OTTAWA (CP) Two separate military reports blame two American F-16 pilots for the deaths of four Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, but the reports don't explain why one pilot ignored a direct order and attacked.
Parallel Canadian and U.S. inquiries said Friday the pilots broke the rules and are directly responsible for the four deaths and eight injuries in the so-called friendly fire incident in April.
The investigators explain how, where, when and what. But they don't say why the airman bombed the Canadian night firing exercise even after he was told to hold his fire.
Only the pilot identified in published reports as Maj. Harry Schmidt of the Illinois air national guard knows, and he's not talking.
He answered some written questions for the Canadian inquiry, but declined to appear in person.
"We certainly would have loved to have the pilot in front of us but ... there's no capability for me as chairman of the board to compel the pilot to come in front of me," said Maurice Baril, the retired general who led the Canadian investigation.
"That's the kind of question we would have asked directly to the pilot if he would have appeared."
Capt. James Key, the pilot's lawyer, said his client didn't know friendly forces were training in the darkness below him. The reports acknowledged that the pilots weren't told about the exercise.
"The pilot also followed the proper defensive procedures in place at the time," Key said in a statement from a U.S. air base in Germany. "He believed that his and the other pilot's lives were at stake, and he took defensive action."
Baril said if someone claims self-defence, they have to be prepared to prove it.
The 225-kilogram, laser-guided bomb, which killed four and injured eight, was dropped moments after an airborne control plane told the F-16s not to fire.
"The pilot's actions were not consistent with either the expected practice for a defensive threat reaction or existing published procedures," the Canadian investigation reported. "This represented a failure of ... airmanship and technique"
The American report was equally harsh:
"The [inquiry] 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 an inappropriate use of lethal force."
The U.S. board, however, also cited "failings within the pilots' immediate command structures" as contributing factors.
Murray Lee, a retired Canadian air force colonel who flew CF-104 and CF-5 fighter bombers, said the pilots should have been warned the Canadians were training.
"Did they not tell him that there were Canadian troops on the ground conducting exercises? If they did not there's your failure in the higher chain of command to pass on information to the wing, to the mission planning centre, to the actual crew that was tasked to fly."
Baril dismissed the idea of contributing factors.
"The pilots ... were the two individuals who were in a position to stop the chain of events that caused the death of our soldiers and that's why we said unequivocally that they were the cause of the accident," he told a news conference.
The Canadian soldiers were cleared of any responsibility by both boards.
"Canadian troops conducting the live-fire exercise followed all appropriate procedures and regulations," Defence Minister John McCallum told a news conference.
The U.S. report said the planes were on their way home after a long patrol when they saw what looked like "fireworks" on the ground and believed it was hostile fire. This was likely muzzle flashes and tracer trails from the Canadian exercise.
The lead pilot requested and received permission to determine the precise co-ordinates of the fire.
The second F-16 pilot then requested permission to fire his 20-mm cannon at the target, but an AWACS airborne control plane in the vicinity instructed him to "hold fire." That pilot then declared that he was "rolling in in self-defence" and released the bomb.
Baril said that even without the personal testimony of the pilots he was satisfied his board had access to all the documentation and testimony needed to draw solid conclusions.
Little of that evidence is public, however, because of operational secrecy. The Canadians released an eight-page summary of a 14-volume report and even those pages had sections blanked out. The Americans issued a one-page news release to sum up what is said to be a 1,700-page report.
"I fully expect we will be able to release more information in the future," said McCallum, who had promised "openness and transparency" in the process.
Families of the victims were briefed privately by the military before the public release.
Lloyd Smith, whose son, Pte. Nathan Smith, was killed, was briefed along with his wife, Charlotte, at their Tatamagouche, N.S.
"I feel comfortable that the military has come through with what they said they'd do," Smith said. "I feel they will take the appropriate follow-up action to make sure this type of thing doesn't happen again."
In Edmonton, home of the 3rd Battalion of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, the parent unit of the victims, there was more bitterness about the airman.
"He made a mistake, people got killed and, yeah, he should pay the consequence," said Pte. Cameron McIntosh.
Brig.-Gen. Ivan Fenton, commander of the army in the West, said in Calgary he hopes the findings help families cope:
"I think it will help the families who are still dealing with this and will deal with it for a long time, and the soldiers."
He said he has no plans to visit the bereaved.
"I'm not sure they have any desire to speak to me, as the commander who sent their troops there."
www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?GXHC_gx_session_id_=b292664a6a7b5bce&pagE-mail this article