Posted on 06/28/2002 6:45:09 PM PDT by Clive
LIEUTENANT GENERAL MICHAEL DELONG, DEPUTY COMMANDER, CENTRAL COMMAND
BRIGADIER GENERAL MIKE GAUTHIER, COMMANDER, CANADIAN TASK FORCE IN SOUTHWEST ASIA
LOCATION: MARRIOTT-WATERSIDE, TAMPA, FLORIDA TIME: 12:01 P.M. EDT DATE: FRIDAY, JUNE 28, 2002
GEN. DELONG: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name -- I'm Lieutenant General Michael DeLong. I'm the deputy commander of Central Command. General Franks is my boss. With me today is Brigadier General Mike Gautheir, who is the commander for the Canadian Task Force in Southwest Asia, the Afghan area.
The sole purpose of the briefing today is to convey to the public the findings of the investigation into the friendly fire incident at Tarnak Farms in Afghanistan, which resulted in the death and injuries to the Canadian military personnel. First, however, I'd like to again offer our most sincere condolences to the families of the Canadian soldiers killed and those injured in this tragic event.
In accordance with Department of Defense directives, General Franks, the commander of U.S. Central Command, directed Lieutenant General Michael T. Moseley, the commander of U.S. Central Command Air Forces, to conduct an investigation into the friendly fire incident that occurred on 17 April near Tarnak Farms, Afghanistan, right around Kandahar, by the way, in which four Canadian military personnel were killed and eight were injured. Both General Franks and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld believed that any investigation should be transparent to the Canadian officials and involve Canadian participation. The decision to appoint two general officers, one U.S. and one Canadian, as co-presidents was unprecedented, but it serves as a statement to the extremely close and longstanding relationship between our two countries.
In response to General Franks' direction, General Moseley appointed the coalition investigation board to inquire into any and all facts and circumstances surrounding the friendly fire incident and to obtain and preserve all available evidence for use in the event of any litigation, claims, disciplinary actions or adverse administrative action. The board was directed to include findings of fact, opinions and recommendations, to include the cause of the incident and to make an assessment as to any fault or neglect. The U.S. co-president was further directed to make recommendations concerning disciplinary actions as appropriate.
The co-presidents were supported by 27 U.S. and Canadian technical advisors and support personnel. The U.S. and Canadian co- presidents and advisors worked seamlessly together throughout this investigation. During the course of the investigation, the board interviewed a large number of U.S. and Canadian military personnel and other witnesses believed to have knowledge of the event or technical expertise that would assist the board in making its final findings.
Now, concurrent with the coalition investigation board, and in accordance with Canadian law, the Canadian minister of national defense appointed a board of inquiry to investigate the injury and deaths of Canadian forces. Canadian officials are also releasing a summary of their findings today -- in fact, the same time we're having this press conference right now.
The two boards were both directed to conduct complete and thorough investigations into all the facts and circumstances surrounding the incident and to determine the cause. Unlike the Canadian board, the coalition board was tasked to make recommendations as to the possible disciplinary action and gather and preserve all evidence for use in potential litigation. Because of the possible judicial use of the coalition board's report, I can only discuss the findings in very general terms as we go through the questions and answers.
The coalition investigation board has issued its findings on the friendly fire incident. According to the report, soldiers from Alpha Company, 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, were engaged in night live-firing training exercise at Tarnak Farms, Afghanistan, just south of Kandahar.
While the Canadian soldiers were training, two U.S. F-16 fighter aircraft were returning from a mission over Afghanistan. As the fighter aircraft passed south of Kandahar, the flight lead noticed what he described as "fireworks" coming from an area a few miles south of Kandahar. The lead aircraft, perceiving this as surface-to-air fire, asked and received permission from the airborne warning and control aircraft, which is what we call AWACS, to determine the precise coordinates of the source of the surface-to-air fire.
While attempting to obtain the coordinates, the wingman, flying with the lead, requested permission to fire on the location with his 20-mm cannon. The AWACS told him to stand by, and the AWACS later requested that the wingman provide additional information on the surface-to-air fire while directing him to hold fire. The wingman provided the requested information to the AWACS and then, declaring self-defense, rolled in on the target, thereafter released a 500-pound laser-guided bomb that impacted a Canadian fire position at Tarnak Farms range.
Four Canadians were killed. Eight were wounded. All the wounded soldiers were immediately evacuated from the area for medical treatment.
The board found the cause of the friendly fire incident to be the failure of the two pilots to exercise appropriate flight discipline, which resulted in a violation of the rules of engagement and inappropriate use of lethal force. The board further found that failings within the pilots' immediate command structures, while not causing the incidents, were contributing factors.
General Franks has approved the report investigation. As matters of discipline or a service responsibility, General Franks has returned the report to his Air Force component for disciplinary action as may be appropriate. General Franks has forwarded the report to all the subordinate commands to review the recommendations of the board and to ensure that the appropriate lessons learned are incorporated into future and current operations.
Despite this tragic incident, our excellent relations with Canada remain unchanged. All parties concerned continue to work together to ensure safety and security of military personnel during future operations.
Mike?
GEN. GAUTHIER: Sir, thank you very much.
Again, I'm Brigadier General Michel Gauthier, from Canada, ladies and gentlemen. As the operational commander for Canada's military contribution to Operation Enduring Freedom, I would like to echo General DeLong's words of sympathy to the families and the loved ones of our killed and injured soldiers. We're all truly sorry for your loss, and we will not soon forget these brave soldiers.
I personally was in the process of taking command of the more than 2,000 Canadians deployed -- personnel deployed overseas when word of the friendly fire incident reached me here in Tampa. Needless to say, it's news every commander dreads.
On behalf of the Canadian men and women who serve in this important fight against terrorism, I want to tell you that we have come through this tragedy with a renewed commitment to the coalition and its objectives.
We are here together to demonstrate our joint resolve to help bring a measure of closure to those affected by the loss of these fine young soldiers. The heartfelt compassion and sympathy that all of us have received from our U.S. partners, including Generals DeLong and Franks, has been comforting. I can assure you that the shock of the incident was felt not just by Canadians but also by the entire coalition here in Tampa and throughout the theater of operations. The friendship and trust among the allies in this campaign extends beyond the color of our national uniforms.
When the incident occurred, our immediate concern was to care for the injured and the families of the stricken. The outstanding cooperation that has existed between our militaries throughout this campaign was never more evident than on the night when the needs of a few prompted the actions of many. Medics, surgeons, some of whom I met over in Afghanistan over the last month or so, infantrymen and many others, Canadians and Americans together, reacted with great professionalism and played a key role in saving lives and caring for the wounded that night.
Soon after an incident of this nature occurs, priority is given to investigating the cause. Although I was not part of either investigation, I have been confident from the outset that both countries would cooperate in the investigation in the same way that we have cooperated in the operational mission at hand; openly and professionally. And this is precisely what has happened.
The United States is Canada's most important ally. Defense and security relations between these two -- our two countries are long- standing, well-entrenched and highly successful. This was never more evident than on that night in Afghanistan. We fought together, we've mourned together, and now we will soldier on together. Our alliance is strong, and we will continue this campaign against terrorism even while we remember the sacrifices of these brave soldiers.
In closing, let me say that the men and women of 3rd Battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry continue to serve with great distinction in Afghanistan together with their American brothers in arms. Their focus on the mission has not wavered. Canadians can take great pride in their determination, and we can only hope that their continuing commitment to the mission will bring some measure of closure to those affected by this tragic event.
Thank you.
GEN. DELONG: Before we go much, further, what I'd -- again, we have a sole purpose here today, and that's to convey the findings of the board. Neither Mike Gauthier or I were on the board. If there's any questions, operational questions, on what's going on in Afghanistan, I'd like to defer those later to Colonel Thomas.
With that, I'll open the questions. Yes,sir?
Q General DeLong, George Coryell, Tampa Tribune. What kind of disciplinary action are we talking about possibly for the pilots?
GEN. DELONG: As I said in the opening statement, General Franks has approved the recommendations. He has passed this to the service component. And all ranges of appropriate disciplinary action are open. It's the service component's call.
Q John Thomas, WFTS in Tampa here. Given the situation, how healthy is the coalition now?
GEN. DELONG: I'd prefer not to go there, but the coalition, from our point of view, is very, very healthy. It's the most healthy it's been ever. What I'd like to do is to also give part of that question to General Mike Gauthier and have him answer from the Canadian point of view.
GEN. GAUTHIER: I guess in a general sense I would respond to that by saying that our two countries have been neighbors and friends and military allies for decades upon decades, and one event such as this is not going to change the close relationship that we have. And I would add to that that the spirit of cooperation that we've seen following the event has only strengthened the relationship between our two countries.
I can also say that I am in regular contact with the battalion commander on the ground in Afghanistan. I spoke to him as recently as today. And they are one family, Americans and Canadians working together. And they're focused on the mission. And even today as they were aware that this was going to be publicized today, the commanding officer is clearly focused, with his American brigade commander, on the operational task at hand.
Q Has it been hard to stay focused, considering everything that's happened here?
GEN. DELONG: And who's that pointed to?
Q It's pointed to General Gauthier.
GEN. DELONG: Okay.
GEN. GAUTHIER: The simple answer to that is no, not at all. They've drawn -- the soldiers, I think, in Afghanistan have drawn some strength from the fact that we're at war and they have an operational job to do. And from the very next day, in addition to making sure that the needs of their families back home were looked after by a very effective rear party, their focus was on getting back to the job. So, all very positive.
GEN. DELONG: Pentagon, please?
Q Hello, General. Matt Kelley from the Associated Press. What disciplinary action was recommended by the panel, against whom? And what recommendations did the panel make to rectify the command deficiencies that were identified?
GEN. DELONG: Well, first what I'd like to say is the recommendations -- as we got the recommendations, the commander in chief passed that to the appropriate service for disciplinary action, so it's been passed to the Air Force for, just as stated, appropriate disciplinary action as appropriate.
Go into the second part of your question, please.
Q What changes did they recommend for the command deficiencies that were identified?
GEN. DELONG: Any time we have an incident like this, we look at what happened, we make -- if there were deficiencies, we make the changes right then so we can get on with either the operation or training, whatever the event happens to be.
Next question?
Q General, Otto Kreisher of Copley News Service. A two- parter question. One, is there anything in the investigation that indicated the pilots were informed of the Canadian live-fire exercise and any idea that they were going to transit in the flight? And the other one is, did the two pilots agree to be interviewed by the investigative board?
GEN. DELONG: Let me start with the second one first. To the best of my knowledge, the two pilots were available to the Canadian investigative board and our investigative board. Again, I'm - the first question again, if you could repeat that.
Q The question is, were the pilots briefed before their flight on the presence of the Canadian live-fire exercise in that their operating area?
GEN. DELONG: A short answer is, I really can't go there because that's still part of an ongoing investigation. I can say that all pilots are briefed prior to every mission they take off. They're briefed on the areas they fly in. And I'll just leave it like that.
Next question. Pentagon.
Q General DeLong, Carl Hanlon (sp), Global National News, Canada.
Could you please explain whether you think that the pilots are taking all of the blame in this case -- not enough responsibility being assigned to others in the chain of command, including those who should have briefed the pilots and warned them the Canadians were on the ground and operating in that area?
GEN. DELONG: If you listen to the opening statement, what we've said is, appropriate disciplinary action was recommended to the service, and there was other action that was going to be taken against probably or appropriate disciplinary action against persons or personnel and the pilot's immediate chain of command.
Next question from Tampa.
Ma'am.
Q General, Diane Pertmer, WFLA-TV in Tampa.
I'm wondering, what should have happened? What is the normal chain of events that should have happened in an event like the pilot experienced when they mistook the exercise for reality?
GEN. DELONG: I would love to answer that question for you, but the problem is, if I speculate, it would be inappropriate, so anything that happened there -- what I see, what somebody else saw, would not be appropriate right now. We still have an ongoing investigation. These have been passed through to appropriate service for appropriate action, and that's being taken.
Next question, Tampa?
Q Hi, Vicky Chacere, the Associated Press.
Could General Gauthier comment a little bit about the future of similar exercises in the war zone and if there's been any reconsideration about whether it is a good idea to be conducting these exercises in a war zone when they might be mistaken for hostile fire?
GEN. GAUTHIER: I guess my comment there would be -- (inaudible) -- of either investigation that the training of the type that was being done will continue to be necessary and will continue to be conducted in the future. In fact, it has been for the past several weeks by these same Canadian soldiers.
GEN. DELONG: One more question, Tampa.
Q General Gauthier had mentioned that the loss was felt throughout the coalition. That ripple effect, as it went through the coalition -- how was it dealt with? Were further lines of communication opened up between parties, or what was done? General DeLong -- General DeLong.
GEN. GAUTHIER: Of course. Yeah, there you go.
GEN. DELONG: Any time that we lose a soldier, airman or Marine here in Tampa or involved in the global war on terrorism, it's felt throughout the coalition. When this happened back on April 17th, we had approximately 22 to 23 members in the coalition here at Tampa. We have 35 today. We've become a team, become a family. And it's felt anytime when there's anybody -- it's just a sad event. However, the global war on terrorism continues, and we will probably lose soldiers, airmen and Marines in the future.
Pentagon?
Q Yes. George Edmondson, Cox Newspapers. Two questions. Can you explain -- the Canadian officials have said that these exercises involved no surface-to-air firings. Can you explain what it was that led the pilot to believe he needed to act in self-defense? And can you give us some background on the pilots? Their experience, particularly what sort of combat experience they had?
GEN. DELONG: Let's go with your first question first. Again, I'm sorry, I can't comment on what they saw. All I can do is report what the board found. What I can say is the United States Central Command and the United States is very pleased with the training and professionalism of the soldiers, airmen, Marines that the service components send to us, and the coalition countries send to us. We couldn't be more pleased with them.
Next question. Pentagon?
Q General, Jamie McIntyre from CNN. You seem to be dancing all around this question about whether or not the pilots were -- had any idea that these exercises were going on and whether they should have known and whether that in any way is exculpatory or mitigates their actions. Can you just provide us a little clarity about this -- what seems to be a key question is, did the pilots know that the Canadian exercise was going on? Should they have known? And if they -- even if they didn't know, would it still have been a violation of the rules of engagement to act as they did?
GEN. DELONG: Well, first of all, Jamie, I'm a Marine, and I don't dance around any questions. But what -- there are still ongoing investigations. And so, for us to comment on ongoing investigations on anything that could prejudice that investigation would be inappropriate. So, what I would ask, there's going to be a time when this ongoing investigation is completed, and when that happens, we will report what happened, what people saw, what they didn't see, and what the results were.
Next question. Pentagon.
Q Carl Osgood, with Executive Intelligence Review. My question is for General Gauthier. Can you describe what exactly was the command relationship of your troops to the U.S. operation? And secondly, are you looking for any changes in that command structure as a result of this investigation?
GEN. GAUTHIER: The answer to the first part of your question, I won't answer in specific terms. In general terms, I will say that the command relationship was clear. And the second part of your question, the answer would be, no, we aren't looking at making any changes. There was no confusion there.
GEN. DELONG: Next question.
Q General DeLong, this is Drew Brown, with Knight Ridder Newspapers. You have mentioned that all ranges of appropriate discipline actions will be open. Can you be a little bit more specific of what options that range consists of?
GEN. DELONG: I'd like to, but here again, I -- there's ongoing investigations. This is a service component responsibility. It's been handed off to the appropriate service. They're looking at the range of options. And all I said is all ranges of options are open. And it's up to the appropriate service component to make the call.
Next question? Tampa, please.
Q Are the families of the soldiers, the Canadian soldiers who were killed, getting any more specific information than you're providing the public today?
GEN. GAUTHIER: I think they are probably getting -- they're getting more specific information than is being provided here through the American process because this has to do with the American investigation. What they will be provided with, what they've probably already been provided with, is salient aspects of the Canadian investigation, but without wishing to compromise privacy concerns, operational concerns, nor any issues that might be prejudicial to the outcome of the American disciplinary process. So, they will not get the full report, but they will get some information. I have not been part of that process. I'm not part of that disclosure process, but I can say that they will have been provided the information before it's made public, and it's being made public as we speak.
GEN. DELONG: Next question, Tampa.
Q I guess this is a housekeeping question. General, I'm wondering, when do you all expect that the full report, the full investigation will be complete and more answers will be available at that time?
GEN. DELONG: Short answer: We don't know. The long answer is, as it goes through the process, everybody does what's appropriate. The recommendations are taken. They'll come back. The disciplinary will go through the appropriate service chain. We'll have nothing to do with those in Central Command. And we don't have a time period. It could be four months, six months.
There are security concerns in the report, things that would be inappropriate for release that would have to be redacted.
Once the disposition of the reports are complete, the appropriate parts are redacted for security reasons, then the report will be released. I don't know when that will be. But that's the process.
Tampa?
Q General Gauthier, you said that your coalition support from Canada is stronger than ever. Are the Canadian people, to your knowledge, feeling the same way? And do you think that'll change after the reports come out today?
GEN. GAUTHIER: The answer to the first question would be yes, I think they still -- the Canadian public still supports Canada's contribution and the role it has to play in this war on terrorism. And I don't think that their opinion will change when the information is made public today.
I think what Canadians want to hear is that these -- this event has been properly investigated and, as the investigation and follow-up process runs its course, that whatever steps we are able to take to make sure that we avoid a repeat of this kind of incident are taken. They will want that to happen, and I think that's what they'll see.
GEN. DELONG: Just to follow up on that, the important part of this whole process is, it was done aboveboard. The coalition board was a combination U.S.-Canadian board, done together. The Canadian government themselves conducted an investigation which was appropriate for them. And so the way the process has worked, we think, could not have been done any more professionally.
Could we go to the Pentagon, please?
Q General, this is Tony Capaccio with Bloomberg News. I want to go back to the early sequence of events. Can you clarify -- did the pilot drop his bomb despite an order from the AWACS plane to hold fire? Could you clarify that?
Number two, to the best you can as a Marine, can you explain to the lay public what "maintaining flight discipline" is?
GEN. DELONG: The best I can as a Marine. That's nice. (Chuckles.)
Sequence of events. Everybody was given an opening statement. Our job was to convey the findings. What I would ask you to do is read the statement and make your judgment now, and as this process continues and it matures, we'll provide you an answer later.
The second part is maintaining flight discipline. Again, I cannot comment, and choose not to comment, on some of the actions that were taken during this process because it may affect some of the disciplinary actions that may or may not be appropriate by the appropriate service.
Next question. Pentagon.
Q Barbara Starr with CNN. General DeLong, I understand what you've been saying about the investigation process and how you can't address that. But separately from that, can you go back? Is there any way you can give us any information on anything that the U.S. military might have done to improve procedures, to improve how missions are conducted to -- the recommendations that came out of the report separate from the investigation process on how to improve procedures? Is there anything you can tell anybody about what you've done to improve things since this incident, since you have looked into that part of it?
GEN. DELONG: I'll say what I said earlier, Barbara. Any time there is an event like this or an operational incident, we look at it immediately. We make immediate changes if appropriate and - - as we have done with the Tarnak range. It was opened within two or three days following the event. So that would be my answer.
Next question. Pentagon.
Q This is Jim Mannion from Agence France Presse. For General Gauthier. I wonder if you could say whether the Canadian investigation found that the pilots had been briefed about the Canadian live-fire exercise.
GEN. GAUTHIER: I think you would have to ask that question of those who are disclosing the Canadian investigation, and that's happening as we speak. So I don't want to tread on that thin ice personally.
Q Thank you.
GEN. DELONG: Tampa? Any more questions? (No questions.)
If I could, last two questions, Pentagon.
Q General, Jamie McIntyre again from CNN. Let me try one more time on the findings of this investigation. Was there any finding that fatigue played a factor in this incident, given the fact that these two pilots were flying from a distant base and were at the end of their mission for that day?
GEN. DELONG: Again, Jamie, I'm -- I don't apologize, but I can't comment on what did or did not happen on either the findings or what the board found. All our purpose here today was to convey the findings and try to go through the process of what we told -- gave you in our opening statements.
Last question, please.
Q General DeLong, this is Drew Brown again, from Knight Ridder Newspapers. Can you tell us at least if the airspace around this training area at Tarnak Farms has been further restricted to prevent the possibility of this kind of incident happening again there?
GEN. DELONG: No, I can't. I can't address that issue. I will answer it the same way I answered it to Ms. Starr, is that we -- any time an incident like this happens, we look at it. We look at what happened. We fix immediately what may or may not have been wrong, and get on with the rest of the operation.
Thank you again very much, from the United States Central Command and from the country of Canada, from Mike Gauthier.
Q Thank you, General.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.