For those not aware, a hospital run by Medecins Sans Frontieres (aka Doctor's Without Borders or MSF) was attacked and destroyed one month ago. MSF has released it's internal review of what happened. It is a tragedy. It is a crime. It was "made within the US chain of command."
This diary first covers the salient details from the MSF Kunduz fact sheet and then delves into why this is a violation of laws ratified by the United States.
Summary of the airstrike on the MSF hospital in Kunduz:
- US Department of Defense, Afghan Ministry of Interior and Defense, and US Army in Kabul were last notified of the GPS coordinates of hospital on 29 Sept.
- "2:00-2:08am until 3:00-3:15am on Saturday, 3 October, MSF’s trauma hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan came under precise and repeated airstrikes."
- "there were 105 patients in the hospital and 140 MSF international and national staff present of whom 80 were on duty that night."
- "at least 30, including: 10 known patients, 13 known staff, and 7 unrecognisable bodies that were in the wreck of the hospital.."
- "attack continued for more than 30 minutes after we first informed Resolute Support and US military officials in Kabul and Washington that it was a hospital being hit"
- "MSF’s hospital was the only facility of its kind in northeastern Afghanistan, providing free high level life- and limb-saving trauma care. Since opening the hospital in 2011, more than 15,000 surgeries were conducted and more than 68,000 emergency patients were treated."
- "The MSF hospital in Kunduz has been substantially destroyed and is no longer operational. This leaves thousands of people without access to emergency medical care when they need it most."
Please donate to MSF,
http://www.msf.org/....
Please sign the petition for President Obama to allow an independent investigation.
There are a number of articles that have covered the details. The best reference I've found is the MSF page on the airstrike, which has links to interviews, fact sheet, and many other related documents.
But this quote from the internal review demands much more:
“Patients burned in their beds, medical staff were decapitated and lost limbs, and others were shot by the circling AC-130 gunship while fleeing the burning building.”
The Atlantic article
What Happened in Kunduz? touches on something more.
At a news conference in Kabul on Thursday, Christopher Stokes, MSF’s general director, said it’s “quite hard to understand and believe” the hospital was mistakenly hit.
I think it's time to go further and ask who was responsible and demand there be an accounting in a court of law. MSF has been clear on this,
This was not just an attack on our hospital - it was an attack on the Geneva Conventions.
...
We are seeking an investigation into the Kunduz attack by the International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission.
Who is responsible for the attack on Kunduz and is there anyone trying to cover up this crime?
Note, I do not use the word crime lightly. I have family and friends in the military and would not wish on them any part of this tragedy. But I believe their interests are best protected by rooting out any elements in the chain of command that approved an AC-130 airstrike on a civilian hospital. Someone approved this mission and did not bother or care that it was a hospital.
The United States has ratified the Geneva Conventions (for sticklers, Conventions I-IV have been ratified, Protocol I and II have been signed but not ratified). The Fourth Geneva Convention articles 18 and 19 cover protection of civilian hospitals.
Paraphrased and quoted, Article 18 "Protection of hospitals" states
- Civilian hospitals may in no circumstances be the object of attack
- States which are Parties to a conflict shall provide all civilian hospitals with certificates
- Civilian hospitals shall be marked by means of the emblem ... but only if so authorized by the State.
- The Parties to the conflict shall, in so far as military considerations permit, take the necessary steps to make the distinctive emblems indicating civilian hospitals clearly visible.
and
Article 19 "Discontinuance of protection of hospitals" states
- Protection may, however, cease only after due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded.
- The fact that sick or wounded members of the armed forces are nursed in these hospitals, or the presence of small arms and ammunition taken from such combatants and not yet handed to the proper service, shall not be considered to be acts harmful to the enemy.
Arguments justifying the airstrike could be made about certificates and symbols. For instance, a
Washington Post article includes before and after aerial shots of the hospital buildings. No symbol is visible on the roofs. What is apparent is that the hospital building was specifically targeted, leaving the surrounding buildings seemingly unscathed.
However, note that the parties to the conflict have responsibility to certify and "to make the distinctive emblems indicating civilian hospitals clearly visible". The US Army in Kabul knew the MSF hospital had been operating in that location since 2011 and had been reminded of the GPS coordinates as recently as four days before the attack. The responsibilty lay with US Army Kabul if it was unable to make the hospital distinctive and visible to it's forces.
Update: As reported in another DKos diary, MSF personnel were actually told to stay within the boundaries of the GPS coordinates due to the ongoing fighting.
Another argument trotted out is that there were Taliban forces in the hospital. This is a particularly callow defense, forgetting what was learned in WWII and why laws and operating procedures were enacted to prevent or prosecute war crimes. An "ex-CIA covert officer" Joshua Katz attempted to serve up the same unethical argument and was staunchly countered by Shep Smith, calling Katz's argument disgusting. Make no mistake, "Because enemy forces are being treated in the hospital" is not an acceptable excuse according to the Fourth Genevea Convention Article 19, ratified by the United States in 1955.
What was the official response? As the Wikipedia Kunduz hospital airstrike page notes, the October 15th NBC Nightly News featured a Pentagon coorespondent reporting that cockpit recordings "reveal that the crew actually questioned whether the airstrike was legal". Further, within days of the airstrike, U.S. and NATO Commander John F. Campbell confirmed
the decision to use aerial fire was "made within the US chain of command."
This is not just a tragedy of war. The attack on the MSF hospital in Kunduz was a war crime and it's time for those responsible to be held accountable.
5:18 AM PT: Please sign the petition for President Obama to allow an independent investigation at https://www.change.org/....