Document U.S. CENTCOM Statement on Events Surrounding Iranian Detainment of 10 U.S. Navy Sailors

U.S. Naval Institute ^ | January 18, 2016 | CENTCOM

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Document: U.S. CENTCOM Statement on Events Surrounding Iranian Detainment of 10 U.S. Navy Sailors

January 18, 2016 1:57 PM

The following preliminary timeline of the events surrounding the Iranian detainment of 10 U.S. Navy Sailors from January 12-13, 2016, is based upon multiple operational reports received by U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) in the first 24-48 hours after the incident. A Navy command investigation initiated on Jan. 14, will provide a more complete accounting of events.

On Jan. 12, two NAVCENT Riverine Command Boat (RCB) crews were tasked with the mission of relocating two RCBs from Kuwait to Bahrain, with a planned refueling en route alongside the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Monomoy. The two RCBs were traveling together since they train and deploy in two-boat elements. They departed Kuwait at 9:23 a.m. (GMT). The planned transit path for the mission was down the middle of the Gulf and not through the territorial waters of any country other than Kuwait and Bahrain.

The two RCBs were scheduled to conduct an underway refueling with the USCGC Monomoy in international waters at approximately 2 p.m. (GMT). At approximately 2:10 p.m. (GMT) NAVCENT received a report that the RCBs were being queried by Iranians. At approximately 2:29 p.m. (GMT) NAVCENT was advised of degraded communications with the RCBs. At 2:45 p.m. (GMT) NAVCENT was notified of a total loss of communications with the RCBs. Immediately, NAVCENT initiated an intensive search and rescue operation using both air and naval assets including aircraft from USS Harry S. Truman and the U.S. Air Force, and U.S. Coast Guard, U.K. Royal Navy and U.S. Navy surface vessels. At the time of the incident, two carrier strike groups were operating nearby. USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group was 45 miles southeast of Farsi Island and Charles de Gaulle carrier strike group was 40 miles north of Farsi Island. NAVCENT attempted to contact Iranian military units operating near Farsi Island by broadcasting information regarding their search and rescue effort over marine radio, and separately notified Iranian coast guard units via telephone about the search for their personnel. At6:15 p.m. (GMT), U.S. Navy cruiser USS Anzio received a communication from the Iranians that the RCB Sailors were in Iranian custody and were “safe and healthy.”

NAVCENT’s initial operational reports showed that while in transit from Kuwait to Bahrain the RCBs deviated from their planned course on their way to the refueling. The command investigation will determine what caused the change in course and why the RCBs entered into Iranian territorial waters in the vicinity of Farsi Island.

At some point one RCB had indications of a mechanical issue in a diesel engine which caused the crews to stop the RCBs and begin troubleshooting. As the RCBs travel together, the second RCB also stopped. This stop occurred in Iranian territorial waters, although it’s not clear the crew was aware of their exact location. While the RCBs were stopped and the crew was attempting to evaluate the mechanical issue, Iranian boats approached the vessels.

Based upon initial operational reports, the first boats on scene were two small craft with armed personnel on board. Soon after, two more Iranian military vessels arrived on scene also with armed personnel on board.

Initial operational reports indicate there was a verbal exchange between the Sailors and the Iranians but no exchange of gun fire. Armed Iranian military personnel then boarded the RCBs, while other Iranian personnel aboard the Iranian vessels conducted armed over-watch of the boats with mounted machine guns. At gunpoint, the RCBs were escorted to a small port facility on Farsi Island where the U.S. Sailors disembarked and were detained for approximately 15 hours. At this point there are no indications that the Sailors were physically harmed during their detainment. The Navy command investigation will focus on the Sailors’ treatment while in Iranian custody, including any interrogation by Iranian personnel. All indications are that the RCB crews were detained by Iranian military personnel operating from Farsi Island.

The Sailors departed Farsi Island at 8:43 a.m. (GMT) Jan. 13, aboard the two RCBs. The Sailors were later transferred ashore by U.S. Navy aircraft from the cruiser USS Anzio and the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman. Other Sailors took charge of the RCBs and continued transiting toward Bahrain, the boats’ original destination. The RCBs arrived in Bahrain at 10:38 p.m. (GMT) Jan. 13.

A post-recovery inventory of the boats found that all weapons, ammunition and communication gear are accounted for minus two SIM cards that appear to have been removed from two handheld satellite phones.

The Sailors are in good health and continue to go through the reintegration process. The Navy command investigation continues and more details will be provided when it is completed.

[KC Burke]

That reasonable hypothesis would make a good story line — get with Travis and we could see if the story prodded something loose. LOL.

It is just amazing what this country has descended into and I don’t hold out much hope for a reversal.

[Hawthorn]

>> So they are in the same time zone <<

Well, to be exact, Zulu Time is always the same as UTC, which is the same as GMT.

So for example, 1730Z is just the way military, aviation and diplomatic traffic refers to 1730 GMT, or 1730 UTC, or 5:30 p.m. London time. It’s that simple.

[blueunicorn6]

Oh, so the boats weren’t in the same time zone as GMT?

[chemical_boy]

or the Iranians spoofed the GPS signal and led them astray and they didn’t want to leave proof behind

[Hawthorn]

>> so the boats weren’t in the same time zone as GMT? <<

Correct. The local time zones in the Persian Gulf are several hours ahead of GMT.

But military, aviation and diplomatic communications will normally cite time in the UTC or “Zulu” format, regardless of whatever time zone the locals happen to be in.

Anyway, a clock set on UTC gives the same time as a clock set to GMT. So whenever it’s 5:30 p.m. at the Greenwich Observatory in England (ignoring the UK’s use of daylight savings time), it’s 1730Z worldwide for the military.

[cmomm44]

My opinion all along-—something was to be delivered that was not to. be seen by anyone , especially the media—

[2harddrive]

“What is the basis for claiming that the boats were seized in international waters?”

Bruce, you will have to read the linked article to see. Who are you going to believe? Iran? Your State Department? Or the Navy SEAL? I go with the SEALS!

[Brown Deer]

http://www.eutimes.net/2016/01/obama-destroyed-after-us-navy-boats-transporting-top-isis-terror-leader-captured-by-iran/

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I read the article. I did not see a clear statement that it was actually in international waters.

The guy who wrote that is an ex-SEAL no longer on active duty. It reads to me a lot more like his own speculation rather than anything based on actual inside information or evidence.

Absent uncontroverted evidence, I go with the simplest scenario that makes sense the most logical sense, and that SEAL's speculation doesn't meet that standard.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Well, it reads like the basis for a pretty cool novel, but there's absolutely no reason to believe that source.

More importantly, it doesn't make sense. Why in the world would you transport such a high-value target in a small open boat from Bahrain to Kuwait, to be flown to Syria? Why not simply fly from Bahrain to Kuwait, or if you're going to go by sea, in a larger ship where he wouldn't be so easily seen? Exposing him on a small boat is more like a cheap pot device than anything that makes sense.

[2harddrive]

I believe the Navy SEAL, because I already KNOW that Iran lies, and that the State Dept lies, and that Obama lies (A VIDEO caused Benghazi? The IRS has NOT been weaponized? You can KEEP your doctor, and KEEP your insurance? You can SAVE $2500 per year?)

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

You can believe who you choose. There is no indication - at all - that this SEAL has any actual knowledge of what happened, as opposed to just speculating. I would agree with you if he was claiming to be there, or actually claimed to have spoken to someone who was. But he didn't.

Second, we also have two SEALs who broke the confidentiality of classified ops to talk about the bin Laden mission, and both claim to have shot OBL. SEALs (like everyone else) are not immune to...puffery. And if you know any, they'll admit that not all of them are perfect.

The report wasn't from the State Department - it was from CENTCOM via the U.S. Naval Institute. While CENTCOM is certainly capable of not relating facts accurately, you at least need to understand the players correctly if you want to discuss this.

I would suggest talking to some former naval officers - guys who are no longer in - and ask them what they think most likely happened. One already chimed in on this tread, and I know others as well. But ask around for yourself.