WASHINGTON — Afghan forces who reported being under Taliban fire requested the U.S. airstrike that killed 22 people at a medical clinic in northern Afghanistan over the weekend, the top commander of American and coalition forces in Afghanistan said Monday, correcting an initial U.S. statement that the strike had been launched because U.S. forces were threatened.
The strike wasn’t sought by U.S. forces, Gen. John F. Campbell said at a hastily arranged Pentagon news conference.
“We have now learned that on Oct. 3, Afghan forces advised that they were taking fire from enemy positions and asked for air support from U.S. forces,” Campbell said. “An airstrike was then called to eliminate the Taliban threat and several civilians were accidentally struck. This is different from the initial reports, which indicated that U.S. forces were threatened and that the airstrike was called on their behalf.”
The clinic was operated by the medical charity Doctors Without Borders. The attack killed at least 22 people and wounded dozens more, setting the hospital on fire.
In response to Campbell’s remarks, the organization’s general director, Christopher Stokes, said the U.S. had admitted that it attacked the facility.
“The U.S. military remains responsible for the targets it hits, even though it is part of a coalition,” Stokes said. “There can be no justification for this horrible attack. With such constant discrepancies in the U.S. and Afghan accounts of what happened, the need for a full transparent independent investigation is ever more critical.”
On Saturday, Afghan officials said Taliban fighters were in the hospital at the time of the airstrike, but that is in dispute.
On Sunday, NATO, under whose umbrella the U.S.-led coalition operates in Afghanistan, issued a statement saying U.S. forces had conducted an airstrike against “insurgents who were directly firing upon U.S. service members” who were advising Afghan forces in Kunduz. The statement also said NATO was undertaking a preliminary assessment of the incident by a multi-national “casualty assessment team,” and that it would produce initial results “in a matter of days.”
The U.S. military is doing its own standard investigation under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Campbell’s revised account does not clarify whether the clinic was targeted in error or whether U.S. military personnel followed procedure. They are required to verify that the target of the requested airstrike is valid before firing. Asked about those procedures, Campbell said he would not discuss the rules of engagement under which U.S. forces operate.
Asked whether he could confirm in general terms whether hospitals and other civilian facilities like mosques and schools are off limits to U.S. airstrikes, Campbell replied, “Very broadly, we do not strike those kind of targets, absolutely.”
He declined to say who authorized the strike. He said it was carried out by an AC-130 gunship, which is an Air Force special operations aircraft sometimes used against close-range ground targets. The aircraft is armed with side-firing weapons including 40mm and 105mm cannons and a 25mm Gatling gun.
