Under the Fog of War


By Richard Cohen

Tuesday, February 12, 2002; Page A25


Carl Sandburg's fog comes on little cat feet. The fog of war comes differently -- on the heavy boots of soldiers. It is these boots that allegedly walked across the backs of Afghan prisoners, in some cases cracking ribs of men who, it later turned out, were American allies. The imprisonment was a mistake. The torture, if true, was a crime.

Both The Washington Post and the New York Times report the same set of facts: Afghans friendly to the central government were mistakenly attacked in the village of Uruzgan by U.S. forces. Twenty-one of the villagers were killed. Twenty-seven others were taken prisoner. They say they were beaten, kicked and imprisoned in a "cage."

Yes, I know, the aforementioned fog of war and all of that. Yet as the fog lifts a bit, we are beginning to see some incidents that threaten to take the luster off what has been a marvelous achievement by the U.S. military in Afghanistan. It is one thing to bomb or attack on the basis of misinformation. It is quite another thing to abuse prisoners captured as a result.

It is also quite another thing to threaten the life of an American journalist. This, though, is what happened outside the village of Zhawar, where, it seems, yet another mistake was made. This time a U.S. Hellfire missile, fired from one of the CIA's Predator drones, hit a group of suspected al Qaeda leaders. One of the victims was tall, as is Osama bin Laden. It turned out, however, to be local villagers.

Once again, mistakes happen. But this time the mistake was compounded by a coercive attempt to keep journalists from learning the truth. My Post colleague Doug Struck was restrained at gunpoint by American soldiers. "This is an ongoing military operation," said the commanding officer, who would not give his name. "If you go further, you would be shot."

Now, who is this commander who would shoot an American journalist merely for doing his job? What is his name, and was he authorized to threaten Struck's life? Is it the Pentagon's policy to use force to stop a reporter from gathering the facts? What country is this, anyhow?

Please, spare me your letters and e-mails about the realities of war. We are not talking here about the understandable overreaction that occurs when people are scared, adrenaline is flowing or lives are on the line. To save a colleague -- to save any innocent person -- I would not hesitate to encourage cooperation with a good kick.

But the Afghans are alleging gratuitous beatings administered after the non-battle -- these were friendlies, remember -- was over. They are saying they were mistreated after they were removed to the American prison. "They were beating us on the head and back and ribs," one of the former prisoners told The Post. "They were punching us with fists, kicking me with their feet," he added. This is when some of the men had their ribs broken.

This is similar to the allegations made by lawyers for John Walker Lindh, the American who enlisted to fight with the Taliban. His attorneys said he was abused after being captured, at one time stripped naked, bound hand and foot and imprisoned in a metal container. I know it's hard to work up a lot of sympathy for Lindh, but his values are not the issue here. Ours are.

And this is what the world is questioning. We are conducting both our foreign policy and the war with a kind of swagger and, sometimes, with not much thought. Policies are announced and then more or less rescinded. After all the controversy over military tribunals, Lindh is being prosecuted in a civilian court. After effectively giving the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war the brushoff, the Bush administration said it would, after all, comply.

As far as I'm concerned, the war against al Qaeda is still about revenge. I want to kill those guys, both to even the score and to ensure that no one again attacks Americans. But it is also a war about American values, and these do not include torture or arrogance or the use of the military to threaten the life of a journalist. A reporter shouldn't have to watch his back as well as his front.

Some of what has been reported so far are allegations. But the accounts are credible, certainly worth investigating, and raise the specter of something much worse happening -- My Lai comes to mind -- if American soldiers are led to believe they can do pretty much what they want. Even in war there are distinctions. It is one thing to fight the enemy. It is quite another to fight like him.



© 2002 The Washington Post Company