Miscommunication and bad maps contributed to the deaths of 24 Pakistani troops in a NATO airstrike last month, a military investigation concluded Thursday.
-
Only on msnbc.com
- Tax fraud claimed in Huguette Clark estate
- Helping dog owners keep their pets in tough times
- In the Granite State, a Romney blitz
- Troops at home: How are you spending the holidays?
- Politics trump hunger in N.Korea
- Alarm over Manning defense team strategy
- Christmas wish: Little listeria victim is home
A statement issued by the Pentagon on Thursday said "inadequate coordination by U.S. and Pakistani military officers" and "our reliance on incorrect mapping information ... contributed to this tragic result."
The statement expressed "deepest regret" for the loss of life and the lack of coordination that contributed to it. However, it also said U.S. forces cannot operate effectively in Pakistani border areas "without addressing the fundamental trust still lacking between us."
A senior defense official told NBC News on Thursday that the U.S. is taking responsibility for its mistakes and, in keeping with cultural norms in the region, will offer condolence payments to the families of the fallen Pakistani troops.
A report in the The Wall Street Journal said the investigation, due to be presented to U.S. defense officials on Friday, acknowledges significant U.S. responsibility for the November 26 airstrike that deepened mistrust between the United States and Pakistan. It cited unidentified U.S. officials familiar with the report.
STORY: Pakistan says attack could hurt war on terror
The uneasy allies faced a series of crises in the past year, including the U.S. raid that killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil in May, the closure of NATO supply routes through Pakistan, and the arrest of a CIA contractor.
'Lack of trust'
The U.S. military report supports some main elements in Pakistan's version of events and conflicts with early U.S. accounts that said Pakistanis gave an all-clear before what would become the most deadly friendly-fire accident of the war in Afghanistan, the WSJ said.
"The overarching issue that surrounds this incident is a lack of trust" between the United States and Pakistan that led to the incident, the Journal quoted a military official as saying.
The airstrike on the border post incensed the Pakistanis, who demanded that the United States leave the Shamsi Air Base within 15 days and blocked ground supply routes through Pakistan to U.S. forces in Afghanistan. They also want a formal U.S. apology.
Video: Angry Pakistanis mourn casualties (on this page)
According to the newspaper, the U.S. report says a U.S.-Afghan commando team came under attack from positions along a ridgeline, after which an F-15 fighter jet and AC-130 gunship launched warning flares towards the positions high above the commandos.
Forces on the ground asked NATO for a report on the area, the Journal reported, and were told in a radio transmission: "We are not tracking any pak mil (Pakistan military) in the area."
The ground forces interpreted that to mean there was no Pakistani military there, a military official familiar with the report told the WSJ.
PhotoBlog: First pictures of border posts attacked by NATO
A second mistake involved inaccurate data provided by the U.S. forces to the Pakistani military at a border coordination center, the report said.
However, U.S. military officials said Pakistani forces should have realized they were not firing on insurgents because of the fighter jets and gunships, the newspaper reported.
"It's hard to mistake these units for insurgents," a U.S. official told the WSJ. "One of the gaps in this investigation is we don't know why they came under fire by the Pakistani military."
Reuters, NBC News and msnbc.com staff contributed to this report.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45762766/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/
abc world news with diane sawyer 2011 abc world news with diane sawyer video abc world news with donnie mcclurkin ally asl on world news with diane sawyer andrew maguire king world news
No comments:
Post a Comment