SAS unit may have unlawfully killed 54 people in Afghanistan - BBC investigation

daytrader

ODI Debutant
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Runs
10,061
Post of the Week
1
SAS reports reveal troubling pattern of suspicious deaths in Afghanistan

SAS operatives in Afghanistan repeatedly killed detainees and unarmed men in suspicious circumstances, according to a BBC investigation.

Newly obtained military reports suggest that one unit may have unlawfully killed 54 people in one six-month tour.

The BBC found evidence suggesting the former head of Special Forces failed to pass on evidence to a murder inquiry.

The Ministry of Defence said British troops "served with courage and professionalism in Afghanistan".

The BBC understands that General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, the former head of UK Special Forces, was briefed about the alleged unlawful killings but did not pass on the evidence to the Royal Military Police, even after the RMP began a murder investigation into the SAS squadron.

General Carleton-Smith, who went on to become head of the British Army before stepping down last month, declined to comment for this story.

BBC Panorama analysed hundreds of pages of SAS operational accounts, including reports covering more than a dozen "kill or capture" raids carried out by one SAS squadron in Helmand in 2010/11.

Individuals who served with the SAS squadron on that deployment told the BBC they witnessed the SAS operatives kill unarmed people during night raids.

They also said they saw the operatives using so-called "drop weapons" - AK-47s planted at a scene to justify the killing of an unarmed person.

Several people who served with Special Forces said that SAS squadrons were competing with each other to get the most kills, and that the squadron scrutinised by the BBC was trying to achieve a higher body count than the one it had replaced.

Internal emails show that officers at the highest levels of Special Forces were aware there was concern over possible unlawful killings, but failed to report the suspicions to military police despite a legal obligation to do so.

The Ministry of Defence said it could not comment on specific allegations, but that declining to comment should not be taken as acceptance of the allegations' factual accuracy.

An MOD spokesperson said that British forces "served with courage and professionalism" in Afghanistan and were held to the "highest standards".

A pattern of suspicious killing
In 2019, the BBC and the Sunday Times investigated one SAS raid which led to a UK court case and an order to the UK defence minister to disclose documents outlining the government's handling of the case.

For this latest investigation, the BBC analysed newly obtained operational reports detailing the SAS's accounts of night raids. We found a pattern of strikingly similar reports of Afghan men being shot dead because they pulled AK-47 rifles or hand grenades from behind curtains or other furniture after having been detained.

  • On 29 November 2010, the squadron killed a man who had been detained and taken back inside a building, where he "attempted to engage the force with a grenade".
  • On 15 January 2011, the squadron killed a man who had been detained and taken back inside a building, where he "reached behind a mattress, pulled out a hand grenade, and attempted to throw it".
  • On 7 February, the squadron killed a detainee who they said had "attempted to engage the patrol with a rifle". The same justification was given for the fatal shooting of detainees on 9 February and 13 February.
  • On 16 February, the squadron killed two detainees after one pulled a grenade "from behind the curtains" and the other "picked up an AK-47 from behind a table".
  • On 1 April, the squadron killed two detainees who had been sent back inside a building after one "raised an AK-47" and the other "tried to throw a grenade".
The total death toll during the squadron's six-month tour was in the triple figures. No injuries to SAS operatives were reported across all the raids scrutinised by the BBC.

A senior officer who worked at UK Special Forces headquarters told the BBC there was "real concern" over the squadron's reports.

"Too many people were being killed on night raids and the explanations didn't make sense," he said. "Once somebody is detained, they shouldn't end up dead. For it to happen over and over again was causing alarm at HQ. It was clear at the time that something was wrong."

Internal emails from the time show that officers reacted with disbelief to the reports, describing them as "quite incredible" and referring to the squadron's "latest massacre". An operations officer emailed a colleague to say that "for what must be the 10th time in the last two weeks" the squadron had sent a detainee back into a building "and he reappeared with an AK".

"Then when they walked back in to a different A [building] with another B [fighting-age male] to open the curtains he grabbed a grenade from behind a curtain and threw it at the c/s [SAS assault team]. Fortunately, it didn't go off…. this is the 8th time this has happened... You couldn't MAKE IT UP!"

As the concerns grew, one of the highest-ranking Special Forces officers in the country warned in a secret memo that there could be a "deliberate policy" of unlawful killing in operation. Senior leadership became so concerned that a rare formal review was commissioned of the squadron's tactics. But when a Special Forces officer was deployed to Afghanistan to interview personnel from the squadron, he appeared to take the SAS version of events at face value.

The BBC understands that the officer did not visit any of the scenes of the raids or interview any witnesses outside the military. Court documents show that the final report was signed off by the commanding officer of the SAS unit responsible for the suspicious killings.

None of the evidence was passed on to military police. The BBC discovered that statements containing the concerns were instead put into a restricted-access classified file for "Anecdotal information about extrajudicial killings", accessible only to a handful of senior Special Forces officers.

The SAS squadron was allowed to redeploy to Afghanistan in 2012 for another six-month tour.

When the Royal Military Police launched a murder investigation in 2013 into one of the raids conducted on that tour, Special Forces director General Carleton-Smith did not disclose to the RMP any of the earlier concerns over unlawful killings, or the existence of the tactical review.

Colonel Oliver Lee, who was commander of the Royal Marines in Afghanistan in 2011, told the BBC that the allegations of misconduct raised by our investigation were "incredibly shocking" and merited a public inquiry. The apparent failure by Special Forces leadership to disclose evidence was "completely unacceptable", he said.

Kill or capture
The BBC's investigation focused primarily on one six-month deployment by one SAS squadron that arrived in Afghanistan in November 2010.

The squadron was operating largely in Helmand province, one of the most dangerous places in Afghanistan, where Taliban ambushes and roadside bombs were common and British Army losses were high.

The squadron's primary role was carrying out deliberate detention operations (DDOs) - also known as "kill or capture" raids - designed to detain Taliban commanders and disrupt bomb-making networks.

Several sources who were involved in selecting targets for Special Forces operations told the BBC that there were grave problems with the intelligence behind the selection process, meaning civilians could easily end up on a target list.

According to a British representative who was present during target selection in Helmand in 2011, "Intelligence guys were coming up with lists of people that they figured were Taliban. It would be put through a short process of discussion. That was then passed onto Special Forces who would be given a kill or capture order."

According to the source, the targeting was pressured and rushed. "It didn't necessarily translate into let's kill them all, but certainly there was a pressure to up the game, which basically meant passing out judgements on these people quickly," he said.

During the raids, the SAS squadron used a recognised tactic in which they called everyone from inside a building out, searched and restrained them with cable-tie handcuffs, then took one male back inside to assist special forces operatives with a search.

But senior officers became concerned by the frequency with which the squadron's own accounts described detainees being taken back inside buildings and then grabbing for hidden weapons - an enemy tactic not reported by other British military forces operating in Afghanistan.

There were also concerns among officers that on a significant number of raids, there were more people killed than weapons reportedly recovered from the scene - suggesting the SAS was shooting unarmed people - and that SAS operatives might be falsifying evidence by dropping weapons at scenes after killing people.

After similar concerns were raised in Australia, a judge-led inquiry was commissioned and found "credible evidence" members of Australian Special Forces were responsible for the unlawful killing 39 people, and used 'drop weapons' in an attempt to justify shootings.

By April 2011, the concerns were so great in the UK that a senior Special Forces officer wrote to the director of Special Forces warning that there was evidence of "deliberate killing of individuals after they have been restrained" and "fabrication of evidence to suggest a lawful killing in self-defence".

Two days later, the UK Special Forces assistant chief of staff warned the director that the SAS could be operating a policy to "kill fighting-aged males on target even when they did not pose a threat."

If the suspicions were true, he wrote, the SAS squadron had "strayed into indefensible ethical and legal behaviour".

The BBC visited several of the homes raided by the SAS squadron in 2010/11. At one, in a small village in Nad Ali in Helmand, there was a bricked up guesthouse where nine Afghan men including a teenager were killed in the early hours of 7 February 2011.

The SAS operatives arrived in helicopters under the cover of darkness and approached the house from a nearby field. According to their account, insurgents opened fire at them, prompting them to shoot back and kill everyone in the guesthouse.

Only three AK-47s were recovered, according to the SAS account - one of at least six raids by the squadron on which the reported number of enemy weapons was fewer than the number of people killed.

Inside the guesthouse, what appeared to be bullet holes from the raid were clustered together on the walls low to the ground. The BBC showed photographs from the scene to ballistics experts, who said that the clusters suggested multiple rounds had been fired downward from above, and did not appear indicative of a firefight.

Leigh Neville, an expert on weapons used by UK Special Forces, said the bullet patterns suggested that "targets were low to the ground, either prone or in a sitting or crouching position close to the wall - an unusual position if they were actively involved in a firefight".

The same pattern was visible at two other locations examined by the BBC. Ballistics experts who reviewed images said the bullet holes were suggestive of execution-style killings rather than firefights.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, an RMP investigator confirmed to the BBC that they had seen photographs from the scenes and that the bullet mark patterns had raised alarm.

"You can see why we were concerned," the investigator said. "Bullet marks on the walls so low to the ground appeared to undermine the Special Forces' version of events."

In 2014, the RMP launched Operation Northmoor, a wide-ranging investigation into more than 600 alleged offences by British forces in Afghanistan, including a number of killings by the SAS squadron. But RMP investigators told the BBC that they were obstructed by British military in their efforts to gather evidence.

Operation Northmoor was wound down in 2017 and eventually closed in 2019. The Ministry of Defence has said that no evidence of criminality was found. Members of the investigations team told the BBC they dispute that conclusion.

The Ministry of Defence said British troops were held to the highest standards. "No new evidence has been presented, but the Service Police will consider any allegations should new evidence come to light," a spokesperson said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-6208319...9F-11ED-A6FD-EBEE4744363C&at_custom3=@BBCNews
 
Last edited:
Not surprising.

They (western forces) have done so much war crimes. They are no better than what Nazis did during WW2.
 
Not surprising.

They (western forces) have done so much war crimes. They are no better than what Nazis did during WW2.

The difference is that Nazi atrocities were state-sanctioned on a vast scale. Even before the infamous extermination camps were established, battalions of Wehrmacht following the front line troops would shoot every civilian - Poles, Russians. This was state policy.

Whereas British soldiers suspected of committing war crimes can face charges, and imprisonment if found guilty.
 
I feel that such atrocities will happen whenever soldiers are put in such environments for long periods of time.

Politicians are to blame
 
I feel that such atrocities will happen whenever soldiers are put in such environments for long periods of time.

Politicians are to blame

War brings out the best in some and the very worst in others.

Much depends on the culture of their nation, and the culture of the unit they are in, and the behaviour of their military leaders, and how long they have been in the field.

The British Army behaved better in Afghanistan than the US Army on the whole, because of their experience gained policing Northern Ireland for 27 years.
 
War brings out the best in some and the very worst in others.

Much depends on the culture of their nation, and the culture of the unit they are in, and the behaviour of their military leaders, and how long they have been in the field.

The British Army behaved better in Afghanistan than the US Army on the whole, because of their experience gained policing Northern Ireland for 27 years.

Behaved well they were in charge of helmand which under them became the biggest opium producing province and most violent province in Afghanistan eventhough the terrain is flat and the more hardier terrain and people live further east and north on pakistan border .

The helmand campaign was a disaster by the British hence why the Americans had to takeover and the atrocities across Afghanistan increased when night raids became the norm.
 
Afghanistan should be left alone. Their people must decide what kind of future they want.
 
War brings out the best in some and the very worst in others.

Much depends on the culture of their nation, and the culture of the unit they are in, and the behaviour of their military leaders, and how long they have been in the field.

The British Army behaved better in Afghanistan than the US Army on the whole, because of their experience gained policing Northern Ireland for 27 years.

The best you are referring to happens when soldiers who feel their country is threatened and they are being wrongfully targeted, pickup arms to defend their country and their countrymen.

The "War on terror" unfortunately has no such heroes. If there were heroes, they were probably obliterated from miles above using advanced tech they were not even aware of. There are no heroes on the other side.

They attacked countries far less advanced and less prepared for war and posed no threat to anyone. You can claim that Afghanistan was being used for training ground for terrorists, but the fact is that it was set up like that a long time ago as such by the west itself. For all their problems, the Afghans were in no position to be a threat to anyone. And need I say anything about Iraq? This war had had no heroes .. only villains, victims and misery.
 
Anytime mainstream news media digs up old stories and pushes it as headlines, it usually means there's another important news somewhere that they're trying to brush under the carpet!
 
The best you are referring to happens when soldiers who feel their country is threatened and they are being wrongfully targeted, pickup arms to defend their country and their countrymen.

The "War on terror" unfortunately has no such heroes. If there were heroes, they were probably obliterated from miles above using advanced tech they were not even aware of. There are no heroes on the other side.

They attacked countries far less advanced and less prepared for war and posed no threat to anyone. You can claim that Afghanistan was being used for training ground for terrorists, but the fact is that it was set up like that a long time ago as such by the west itself. For all their problems, the Afghans were in no position to be a threat to anyone. And need I say anything about Iraq? This war had had no heroes .. only villains, victims and misery.

I refer to selfless actions to help others - either fellow soldiers, or civilians such as the prisoners of the liberated Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen.
 
Heinous crimes.

Not a surprise at all tbh.

War brings out the worst in people.
 
No condemnation from NATO apologists? Ahh yes the classic, war brings out the worst of people excuse.

If this was Russia, China, Iran etc, the West would be shouting - WAR CRIMES!

Pathetic to see NATO apologists trying to justify these actions.

This is just one expose in 20 years a war in ONE country by NATO. Imagine how many other stories exist.

No wonder Assange is wanted in the USA; the truth exposes the West!

NATO the NAZIS!
 
Notice how MSM operate.

If Russian’s forces are involved; it’s not ‘may have’, it is!

If Western forces are involved; it’s ‘may have’, not it is!
 
The former head of the British armed forces said he would "order a thorough investigation" into allegations that SAS troops killed detainees in Afghanistan if he were still in charge.

General Lord Richards was responding to a BBC investigation into alleged unlawful killings by the SAS.

Lord Richards said he had "no doubt that Admiral Radakin, the current chief of the defence staff, will do this".

The Ministry of Defence said that no new evidence had been presented.

Lord Richards was the chief of the defence staff between 2010 and 2013, when the alleged extrajudicial killings took place.

BBC Panorama showed him the evidence it had gathered. He said that "worrying events of the type captured by Panorama are very rare in the British armed forces", but that "given the compelling nature" of the evidence, he would order an investigation if he were in charge.

BBC Panorama found evidence that one SAS unit operating in Afghanistan during that time may have been responsible for 54 unlawful deaths in one six-month tour of duty.

The BBC understands that General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith was briefed about the alleged executions when he became head of special forces the following year. But the general failed to pass on evidence to the military police, even when they investigated a member of the same SAS unit for murder.

The UK Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace, faced mounting calls to act on Tuesday after Shadow Defence Secretary John Healey called on him to "urgently explain to Parliament what action he'll take to verify any truth to these claims and any possible cover-up".

"These new allegations are deeply disturbing, and such reports cast a dark shadow over the excellent reputation of our British Special Forces," Mr Healey said.

He added: "Justice for those affected and the integrity of British forces fighting overseas must be secured."

The Ministry of Defence said in a statement that it believed the BBC had jumped to "unjustified conclusions from allegations that have already been fully investigated".

An MoD spokesperson said that British forces "served with courage and professionalism" in Afghanistan and were held to the "highest standards".

Mr Wallace has yet to comment on the allegations.

The UK Armed Forces Minister, James Heappey, said if there was new evidence of offences, "we will absolutely investigate it".

"Nobody in our organisation, no matter how special, gets a bye on the law," he said.

Sir Howard Morrison QC, a former judge at the International Criminal Court, told the BBC on Tuesday that "at the very least, a judge-led inquiry should be established to re-examine the evidence.

"The Panorama investigation raises such a powerful case, using civilian and military sources, it is difficult to believe anyone would disagree that these issues need to be thoroughly reinvestigated," he said.

"The British SAS is rightly regarded as an elite unit, with exceptionally rigorous selection standards and proud history. But no-one engaged in military operations is above international and military law."

Similar allegations - of extrajudicial killings and use of so-called "drop weapons" planted at scenes - were raised against Australian Special Forces, prompting a four-year judge-led inquiry.

The Australian inquiry found credible evidence that its Special Forces were responsible for 39 unlawful killings in Afghanistan, as well as planting enemy weapons at the scenes of raids to justify shootings of unarmed people.

The Labour MP Dan Jarvis, a former army major who served alongside Special Forces in Afghanistan, said on Tuesday that the allegations raised in the BBC's reporting were "extremely serious" and "undoubtedly warrant an independent inquiry".

"UK Special Forces personnel are rightly revered across the world, but no one is above the law," Mr Jarvis said.

"Without the truth, we risk irreparable damage to the reputation and legitimacy of British forces."

The chairman of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, Tom Tugendhat, who is running to be leader of the Conservative Party and prime minister, said if there was any truth to the allegations they would be "investigated fully by the Ministry of Defence".

Mr Tugendhat, a former army officer who served in Afghanistan, said he "neither saw nor heard any of these accusations" during his service, adding that British troops were "extraordinary, courageous, determined and brave people serving our country".

In 2014, the British Royal Military Police launched a wide-ranging investigation into allegations of abuses and unlawful killings by British forces in Afghanistan, including SAS night raids scrutinised by the BBC.

Operation Northmoor was wound down in 2017 and eventually closed in 2019 with no charges brought. The current defence secretary, Ben Wallace, oversaw the closure of the final three criminal investigations.

The Ministry of Defence said at the time that no evidence of criminality had been found.

But Royal Military Police investigators who worked on Operation Northmoor told Panorama they had been obstructed in their efforts to gather evidence, blocked from visiting the sites of the shootings, and frustrated in attempts to interview senior leadership.

"We were hitting brick walls in every direction," one senior investigator said.

"I believe there was pressure from above to shut down the investigation. It became increasingly clear to me that it didn't matter what evidence we were able to gather, these cases were never going to be allowed to go to court."

In an official report, the RMP said there was a "regimental amnesia" among the SAS and said there were suggestions its troops had been "coach[ed]" by other SAS personnel ahead of interviews.

The Ministry of Defence said in a statement that it believed the BBC had jumped to "unjustified conclusions from allegations that have already been fully investigated".

"We have provided a detailed and comprehensive statement to Panorama, highlighting unequivocally how two Service Police operations carried out extensive and independent investigation into allegations about the conduct of UK forces in Afghanistan," a spokesperson said.

"Neither investigation found sufficient evidence to prosecute. Insinuating otherwise is irresponsible, incorrect and puts our brave Armed Forces personnel at risk both in the field and reputationally."

Later on Tuesday, an MOD spokesperson said the Royal Military Police had written to Panorama and other media organisations asking for any new material so it can be reviewed.

The BBC said it would engage with the military police and considered all requests for un-broadcast material in accordance with its editorial guidelines.

BBC
 
These enquiries and investigations are useless considering a UK PM was found guilty of lying to the UK Gov and public over the war in Iraq, and walked away scott free with blood on his hands - Tony Blair.
 
Haven't watched the programme but as soon as I hear the military will conduct an internal investigation, I already know the outcome. It's just flim flam to preserve the army's reputation, but would not really expect anything else. Once you send an army to war you have to support them as much as possible, you don't want to be seen siding with the enemy.
 
Haven't watched the programme but as soon as I hear the military will conduct an internal investigation, I already know the outcome. It's just flim flam to preserve the army's reputation, but would not really expect anything else. Once you send an army to war you have to support them as much as possible, you don't want to be seen siding with the enemy.

While the Army is historically bad at investigating and charging war criminals within its ranks, HM Gov has set up a special team of investigators, drawn from RN and civilian police, which has brought criminal soldiers to justice.

Moreover, prosecutions of ex-soldiers accused of crimes against civilians in NI are ongoing.
 
While the Army is historically bad at investigating and charging war criminals within its ranks, HM Gov has set up a special team of investigators, drawn from RN and civilian police, which has brought criminal soldiers to justice.

Moreover, prosecutions of ex-soldiers accused of crimes against civilians in NI are ongoing.

I think the concern is an institutional body effectively doing its own homework on itself. The general public have lost trust in this process. That’s what <I>Line of Duty</I> is about.
 
War brings out the best in some and the very worst in others.

Much depends on the culture of their nation, and the culture of the unit they are in, and the behaviour of their military leaders, and how long they have been in the field.

The British Army behaved better in Afghanistan than the US Army on the whole, because of their experience gained policing Northern Ireland for 27 years.

When trying to change a a culturally different environment, there is bound to be frustrations etc which in terms of soldiers with guns in hand will result in such atrocities.

No soldier is taught to kill civilians but human nature intervenes over a period of time.
 
When trying to change a a culturally different environment, there is bound to be frustrations etc which in terms of soldiers with guns in hand will result in such atrocities.

No soldier is taught to kill civilians but human nature intervenes over a period of time.

Sure. Look at the Bloody Sunday atrocity in Derry in 1972.
 
When trying to change a a culturally different environment, there is bound to be frustrations etc which in terms of soldiers with guns in hand will result in such atrocities.

No soldier is taught to kill civilians but human nature intervenes over a period of time.

Not true.

British and Western soldiers are trained to kill civilians in certain situations.

Being a soldier doesnt make one a hero. It makes one a terrorist if they are taking part in a force which is occupying another nations immorally.

No armed forces person whether its Brits, Yank or Turkish who was part of the occupation is a hero but a criminal imo.

I would advise you to research a little into this barbaric attack and occupation on of the poorest nations on Earth. When Brit soldiers engaged in a shoot out with the resistance it often led to deliberate bombing of a whole village, inc elderly women and babies blown up from the skies because these so call brave occupiers couldnt defeat them in a gun fight. Also check out drone strikes and 2nd strikes which were targeting civilians.

The large number of instances of civilians murdered by forces from various nations shows killing people was common for the Nato allied invaders.

There should be no sympathy or excuses for these evil people such as 'war brings the worst out' or 'cultural misunderstandings'.

We should be defending the innocent not the invaders.
 
There should be no sympathy or excuses for these evil people such as 'war brings the worst out' or 'cultural misunderstandings'.

This is my original response in its full context:-

“Heinous crimes.

Not a surprise at all tbh.

War brings out the worst in people.”

There is no sympathy and there are no excuses from me at all.
 
This is my original response in its full context:-

“Heinous crimes.

Not a surprise at all tbh.

War brings out the worst in people.”

There is no sympathy and there are no excuses from me at all.

Imo they are evil people, war only gave them the excuse to live out their personalities.

A lot dont realise, MORE civilians were killed by invading forces not by fellow Afghans resisting.

Yes I realise you stated there is no excuses and rightly so. But if it was the other way, where UK was invaded by over 40 nations for 20 years, we'd (inc myself) all see it differently.
 
This is my original response in its full context:-

“Heinous crimes.

Not a surprise at all tbh.

War brings out the worst in people.”

There is no sympathy and there are no excuses from me at all.

That war brings out the worst in [some] people is not sympathy or excuse. If there is evidence that individual soldiers commit war crimes, they should face trial. This is the European way ever since the Nuremberg trials in 1946.
 
I watched part of this yesterday on BBC iplayer and it was so disgusting I had to turn it off. Foreign forces releasing dogs in villages and in homes where children were maimed. Imagine if Islamic countries did that in Europe? The combined forces were bombing mud hut villages and terrorising tiny populations of uneducated communities.
 
Back
Top