# IDF:  Bad Maps Led to 25 Jul 06 Strike on UN Post in LBN



## The Bread Guy (14 Sep 2006)

*Israeli report: Bombing of UN peacekeepers in Lebanon due to inaccurate maps *  
Canadian Press, 14 Sept 06
http://www.recorder.ca/cp/World/060914/w091447A.html

Israel on Thursday released details of its report on the killing of four UN peacekeepers in an Israeli air strike in Lebanon, saying their position, close to a Hezbollah rocket launch-site, was erroneously targeted because of flawed Israeli military maps. Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener of Kingston, Ont., a 20-year veteran, was one of the peacekeepers killed in the attack.  Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said the findings were handed to diplomats from Canada, China, Finland and Austria, which each had a peacekeeper killed in the July 25 strike on the UN post at Khiam, southern Lebanon, about 180 metres from a position manned by Hezbollah, which at the time was firing salvos of rockets into Israel, where they killed 39 civilians . . . . .


*Israel provides info on UNTSO deaths*
Herb Keinon, Jerusalem Post, 14 Sept 06
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1157913631667&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Israel on Thursday presented diplomatic officials from Canada, China, Finland and Austria with the findings of the investigation into the killing of four UNTSO (United Nations Truce Supervision Organization) observers in Lebanon on July 25. One soldier from each of the four countries was killed in the incident which, for a brief period, strained Israel's relations with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Immediately after the attack on the observer post in Khiyam near the eastern end of the border with Israel, Annan expressed "shock and deep distress" over what he called the "apparently deliberate targeting" of the UN position . . . . The report did not, however, include the e-mail message sent by one of those killed, Canadian Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, to a Canadian colleague, Major General Lewis Mackenzie, saying there was extensive Hizbullah very close to the post.


*Israel says U.N. deaths caused by military map error*
Reuters (UK), 14 Sept 06
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/14092006/325/israel-says-u-n-deaths-caused-military-map-error.html

An Israeli air strike which killed four United Nations military observers at their base in Lebanon was due to an error with military maps of the area, an investigation by Israel said on Thursday.  The air strike in July destroyed a U.N. post in southern Lebanon, killing four U.N. peacekeepers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland.  Israel presented the findings of its investigation into the incident on Thursday to officials from the four countries, Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Mark Regev said.  He said maps of the area had been duplicated due to the deployment of more troops in the area . . . .


----------



## geo (14 Sep 2006)

Interesting explanation.

Wonder how many "defective" maps were printed up?


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Sep 2006)

...not to mention all the problems they must have had with their GPS's and other gadgets, right?


----------



## GAP (15 Sep 2006)

Their maps had the UN position labelled as a Hezbolla position. Was there not an extensive tunnel system just meters from the outpost? I also wonder where the 17 Hezbolla bodies came from....maybe Scotty beamed them down.


----------



## TCBF (15 Sep 2006)

There is no crime in trying to hit an enemy target and missing.  The crime here was the UN leaving the team in place hoping to create some Blue Beret "martyrs."


----------



## Kat Stevens (15 Sep 2006)

Ding, ding, ding!  We have a winner!  Hold your cards, ladies gents, we have a bingo!


----------



## geo (15 Sep 2006)

and there you have it.........


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> There is no crime in trying to hit an enemy target and missing.  The crime here was the UN leaving the team in place hoping to create some Blue Beret "martyrs."



Please tell me you're not being serious with that comment.


----------



## geo (15 Sep 2006)

Crantor....
once the shooting started, what did you expect the UN observers to do?
leaving em in harms way once both sides were actively shooting at each other is somewhat irresponsible - no?


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> Crantor....
> once the shooting started, what did you expect the UN observers to do?
> leaving em in harms way once both sides were actively shooting at each other is somewhat irresponsible - no?



Agreed, but insinuating that "the hope was to create Blue Beret martyrs" is as ridiculous as any other conspiracy theory.


----------



## paracowboy (15 Sep 2006)

Crantor said:
			
		

> Agreed, but insinuating that "the hope was to create Blue Beret martyrs" is as ridiculous as any other conspiracy theory.


or, it's deliberate exaggeration for humour and effect.  :


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2006)

Hard to tell when it's just typed.  Thus why I asked if he was being serious.


----------



## Petard (15 Sep 2006)

This "excuse" from Israel is B.S.
Wrong map, yeah right. Sounds to me like a pilot screwed up trying to "thread a needle" at altitude more likely
But we can't have the "most professional" airforce in the world accept something like that, no-no-no.
But that's probably going to be all we'll ever hear about this.
This kind of indifference to UN presence whenever these kind of conflicts flare up like this, aught to be mentioned to those who lament we should return to our "traditional" peacekeeping role. Where did that ever work in the last 2 decades?


----------



## big bad john (30 Sep 2006)

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1448212006

U.N. says Israel used precision bomb to hit U.N. officers
By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Israel used a precision-guided bomb to launch a direct hit on four U.N. peacekeepers killed in southern Lebanon last July, the United Nations said on Friday of its probe into the incident.

But a report by a special U.N.-appointed board of inquiry could not affix blame because Israel did not allow the access to operational or tactical level commanders involved in the July 25 disaster at Khiam. Four military observers died, officers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland.

Therefore, the board was "unable to determine why the attacks on the U.N. position were not halted, despite repeated demarches (communications) to the Israeli authorities from U.N. personnel, both in the field and in U.N. headquarters," Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a statement.

Annan said the U.N. bunker at Khiam "was struck by a 500- kilogram precision-guided aerial bomb."

Despite not drawing any conclusions, a senior U.N. official briefing reporters on condition of anonymity, said precision-guided munitions were "precision-guided and meant to hit the targets they hit, which was the United Nations."

"War is hell, peacekeeping is not supposed to be," the official said.

Israel has accepted full responsibility for the incident and apologised to the United Nations for the army's "tragic operational mistake." But Annan and other officials made clear they were not able to verify if and how the error occurred.

The report was released only to Austria, Canada, China and Finland because such investigations are not publicised to preserve the confidentiality of informants in future probes.

"In this particular case, since the Israeli government also conducted its own investigation which they released, we also felt it's necessary to speak about the conclusion of ours," U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said.

Israel presented its findings on September 15 to the four countries that lost peacekeepers and then briefed reporters.

'HOSTILE ACTIVITY'

Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said maps of the area had been incorrect. "There was a mishap on the Israeli side where in duplication of maps, the U.N. position on the maps was not marked as it should have been and that created the tragedy," he said.

Israel launched an offensive into Lebanon after Hizbollah guerrillas captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12.

Regev said the investigation found that about 100 metres (yards) from the U.N. position there was a Hizbollah position where there was "hostile activity".

U.N. officials agreed Hizbollah guerrillas were at a base in the area as well as in a nearby prison. But they said there was no activity from the militia on July 25 and the U.N. bunker was clearly marked.

Jane Holl Lute, a deputy head of U.N. peacekeeping operations, told the U.N. Security Council on July 26 there were 21 strikes within 300 metres (yards) of the observer post during the six hours before it was completely destroyed.

Twelve of the 21 struck within 100 metres, including four that scored direct hits, Holl Lute said.

While there was speculation Israel may have been targeting Hizbollah positions near the Khiam post, Holl Lute said there was no Hizbollah firing coming from near the outpost.

An Irish army officer in south Lebanon warned Israeli forces six times that its strikes threatened the lives of the four observers, Ireland's Foreign Ministry said.


Photo 1) The United Nations observer post of the U.N Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in south Lebanon that was destroyed by Israeli forces is seen in this photo released July 27, 2006. Israel used a precision-guided bomb to launch a direct hit on four U.N. peacekeepers killed in southern Lebanon last July, the United Nations said on Friday of its probe into the incident. /U.N Press Office/Handout


----------



## scm77 (30 Sep 2006)

Interesting video that shows how close some of the Hezbollah bunkers were to the UN positions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0VeMV-BAaY&NR
(about two minutes into it)


----------



## career_radio-checker (30 Sep 2006)

Well the last time I commented on this topic I got sent to the 'time out box' so I'll cut the profanities and just say this: with the sophistication in the IDF arsenal and the repeated phone calls by the UN observers to the IDF, "Map error" sounds about as plausible as Janet Jackson explaining her "wordrobe malfunction"  :


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Sep 2006)

A bit more, from the UN's side....

*SECRETARY-GENERAL RECEIVES REPORT ON ATTACK THAT KILLED OBSERVERS AT KHIAM, LEBANON*
UN news release #SG/SM/10666, 29 Sept 06
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sgsm10666.doc.htm

The following statement was issued today by the Spokesman for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan:

The Board of Inquiry appointed to investigate the incident at Khiam, Lebanon, in which four UN Military Observers were killed, has now submitted its report to the Secretary-General.

UN Patrol Base at Khiam was struck by a 500 kilogram precision-guided aerial bomb and destroyed at 1925 hours on 25 July 2006.  The Board of Inquiry notes that the Israeli authorities have accepted full responsibility for the incident and apologized to the United Nations for what they say was an “operational level” mistake.  The Board did not have access to operational or tactical level IDF commanders involved in the incident, and was, therefore, unable to determine why the attacks on the UN position were not halted, despite repeated demarches to the Israeli authorities from UN personnel, both in the field and at Headquarters.

The report concludes that all standard operating procedures were followed and no additional actions could have been taken by UN personnel that would have changed the outcome.

The Secretary-General once again pays tribute to the four who gave their lives in the cause of peace, and reiterates his heartfelt condolences to their families.
---

*Probe into Israeli killing of UN monitors unable to determine why appeals were ignored*
UN News Centre, 29 Sept 06
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20079&Cr=leban&Cr1=

A board of inquiry into an Israeli attack in Lebanon that killed four United Nations military observers in July had no access to the commanders involved and was therefore unable to determine why the attacks were not halted despite repeated appeals from UN personnel, Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s spokesman said today.

The Board, appointed by the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) as standard procedure in such circumstances, noted that the Israeli authorities accepted full responsibility for the attack on the UN post at Khiyam and apologized for what they say was an “operational level” mistake, the spokesman added in a statement.

But he added: “The Board did not have access to operational or tactical level IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) commanders involved in the incident, and was therefore unable to determine why the attacks on the UN position were not halted despite repeated demarches to the Israeli authorities from UN personnel, both in the field and at Headquarters.” 

Immediately after the attack with a 500-kilogram, precision-guided aerial bomb on 25 July, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed “deep sorrow.”

On the day that the four observers – from Austria, Canada, China and Finland – were killed, the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) said 21 strikes were made within 300 metres of the patrol base, with the UN protesting each one to the IDF. UN Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown also made several calls to Israel’s UN mission.

After UNIFIL headquarters lost contact with the base, it coordinated safe passage for two armoured personnel carriers which pushed through and discovered the shelter collapsed and the four observers dead. Despite repeated requests to the IDF to desist, firing was maintained during the rescue operation and continued to strike near UNIFIL positions, UN officials said at the time.

The Security Council called on Israel to conduct a comprehensive inquiry and Mr. Annan suggested a joint UN-Israeli investigation.

Today’s statement said the Board’s report concluded that all standard UN operating procedures had been followed and there was no additional action UN personnel could have taken that would have avoided the outcome.

Mr. Annan once again paid tribute to the four who gave their lives in the cause of peace and reiterated his heartfelt condolences to their families.


----------



## Kat Stevens (30 Sep 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> Well the last time I commented on this topic I got sent to the 'time out box' so I'll cut the profanities and just say this: with the sophistication in the IDF arsenal and the repeated phone calls by the UN observers to the IDF, "Map error" sounds about as plausible as Janet Jackson explaining her "wordrobe malfunction"  :



Okay, given. It still doesn't explain why those blueberries were still there.  Manure contacting a rotary oscillator is an area weapon with a 360 degree blast radius.  When there is no peace to keep, the blue hats should deedee on down the road.


----------



## Bartok5 (30 Sep 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> Well the last time I commented on this topic I got sent to the 'time out box' so I'll cut the profanities and just say this: with the sophistication in the IDF arsenal and the repeated phone calls by the UN observers to the IDF, "Map error" sounds about as plausible as Janet Jackson explaining her "wordrobe malfunction"  :



X2

I went through 13 weeks of BOTC, 9 months of French Language Training, then 7 months of Phase 2 through 4 Infantry Officer training with "Wolf".  I went on to serve with him as a fellow "subbie" in 2 VP for 3 years.  Then we served together again in 3 PPCLI.  

I attended his memorial service in Kingston a few months ago, and then I had the honour of carrying my friend's remains to his final resting place the next day.

I am not bitter, but nor am I a fool.  The IDF are responsible for the direct and deliberate PGM targeting of that UN installation, and "maps" are not the issue.   All concerned had been there long enough to know who was who, and who was where.   

Just say'in.....


----------



## Gunner (30 Sep 2006)

> The IDF are responsible for the direct and deliberate PGM targeting of that UN installation, and "maps" are not the issue.



Mark, I agree but do not let the UN off either, they have a responsibility to remove unarmed MILOBS once the situation begins to deteriorate.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Sep 2006)

Gunner said:
			
		

> ........do not let the UN off either, they have a responsibility to remove unarmed MILOBS once the situation begins to deteriorate.



Question is:  "At what time is that decision made?"  Who can accurately predict the future and forsee to what level of escalation the situation may take?


----------



## Kat Stevens (30 Sep 2006)

Gunner said:
			
		

> Mark, I agree but do not let the UN off either, they have a responsibility to remove unarmed MILOBS once the situation begins to deteriorate.




This is all I'm sayin'.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (30 Sep 2006)

Mark C,

  Nice to see you could be with him at the end and give him the dignity and final gesture of carring him, a true friend you are.

  Well said on the map issue, as a FAC one does not use maps once you are targeting all day around the same very visible object. Maps is bull, this was as Mark C has said a deliberate targeting. I wonder and I am really speculating now if it had anything to do with the nationality of the 4th UNMO (Chinese) they have been known to transfer int to the other side in the past and have gotten a rocket up the arse for it. Why else would they be targeted? I guess we will never know.


----------



## Gunner (30 Sep 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Question is:  "At what time is that decision made?"  Who can accurately predict the future and forsee to what level of escalation the situation may take?



According to cbc.ca timeline:

Israel began air strikes and artillery attacks on 12 July.  17 July, Israel begins limited ground operations in southern Lebanon.  20 July size of ground operations increase in Southern Lebanon.  Ground operations increase each day of the operation...leading up to 25 July.  

MILOBS are unarmed and their mandate was to observe and report on the stablity of the situation between Israel and Lebanon.  Once violence erupts, particularly the large scale operations conducted by both, the UN should have withdrawn them.  I wasn't there so I'm being an armchair general but in my opinion, the situation was deteriorating rapidly.


----------



## Cloud Cover (30 Sep 2006)

Are we not conducting our own independent investigation? I thought our guy had intimated that things were not 100% at or around) the post in the days before the attack?


----------



## 3rd Herd (26 Jul 2007)

Mods feel free to move
The Usual Disclaimer:
Embassy, July 25th, 2007
NEWS STORY
By Lee Berthiaume
Fallen Peacekeeper Lost in the Shuffle 
While the UN remembers four peacekeepers killed in Lebanon last year, a proposal that Canadian Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener receive a posthumous medal has been subject to an "administrative error."  

A commemoration ceremony will be held outside the UN Observer post in Lebanon this morning where four peacekeepers, including a Canadian, were killed by an Israeli bomb exactly one year ago. 

A plaque bearing the names of Canadian Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, Major Hans Peter Lang of Austria, Major Zhaoyu Du of China and Lt. Jarno Tapio Makinen of Finland will be unveiled during the ceremony outside UN Observation post Khiam. 

The post, located about 10 kilometres from where the Lebanese, Israeli and Syrian borders meet, was destroyed during the war between Israeli Defence Forces and Hezbollah fighters on July 25, 2006. 

At the time, it was reported that Israeli forces were repeatedly warned they were attacking a UN post, but failed to stop their attacks. 

In addition, there were allegations immediately after the bombing by then-UN secretary-general Kofi Annan and Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's wife that the post was intentionally targeted, possibly because it was reporting Israeli troop movement in the area. 

While an Israeli investigation into the incident found that inaccurate maps were the cause of the confusion, a Canadian investigation is still underway. 

The UN appears to have accepted Israel's explanation, despite reports last year that Israeli officials had hindered UN investigators. 

"The IDF has admitted that the bomb which destroyed the patrol base was dropped by an IDF aircraft and accepted responsibility for the incident which it has maintained was due to an operational error," said a UN press release about the commemoration ceremony. 

Families of the fallen peacekeepers are expected to attend, as are ambassadors from the four countries. 

While the UN will be honouring its fallen peacekeepers today, a retired colonel has recommended that Maj. Hess-von Kruedener be posthumously awarded a medal for bravery. 

On Aug. 9, 2006, retired colonel Michel Drapeau sent a letter to Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier recommending the major for the Meritorious Service Cross. 

"Despite knowing that he might be severely injured or killed, he remained at his UN post continuing to valiantly and steadfastly perform his duties in an outstandingly professional manner in the service of the UN and humanity," the letter reads. 

"In the process, he brought great honour to the Canadian Forces and the military profession." 

Yet it was not until last week that the Canadian Forces confirmed it had received the recommendation, which Mr. Drapeau, who retired in 1992 as executive secretary at National Defence Headquarters, called unusual. 

Given the length of time the military has been investigating Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's case, as well as the potential impacts on relations with Israel and the UN depending on the investigation's results, Mr. Drapeau questioned the reason for the delay, though he acknowledged he did not pursue the matter himself. 

Military spokeswoman Capt. Holly Apostoliuk said the Chief of Defence Staff's office replies to all correspondence as a matter of courtesy. 

"If someone has not received a response, then that is an administrative oversight," she said. "If something did not happen the right way here, in response to the nominator, that's going to be rectified right away." 

Citing protection of privacy and the sensitive nature of honours and awards, Capt. Apostoliuk would not comment specifically on Maj. Hess-von Kruedener or Mr. Drapeau's letter. 

"Nominations received are certainly considered," she said. "Any nomination would be taken very seriously." 

Capt. Apostoliuk dismissed suggestions that the controversy over Israel's bombing of the Observation post, the length of time it is taking for the military to complete its investigation into the incident, and the absence of a response to Mr. Drapeau's letter were somehow linked. 

"I would be stunned if there was a relationship," she said. http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index.php?display=story&full_path=/2007/july/25/peacekeeper/


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Jul 2007)

Never mind.


----------



## Scoopster (27 Jul 2007)

Embassy, July 18th, 2007
NEWS STORY
How Canada Honours its Heroes
The families of two Canadian soldiers killed overseas last year are still waiting for military reports into their respective deaths, raising questions about how Canada deals with friendly fire cases and the purpose of boards of inquiry.
By Lee Berthiaume
On a desk somewhere within National Defence Headquarters sits a report that explains how and why Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener died in Lebanon a year ago next week.

Another report, perhaps on the same desk, does the same for Private Robert Costall, who was killed in Afghanistan four months earlier.

While Israel and the United Nations completed their own studies of the events surrounding Israel's bombing of Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's UN Observation post, on July 25, 2006, within a few months of his death the Canadian military is still reviewing the results of its own board of inquiry, almost a year after his death.

At the same time, while American media were able to obtain a copy of that country's report on what happened the night of March 29, 2006, when Pte. Costall was shot in the back by an American machine gunner, the Canadian Forces has refused to reveal any information on his death.

A former Canadian Forces officer with extensive experience with boards of inquiry say those in charge are watering down the report to not only protect relations with the allied countries involved, but also to cover their backs from any negative fallout.

Meanwhile, the two men's devastated families have been left with unanswered questions and a lack of closure.

The first time Colleen McBain heard that her nephew, Pte. Costall, may have been killed by so-called friendly fire was several days after his reported death. Ms. McBain was in British Columbia with the soldier's parents when the private's wounded comrades revealed to reporters that it might have been American forces that killed him.

"We were floored, of course, because this was the first we'd heard about it," Ms. McBain said from her Thunder Bay home last week. "Just finding out about it that way was so hard."

An American soldier, Sgt. Thomas Stone, was killed by the same gunner that night, and after the news broke that the fire came from U.S. forces, the Canadian and American militaries clamped down on any further details as they launched investigations.

"It is inappropriate for us to speculate on the events of 28 March as they will be examined as part of the investigation," Brig.-Gen. David Fraser said in a statement on April 4, 2006. "Further information will be made available as appropriate once the investigations are complete."

The board of inquiry was convened on April 13, 2006, and heard from 100 witnesses over the next few weeks, said military spokesman Lt.-Col. Jamie Robertson.

That was the last anyone had heard until July 2 when the Associated Press obtained the results of the U.S. investigation through a Freedom of Information request.

The AP report said the machine gunner had fallen asleep following pitched battles and awoke to gunfire. He opened fire on Canadian troops who had come to help the Americans, killing Pte. Costall. When the gunner was told he was firing in the wrong direction, he spun the gun around and shot at American soldiers, killing Sgt. Stone.

Ms. McBain said when the American report on her nephew's death was released, she had expected the Canadian military to follow suit, but two weeks later, she's still waiting.

"We're still wondering if perhaps it was going to be appealed or what was going to happen from this point in time," she said. "We thought maybe in the next couple of days [after July 2] it would be released, but so far nothing.

"We were really disappointed that we haven't heard anything and it was just dropped because we haven't heard anything from the Canadian military."

Then late last friday, the military released the results of its investigation into the death of another Canadian, Private Mark Anthony Graham, who was killed when an American jet shot at Canadian positions by mistake, killing the former Olympian and wounding dozens of others.

The report found that the pilot was responsible because he was not using proper equipment when the preventable attack occurred.

Pte. Graham was killed on Sept. 4, 2006 during Operation Medusa, last summer's big assault in the Kandahar region, more than five months after Pte. Costall was killed.

A U.S. report made public afterwards supported the Canadian report and said the pilot's fate would be determined by his commanding officer.

Opposition defence critics, Liberal MP Denis Coderre and NDP MP Dawn Black questioned the decision to release the report late Friday afternoon on the same day media outlets were focused on the Conrad Black verdict.

"They're looking at ways to keep stories off the front pages, especially issues of deaths by friendly fire," the CBC quoted Ms. Black as saying Monday. "That's wrong. I think Canadians need to know the full details of this."

A military spokesman denied the report was released late Friday to minimize public exposure and reaction.

Lt.-Col. Robertson said it's not unusual for board of inquiry reports to have varying times between the investigation's conclusion and the report's release as it "depends on the complexity."

With the release of the American report on Pte. Costall's death, the Canadian military issued a statement saying "the responsible authorities are in the process of diligently reviewing the findings as per normal procedures."


Inquiry Reviews Go 'On and On'

Retired Col. Michel Drapeau knows all about normal procedures for military boards of inquiry.

When he retired after 34 years of service in 1992, Col. Drapeau was the executive secretary at National Defence Headquarters. He was responsible for pushing the Somalia inquiry towards becoming a reality, something he says he's not very popular for.

"I've seen more inquiries than I care to shake a stick at in my service," he says. ¬≠

After retiring, Col. Drapeau studied law and was called to the Ontario Bar in 2002. Since then he has specialized on military law, including boards of inquiry.

The lawyer says it's not the inquiry that takes a lot of time, it's the review process. The report criss-crosses the entire department, slowly working its way between relevant departments and officials. At each point, those responsible make changes in a process called "staffing."

"It just goes on and on and on," Col. Drapeau said, adding as many as 15 or 20 people can see the report.

While most boards of inquiry deal with sensitive issues, adding in a second or third country as a factor in what happened will only make things worse as more considerations need to be made. The fact that relations with allied countries is a key consideration and can delay the report's release, Col. Drapeau said.

But Col. Drapeau says politicians are not involved; rather it's internal politics that are at play. The ultimate purpose, he adds, is to ensure no one can be held responsible.

"It's their asses," he says. "And there's where time in a bureaucracy is absolute gold. They want to make sure the report doesn't come out on their shift. Small as it may be, any blame or any censure or any indirect possibility for it, that's where the wordsmithing comes into play."

As a result, time is relegated to a secondary consideration.

"The primary factor is to look behind every door and make sure every door is not only closed, but armoured in the way that they've looked at that and they've got 15 reasons as to why it is the way it is.

"It's internal politics, and there are an awful lot of internal politics. Who's going to look good? Who's going to look bad? When's a good time for it?"

But while everyone is covering themselves, and the report gets increasingly watered down, the families are left without answers.

"All of that takes a long, long time, and the process lacks sensitivity and it lacks a certain degree of elegance," Col. Drapeau says. "Nobody says 'Come on, they have families.'"

In February, military ombudsman André Marin released the results of his investigation into boards of inquiry, specifically looking at the case of a first-year officer-cadet at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ont.

While he found that the military had taken the case seriously and acted in good faith (though his study focused on the board of inquiry process only), Mr. Marin found a number of problems with the military's boards of inquiry process.

"It became clear to me that the errors that occurred in this case should not be considered completely isolated," he said in his report. "I am particularly concerned that, given the BOI's composition and training, its members were not adequately equipped to undertake their task.

"When it comes to training for Boards of Inquiry, in spite of the extremely important and complex matters they deal with, members are merely expected to fly by the seat of their pants."

Mr. Marin also raised concerns about the Canadian Forces' decision to effectively exclude the cadet's family, saying it created a cloud of suspicion about the fairness and thoroughness of the process.

"It serves no purpose to exclude CF members and their families from the Board of Inquiry process," he said. "They should be allowed to participate fully to ensure that the ultimate goal of any Board of Inquiry–the successful search for the truth–is achieved."


Delay Tarnishes Forces' Reputation

When asked whether she harboured any doubts or suspicions about the military's investigation into Pte. Costall's death, Ms. McBain said the lack of information flowing from the military and the delay "leaves so much room for people to think things like that."

Ms. McBain said the Canadian military has been very good to her family in every other respect, which has made the delay in releasing the report on her nephew's death even more mind-boggling.

That, in turn, has led to frustration.

"He was out in the field fighting in combat and he was shot in the back and nothing is done," she said. "For how long do we sit and say nothing? We just sit and we patiently wait and we patiently wait.

"I don't want his death to go unnoticed and nothing done for his son and his family," she said. "If he were walking down the street and shot, something would have been done."

Ms. McBain has been very vocal about her disgust that the American report doesn't lay any blame or recommend charges, and she said the family wants to find a way to ask for compensation, but can only do that once the Canadian report is released.

"Until we have the Canadian report to go from and go with, we really don't know," she said. "Time is passing and it's just so frustrating."

Military spokesman Capt. Kenneth Allan said the Canadian Forces has not seen the American report on Pte. Costall's death and cannot comment–a statement Col. Drapeau doesn't believe–and that the military is still reviewing the results of the board of inquiry as well as the Maj. Hess-von Kruedener report.

"We're not finished with it yet," he said. "They're reviewing it to make sure everything from the terms of reference have been answered on it. Because our ultimate goal for the BOI is to make sure this event does not occur again, the safety of the soldiers first."

Capt. Allan said the main concern for any board of inquiry is to ensure "that it never happens again," whether that be a friendly fire death or road accident.

"A board of inquiry is really looking out for the interests of the Canadian Forces and its members to ensure it doesn't happen again," he said. "I know the review process takes quite a while and everyone wants to make sure everything in the terms of reference are answered and, of course, it involves a lot of different people looking at it."

Capt. Allan couldn't say when the reports would be released, and couldn't answer why the review process is taking so long.

"That's a good question. I can't answer that."

Even when the reports are released, it's unclear how much information will be released.


Handling of Cases Questioned

While the reports on the deaths of Ptes. Costall and Graham involve only the United States, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's case is more complicated.

When hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah erupted last summer, a UN peacekeeping force was caught in the middle. Maj. Hess-von Kruedener was one of those soldiers and on July 25, 2006, he was manning observation post Khiam with three other unarmed peacekeepers charged with monitoring the Blue Line. The post was located about 10 kilometres from where the Lebanese, Israeli and Syrian borders meet.

Sometime during the day, the post came under Israeli fire. It's believed Hezbollah fighters were hiding nearby, though the UN's story changed on this matter. However, it was noted that the UN called the Israeli Defence Force several times to report their personnel were being fired upon.

Finally, an Israeli aircraft dropped a bomb on the post, which had been built in 1978, destroying it and killing Maj. Hess-von Kruedener and his three colleagues from Austria, China and Finland.

When he heard the news, UN secretary-general Kofi Annan burst from a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora and told reporters the attack was deliberate.

"I am shocked and deeply distressed by the apparently deliberate targeting by Israeli Defence Forces of a UN Observer post in southern Lebanon that has killed two UN military observers, with two more feared dead," Mr. Annan said.

It was reported Ireland, which had a senior UN peacekeeper responsible for liaising with the IDF, filed a formal complaint after the attack, though its unclear what resulted from the complaint.

Cynthia Hess-von Kruedener publicly stated she also felt the attack that killed her husband was intentional, and she demanded answers. Mrs. Hess-von Kruedener has declined interview requests, saying she is waiting for the board of inquiry report.

While Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who had been criticized for calling Israel's bombing of Lebanon in response to the Hezbollah attacks as "measured," ordered an investigation, he took a different tack from Mr. Annan and Mrs. Hess-von Kruedener.

"We want to find out why this United Nations post was attacked and also why it remained manned during what is now, more or less, a war during obvious danger to these individuals," Mr. Harper told reporters. "I think this event is obviously a terrible tragedy," he said. "But that doesn't change the right of a country to defend itself against terrorists and violent attacks."

The thought that Canada would cover up the real circumstances behind Israel's attack on the observation post to save relations with the Middle East country raises serious questions about its handling of friendly fire cases.

The UN and Israel launched their own investigations as well and completed their reports within a few months. The Israeli report, obtained by the Jerusalem Post, apparently blamed "serious professional errors," including faulty maps, despite the post's age and repeated warnings from the Irish peacekeeper, something the report apparently never mentions.

UN officials, meanwhile, were reported as saying the IDF had hampered investigation efforts and said Israeli officials ignored warnings they were targeting the observation post. However, in a prepared statement, a spokesman for Mr. Annan said the board of inquiry "notes that the Israeli authorities have accepted full responsibility for the incident, and apologized to the UN for what they say was an 'operational level' mistake."

The inquiry into Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's death commenced on Sept. 13, 2006, and heard from 50 witnesses, Lt.-Col. Robertson said, adding that both inquiries are technically still up and running.

Because the Canadian report on Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's death deals with the UN and Israel, "we are not allowed to disclose certain information," Capt. Allan said. "So when a document does not come, whether it's through Access to Information or whatever, I think it's going to be pretty severely severed [censored]."

Capt. Allan said while the UN and Israel provided copies of their reports to the Canadian Forces, board members were not allowed to interview certain officials from those two entities.

An Access to Information request filed by Embassy in January asking for all information regarding Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's death resulted in the release of documents outlining the difficulties experienced in recovering and identifying his remains, the repatriation plans, and terms of reference for the board of inquiry. The documents did not include any evidence presented at the board of inquiry, nor any contact or reports dealing with Israel's role in his death. Embassy has filed a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner.

Capt. Allan said he understands the pain Mrs. Hess-von Kruedener is going through with the answers she is seeking, but that ensuring such an incident doesn't happen again is the main priority.

That, says retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis Mackenzie, is wrong.

"The people who are the real folks of concern are the family," he said. "That's what's really important. It's not the colleagues or the media. It's the families."

Maj.-Gen. Mackenzie said he understands the military's desire to run the reports through lawyers and other high-ranking officials to ensure precedent is being set and all potentially libellous issues are addressed.

"The fact is, it takes a significant amount of time, especially on international cases, for people to ensure they are not establishing precedence and they're concerned about the libel issue and all of those factors that the bureaucratic side of the house can come up with," he said. "Once you go across borders, then that lines up another phalanx of lawyers."

However, there is the threat that the military being "much too thorough," he said, and if the system is flawed, then it should be fixed.

And above all else, the families should be told the truth.

"If that's known, than ethically, they should be made aware."


----------



## George Wallace (27 Jul 2007)

So Scoopster?

Is that your article, or not?  We like people to give credit to the 'authors' here, or at least credit the publication and include a link.


----------



## Scoopster (27 Jul 2007)

Yes it is. Someone had asked about our investigation so I thought I would add to the debate.

The story can be found at:
http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index.php?display=story&full_path=/2007/july/18/heroes/


----------



## Old Sweat (27 Jul 2007)

Whoever wrote it is either careless or playing with the facts. Take the following:

When he retired after 34 years of service in 1992, Col. Drapeau was the executive secretary at National Defence Headquarters. He was responsible for pushing the Somalia inquiry towards becoming a reality, something he says he's not very popular for.

As Drapeau retired from the Public Service in 1992 (he had already retired from the CF to take up the civilian post), 
he must have been pushing the Somalia inquiry toward becoming a reality from outside the department. That is not clear from the paragraph or the one that precedes it: "Retired Col. Michel Drapeau knows all about normal procedures for military boards of inquiry."


----------



## armyvern (27 Jul 2007)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Whoever wrote it is either careless or playing with the facts. Take the following:
> 
> When he retired after 34 years of service in 1992, Col. Drapeau was the executive secretary at National Defence Headquarters. He was responsible for pushing the Somalia inquiry towards becoming a reality, something he says he's not very popular for.
> 
> ...



How true that. He retired before the CAR even deployed to Somalia in late Dec 1992. It is certainly misleading not to make that fact very very clear.


----------



## The Bread Guy (28 Jul 2007)

Scotty said:
			
		

> Interesting video that shows how close some of the Hezbollah bunkers were to the UN positions.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0VeMV-BAaY&NR
> (about two minutes into it)



FYI to anyone trying to link to this video - don't work no more.


----------

