Seven days of uncertainty

After a week of claims, counterclaims, and confusion over an SAS raid that some say has eroded public trust in New Zealand’s armed forces, the waters are now so muddied that an independent inquiry is the only way to determine the truth.

It has been seven days since the explosive - and now contested - claims from authors Nicky Hager and Jon Stephenson that six civilians were killed during a botched SAS-led raid on two Afghani villages. It has been seven days of scrambling from the Defence Force, back and forth accusations of inaccuracies and war crimes, and little reassurance from the Government. At the end of those seven days, the New Zealand public is still in the dark, forced now to consider claim and counterclaim over any clear, independent review of the facts. The conflicting accounts from those supposedly in the know, from SAS members to then- Defence Minister Wayne Mapp, mean an independent inquiry is the only way to definitively prove, either way, what happened.

During an extraordinary press conference on Monday, Defence Force chief Lieutenant-General Tim Keating attempted to dispel the claims. Instead, his acknowledgement that civilians may in fact have been killed, after years of denials, only added to the appearance of what those who have a firm and positive position on the book’s claims would call a cover up. The fact that those civilians may have been hit by fire from a US Apache helicopter that accidentally shot a building due to an equipment malfunction is an important distinction. Keating’s claim that Kiwi soldiers had never operated in the villages named in the book is concerning, and needs to be addressed.

‘‘The clear contrast to me between the book and what actually happened during Operation Burnham was in all respects the conduct of the New Zealand ground forces was exemplary,’’ Keating said.

That may be true. The authors had a duty of care to ensure that, given the explosive nature of their allegations and the flow on effect they could have, their research and findings were as iron clad as possible. Their claims, just like the counter-claims of the Defence Force, need to be scrutinised to determine their accuracy. However, the seven days of confusion shows we are beyond the point of taking in good faith what we are told by those involved. The claims of both sides need to be considered by an independent body. Pressure is mounting on the Government to approve an inquiry into the raid.

Labour leader Andrew Little stood by his decision to back an inquiry on Tuesday, saying it was necessary ‘‘for the sake of their reputation and New Zealand’s reputation’’. He’s right. Critics will say an inquiry is a waste of money. They will say that war is an ugly thing, and that civilian casualties are an unfortunate reality of conflict. But anything other than a fully independent investigation into the operation will only serve to give the impression that the public has been deliberately misled. In a nation that highly values the integrity of its armed forces, the impact of that cannot be dismissed. - Fairfax NZ