Operation Red Wings

1. Operation Red Wings Afghanistan 28 June 2005

2. Agenda • Background • Geography • Command Structure • Goal / Plan / Mission • Background information • Compromise Scenario • Options • ROE Discussion

3. Background • Operation Red Wings was a 2/3 Marine operation, that included SEALs during the opening phase. • At the time, the SEALs were part of the CJSOTF-A (Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force – Afghanistan). • Naval Special Warfare Task Unit • Seal Team • Based at Bagram Airfield. CJTF-76 CJSOTF-A NSWTU 2/3 Marines

4. Geography • Mountainous, arid country above tree line with no/little vegetation. • Hindu Kush mountain range along Pakistan border.

5. Geography

7. Goal • Disrupt anti-Coalition militia (ACM) activity in the region • Focus on the “Mountain Tigers” led by Ahmad Shah. • Estimated 8-200 ACM members. • “Capture or kill” mission • Ahmad Shah then considered a high-value Taliban target in this area due to IED strikes.

8. The Plan (Slide 1 of 3) • 2/3 Marines original plan: • Six-man scout/sniper team occupy observation posts under cover of darkness. • Main assault would occur at night. • Remain in area for weeks conducting various missions (patrolling, HA, medical). • No illumination, so required SOF helicopter assets. • Plan changed…….

9. The Plan (Slide 2 of 3) • Helicopter assets available to the Marines could not operate in low illumination environments. • To get SOF helicopters, SOF commanders wanted SOF ground force involvement . • Surveillance team changed to 4 SEALs.

10. The Plan (Slide 3 of 3) • Insert SR team at night by helicopter. • Insertion point within 1 mile of a populated area. • SEALs would then conduct the direct action portion of the raid, and Marines would provide cordon security. SEAL Pre-Mission Briefing Map

11. The Mission • 27 June 27 2005 -- “Redwings is a go!” • 4 SEALs inserted by helicopter at night on 27-28 June 2005. • Established initial observation post. • Settled in to begin their mission.

12. SEAL Background • Team members: • LT Michael Murphy • HM2 Marcus Luttrell • STG2 Matthew “Axe” Axelson • GM2 Danny Dietz • Previous engagements with anti-coalition militia (ACM) members in Afghanistan. • Previous combat experience in Iraq.

13. Compromise • SEALs discovered by three unarmed civilians with around one hundred goats • One youth: approximately 14 years old. • “No Taliban.” • Luttrell believes that they are goat herders from high country. What do you do?

14. Options Discussed • Option 1: Kill the civilians Problem: What to do with the goats & means of disposing of the bodies or others coming to look for them. • Option 2: Turn them loose Problem: Possibly disclosing position & jeopardizing mission.

15. Discussion Why vote?

16. Decision and Results • The vote: • Dietz abstains; Murphy discussed both sides; • “Axe” says kill; Luttrell says free; • Goat herders released –SEALs move to a better defensive position and prepared for possible compromise of their mission. • Approx 40 minutes later…SEALs attacked by between 30 and 40 ACM fighters.

17. Questions What training could have resolved this discussion? ROE? Law of Armed Conflict? Other? Who should have provided that training? Judge Advocate? Commander?

18. ROE • 2005 OEF mission ROE • Required positive ID and “LIT” • Slightly different from OIF ROE • Always retained the right of self defense • According to Luttrell “Our rules of engagement in Afghanistan specified that we could not shoot, kill, or injure unarmed civilians.”

19. OEF ROE Particulars • PID: A reasonable certainty that the proposed target is a legitimate military target. • “likely and identifiable threat” - certain enemy forces who pose a likely and identifiable threat to friendly forces could be considered hostile and engaged and destroyed. Source: Legal Lessons Learned From Iraq and Afghanistan Vol 1 (p. 96 & 100)

20. Luttrell’s Thoughts on ROE • Liberal politicians and media create ROE. • “However, from the standpoint of the U.S. soldier, Ranger, SEAL, Green Beret, or whatever, those ROE represent a very serious conundrum. We understand we must obey them because they happen to come under the laws of the country we are sworn to serve. But they represent a danger to us; they undermine our confidence on the battlefield in the fight against world terror. Worse yet, they make us concerned, disheartened, and sometimes hesitant.”

21. Luttrell’s Thoughts on ROE • “The truth is, any government that thinks war is somehow fair and subject to rules like a baseball game probably should not get into one” • “Faced with the murderous cutthroats of the Taliban, we are not fighting under the rules of Geneva IV article 4. We are fighting under the rules of Article 223.556mm…”

22. Luttrell’s Thoughts on ROE • Developed by politicians: - “the ever-intrusive rules of engagement” - “very long way from the battlefield “ “And those ROE are very specific: we may not open fire until we are fired upon or have positively identified our enemy and have proof of his intentions”

23. Blogs/Book Reviews • A review of a wide variety of blogs demonstrated a widespread perception that ROE hinders mission accomplishment • Many soldiers “added” that ROE often cost American lives • A few soldiers took offense at placing the blame on ROE – and indicated that even “regular” soldiers practiced what to do if compromised – a common occurrence in that terrain.

24. Rest of the Story… • LT Murphy used cell phone to call for help • Awarded Medal of Honor • Murphy, Dietz & Axelson were killed • Dietz and Axelson each awarded the Navy Cross • Rescue team killed by RPG fired by hostile forces. • Most SEALs killed in single incident. • Luttrell escaped and was rescued by a local Afghan shepherd. • Evaded ACM forces for several days before returning to US forces

28. April 16, 2008 • Ahmad Shah (AKA Mullah Ismail) killed in a shootout with Pakistani police.

29. Conclusion • Outcome was not a result of the ROE. • Under the circumstances, killing the civilians would have been a crime. • Pre-mission legal training was conducted; commanders must train ROE. • Results due more to lack of proper communications, planning, Command and Control, and “fog of war.”

31. Questions