Who broke the law in Afghan attack

NY Times:

American marines reacted to a bomb ambush with excessive force in eastern Afghanistan last month, hitting groups of bystanders and vehicles with machine-gun fire in a series of attacks that covered 10 miles of highway and left 12 civilians dead, including an infant and three elderly men, according to a report published by an Afghan human rights commission on Saturday.

...

In its report, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission condemned the suicide bomb attack that started the episode, striking a Marine Special Operations unit convoy and slightly wounding one American. And the report said there might also have been small arms fire directed at the convoy immediately after the blast. But it said the response was disproportionate, especially given the obviously nonmilitary nature of the marines’ targets long after the ambush.

“In failing to distinguish between civilians and legitimate military targets, the U.S. Marine Corps Special Forces employed indiscriminate force,” the report said. “Their actions thus constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian standards.”

In the weeks immediately after the episode, the United States military began an investigation, and it is now exploring possible criminal charges, senior military officials said. The marines involved in the episode are being kept in Afghanistan, but the rest of their 120-man company has been pulled out of the country.

[The Washington Post reported late Saturday that a preliminary United States investigation had found that the people who were killed and injured were civilians, and that there was no evidence that the marines involved had come under small arms fire after the bombing.

[The preliminary findings were reported by Army Maj. Gen. Francis H. Kearney III, the commander of Special Operations troops in the Middle East and Central Asia, who ordered a formal investigation in March, The Post reported.]

...

Of course one of the reasons the Marines failed to distinguish between civilian and military targets is that the enemy deliberately violated the Geneva Conventions by failing to wear a distinguishing uniform and camouflaged himself as a civilian.

While the report condemns the initial attack it does not speak to the obvious war crime by the enemy that precipitated the civilian deaths. The international failure to call the enemy on this tactic has endangered civilians and resulted in many civilian deaths and the primary responsibility for them should be on the enemy. Continuing to ignore that war crime will only result in more deaths of innocents.

A separate issue is whether the action of the Marines may have violated their rules of engagement. In counterinsurgency warfare, not shooting is sometimes preferred and the Marines need to explain why they perceived the threat in the way that they responded to it.