melee that followed.
But the Times reports that the car may have proceeded because its driver was already dead:
The car in which the first people were killed did not begin to closely approach the Blackwater convoy until the Iraqi driver had been shot in the head and lost control of his vehicle. Not one witness heard or saw any gunfire coming from Iraqis around the square. And following a short initial burst of bullets, the Blackwater guards unleashed an overwhelming barrage of gunfire even as Iraqis were turning their cars around and attempting to flee.As the gunfire continued, at least one of the Blackwater guards began screaming, “No! No! No!” and gesturing to his colleagues to stop shooting, according to an Iraqi lawyer who was stuck in traffic and was shot in the back as he tried to flee. The account of the struggle among the Blackwater guards corroborates preliminary findings of the American investigation.
Yesterday, Erik Prince, CEO of Blackwater, said that it's far from clear that Blackwater did anything wrong. That response might be self serving, but it's not necessarily false -- at least from the perspective of the State Department-issued "escalation of force" policy.
After approaching cars fail initial orders to halt, Blackwater guards are permitted to "spider" a driver's windshield -- in other words, to fire into it. Only after "spidering," State Department security chief Richard Griffin explained, can Blackwater guards employ lethal force. If Blackwater guards were following procedure, then the bullet used to spider the windshield ended up killing the driver -- which, frankly, you'd expect, since it's the rare Iraqi civilian vehicle that possesses a bulletproof windshield, and Blackwater guards don't typically fire low-caliber handguns like .22s.
Once the driver was killed, the car rolled forward, prompting Blackwater's guards -- who were several yards away and perpendicular to the car -- to apparently believe they were in further danger from the vehicle. From there, the chaos progressed:
By then cars were struggling to get out of the line of fire, and many people were abandoning their vehicles altogether. The scene turned hellish.“The shooting started like rain; everyone escaped his car,” said Fareed Walid Hassan, a truck driver who hauls goods in his Hyundai minibus.
He saw a woman dragging her child. “He was around 10 or 11,” he said. “He was dead. She was pulling him by one hand to get him away. She hoped that he was still alive.”
As the shooting started in earnest Jabber Salman, a lawyer on his way to the Ministry of Justice for a noon meeting, described people crying and shouting. “Some people were trying to escape by crawling,” he said. “Some people were killed in front of me.”
As Mr. Salman tried to drive away from the shooting, bullets came one after another through his rear windshield, hitting his neck, shoulders, left forearm and lower back. “I thought, ‘I’m sorry they are going to kill me and I can do nothing.’”
It could be that the rules weren't properly followed. After all, there appeared to be no flares or thrown water bottles preceding the shooting, as, according to the rules of engagement, should have occurred. On the other hand, though, if these accounts are correct -- and it should be noted that at least two investigations, one by the FBI and another joint U.S.-Iraqi inquiry, are ongoing -- it might be a case of contractors following proper "spidering" procedure. If so, that procedure left Iraqis dead and Blackwater believing it was still endangered, prompting further violence in perceived self-defense.
Update: This post has been corrected to avoid giving the inaccurate impression that Prince did not comment on the September 16 incident at all.
OT: Spencer, I haven't seen anything on TPM about the ORB poll on estimated Iraqi casualties. They estimate 1.2 million deaths due to the conflict, more than the ~650,000 estimated by the Lancet study (although the time frames are different and I see e.g. from Deltoid that if you extrapolate Lancet to the ORB timeframe you get about the same number). These numbers are much higher than the ~80,000 documented deaths according to Iraq Body Count, the measure that WaPo and other press outlets tend to use. Any thoughts?
See e.g. http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-fg-iraq14sep14,1,1207545.story?coll=la-news-a_section
for more on the ORB poll
October 3, 2007 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
But the car rolled forward, resulting in Blackwater guards killing the driver, his wife and their young child -- and sparking the melee that followed.
Apparently this is not true.
The latest report says there were only 2 people in the car - the driver and his own mother. The driver got shot and his mother died while holding his body.
Apparently the bodies were so charred that the police misinterpreted it as a young woman holding her baby rather than an older woman holding her adult son.
Still, a tragedy.
October 3, 2007 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Folks,
Be ready when these death squads come home.
Blackwater folks kill people for money and for fun.
Think about that...
October 3, 2007 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
As for the "spidering", during the hearings yesterday Erik Prince detailed the procedure; they do not expect Iraqi cars to have bulletproof glass. He said they try to shoot at the middle-top of the windshield first to avoid hitting anyone.
My guess is they tried to do this, missed and killed the driver, and because of the spidered glass could not determine afterward that the driverless car rolling forward was driven by a dead man.
Saying all that doesn't mean I condone the actions of this contractor, I lay the primary blame for this and all the other incidents at the feet of the State Department. Putting cowboys with machine guns in a war zone without any system of accountability directly led to the deaths of thos civilians..
October 3, 2007 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, traffic control via automatic gunfire is inefficient! I hope Congress appropriates money to study this grave problem, perhaps for the next ten years. After that, the courageous democrats can suggests new regulations to synergize our brave PMS - private military services (not mercenaries, for God's sakes) to make them ever more efficient.
Or, they could be honest, bold, have some integrity, and make this incident the last straw as they pull the plug on mercenaries doing any work for the Pentagon, period. Of course, this means that the Democrats won't be able to use Dyncorps to do so much good, as they did in Bosnia (the liberal interventionists dream of an intervention, apparently).
Supposedly, after an intense investigation, Osama bin Laden determined that the 19 hijackers violated no rules of engagement when they collapsed the WTC. Frankly, I thought they had, but... if they were following the rules, I guess that's okay, then.
October 3, 2007 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The entire enterprise is obscene.
Imagine what it must be like for ordinary Iraqis. If you happen to be in a place that your conquerors don't want you, they are free to simply shoot you and your babies; and have to answer to no one.
If these thing were happening to us, here, by a foreign invader, and we resisted, we'd consider ourselves patriots. They are "insurgents" & "terrorists".
What is the definition of "terrorist" again? Oh, right, anyone we don't like - double if they don't like us, back.
October 3, 2007 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Roger:
How many people did Dyncorp kill in Bosnia? I didn't hear that story.
DaveB
October 3, 2007 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read this article in the Boston Globe today--it was very detailed and damning towards Blackwater...
Describes Prince as an "ex commando", but doesn't bother to mention his deep spiderweb ties to the current administration's closest friends.
It was also buried...back page of Section C, preceeded and on the same page as obituaries!
October 3, 2007 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
What? How can the take-away from any of this be that Blackwater was properly following the rules of engagement? (I'm going to skip the crazy assumption that if Blackwater followed proper "spidering" procedure that makes everything copactic.)
Even if the Blackwater guards thought they still faced a threat from a car with two people in it, how the funk do they wind up shooting 41 people and killing 17? There is no way to pin that kind of carnage on a proper engagement. It sounds like they just opened up on a crowded square where they had already killed the people who supposedly posed a threat.
October 3, 2007 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I keep wondering if these Black thugs - uh, blackwater heroes - got all of their training at a paint ball range. It is obvious that they aren't the least concerned about how many Iraqis die as they have their fun. Possibly the most constructive thing Congress needs to do right now is forbid any of the thugs from reentering this country. What if someone cuts one of them off on the freeway?
October 3, 2007 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
These thugs have been in Iraq for more than four years and have _never_ been held to account for shooting innocent Iraqi citizens. Not once. Of course they opened up on the whole square! Why not? They've have learned that they're allowed to kill whomever the please, no questions asked.
And yes, we should be very afraid of these monsters right here in the US.
October 3, 2007 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I don’t pretend to understand the desire to privatize the military/security operations in Iraq, (or the need to initially enter Iraq for that matter) we can not simply dismiss the need for standardized protocols, as well as external support for these protocols, within these organizations. These private solders are just that; most have served multiple years in high risk combat situations and taken advantage of premium civilian pay offered for this, post-service, work. Referring to them as “cowboys” or remarks about their pending return to the states does nothing but exacerbate the problem; presented the opportunity to return home to make similar money (many may jump at just basic employment) in a safe environment – frankly, most would without hesitation. Others feel that the work they do is to the benefit of our country, for many different reasons – however jaded, still relevant.
It is very easy to hold a handful of “ex-commandos” accountable for this terrible, avoidable incident – it is also too convenient and counter productive.
Simply, we are all to blame for the situation we find ourselves addressing; rehashing this blame, regardless of direction, does nothing to fix the underlying problems or find a workable solution. The real concern brought to light is the lack of transparency within this current tri-marriage of Corporate interests, Media laziness and Political malpractice. Regardless of collaboration between these entities, they have all worked in concert over the past years to numb our “super-power” into submission……. So, speak up, speak often, and most importantly – listen – don’t just complain.
If we all found a way to value peace, along with peace of mind through restrained might, we could solve these problems. The balance exists, and can be found if we look to address items like sustainable, good jobs for these “mercenaries” when they return home, the economic inequality, and domestic energy/fuel dependence. All it takes is leadership, so let’s all start the accountability there.
October 3, 2007 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
DaveB, about dyncorp abuses in Bosnia, I recommend this article in Salon.
http://dir.salon.com/story/
news/feature/2002/08/06/dyncorp/.
The larger point is, obviously, that Clinton was using mercenaries to achieve foreign policy ends which would have involved domestic political pressure if he had used the American military. At the time, the liberal interventionist crowd thought this was terribly clever. But bad policy, even for good ends, sets bad precedent. Now we know. But is anything going to be done, or are the Dems just going to be happy with sitting around and hoping their person is in the White House, using mercenaries to promote virtue?
I think getting rid of Blackwater and making it illegal for the Federal government to use mercenaries should be on the agenda for any real progressive.
October 3, 2007 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blackwater want shoot people as much as they want to get shot at. Seriously... some people think it's all fun and games over there. It fucking sucks.
Who to blame... State Department. Seriously , they approved the escalation of force policy. Maybe if the policy was changed then this would not happen.
...but hey, the clients are scared of having the cars remodeled by a PKM, RPG or a IED.
I know I would...
October 3, 2007 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh. I see. If rules are in place and appear to be followed -- though under trying conditions; Iraq and all that -- then the slaughter of Iraqi innocents is "by the book" and excusable.
Truly a very sick interpretation, but it happens all the time in the case of Officer Involved Shootings in this country. If the rules are followed, it's OK to kill whomever the authorities want.
Those who call for barring these Blackwater and other mercenary forces from returning to this country have a point.
But it's already too late.
The only question is will future generations ever forgive this one.
October 3, 2007 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
RE the televised-live Waxman-chaired 'Blackwater' hearings, and many other congressional investigations which Democrats have either held, threatened to hold or proposed:
The Democrats displayed their usual stupidity in scheduling and holding the B-Water Q & A session in the public limelight.
Seems to me that they would think back to the Ollie North affair of almost two-decades ago and figure out that when you sit a good-looking young middle-aged in a hostile environment (even if he may be, basically, an arrogant crook) and then allow a panel chaired by one of the least-handsome U.S. Representatives in D.C. to subject him to questions, it is not going to take any super-psychologist to figure out that a lot of sympathy will accrue to the 'good-looking young-middle-aged' whether he is a crook or no.
This is especially true when it is apparent that rank and file Democrats and the public, in general, are beginning to regard all these Committee and 'panel' chairmen/women as all bark and no bite.
October 4, 2007 1:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suggest a slightly different take on the Blackwater incident. Most extreme incidents of excessive force include major failures of (1) command and fire control, which requires a disciplined and experienced head of the security team [he apparently was ignored, if the team leader was the one calling out "cease fire! cease fire!"]; and also requires a disciplined team; of (2) discipline among team members; which is usually a result of BOTH (3) poorly understood rules of engagement AND (4) inadequate or non-existent training as a team.
A professional military unit has these problems very rarely. The unit trains as a unit on exercises and knows who to look to for the decision to open fire and knows NOT to start a firing barrage right after the first suspected hostile firing.
In the "rent-a-grunt" business, Blackwater has no incentive to spend resources on training exercises. Since the contractor is apparently paid on a piece-work basis [# of men available for security details times # of days each man is available], even the compensation structure worked into the contract tends to devalue training. The gunners cannot be training on days where they are paid to be available for details. [This is speculative; the contract provisions may be more subtle.]
Let's bring this issue to the attention of the congressional committees that are considering regulating the private security firms. I think the very fact that it is impossible to assure that private contractors will provide teams who have trained together under the command of an experienced unit leader should be grounds for scuttling the entire concept of private contractors providing security in zones where there are frequent incidents of shots being fired as part of the security details.
An additional note: Incidents of use of excessive force out of fear and poor training are much more frequent among the reserve and National Guard units than in regular military units that are on the front lines in Iraq.
October 4, 2007 3:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
ijjfmpb17ezu entertainment news entertainment news
December 20, 2007 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink