IRAQ: The NBC footage of the apparent execution of an unarmed and wounded Iraqi prisoner by an American soldier on Monday will deny the US any propaganda value attaching to its assault on Falluja, writes Tom Clonan
The explicit images of the shooting - among a group of dead and dying Iraqis huddled on the floor of a mosque at the end of Ramadan - will send shock waves throughout the Muslim world. In the same way that images of the ritual slaughter of foreign hostages by Islamic extremists continues to shock and enrage audiences in the West, the recording of Monday's incident will provoke and radicalise Muslims throughout the Middle East.
However, unlike the calculated and cold-blooded murder of Western hostages by terrorists such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his Tawhid and Jihad accomplices, it may well be argued in any forthcoming military investigation that Monday's killing took place during the heat of battle. In mitigation, it may be pointed out by the soldier and his colleagues that the death occurred as US troops conducted intensive and hazardous building-clearance operations during the final phases of operation "Phantom Fury". In addition, in defence of the actions of the soldier involved, reference might well be made to an incident which took place earlier during the operation in which another marine fell victim to an improvised explosive device (IED) concealed about the body of an Iraqi insurgent.
The precedent generated by that incident would certainly have generated a genuine fear on the part of marines that wounded Iraqi insurgents might seek to detonate hidden IEDs - perhaps configured as explosives belts concealed under clothing - on the approach of US troops. This fear would have been reinforced by the proven suicide propensity of Iraqi insurgents engaged in car bombings and other attacks on American forces.
In such an environment, faced with an enemy with no regard for the laws of war or the rules of engagement, US soldiers on the ground in Falluja would appear to have adopted a combat posture predicated on the indiscriminate use of lethal force.
Among the key legal provisions governing the use of force in such circumstances is that of justification. In order to open fire, a soldier must believe that the target poses a threat to his or her own life or the lives of his or her comrades. In such circumstances - in the case of a wounded insurgent making a sudden or suspicious movement - one might anticipate the reflexive startled response of a soldier in opening fire, point blank, in the general direction of the target. Soldiers are trained in such scenarios to fire at the "centre of the visible mass", or torso, of the target. In Monday's incident, however, the US soldier who opened fire did not do so immediately. He opened fire after making a number of observations to his colleagues about the prisoner. In firing, he raised an automatic rifle to his shoulder, to what the military refer to as the "high-port position" and fired a deliberate shot to the head of the prisoner.
These actions will no doubt bear further scrutiny in the coming weeks. Under the legal provisions governing appropriate use of force, it will have to be determined whether the act of opening fire on this occasion was punitive rather than preventative in nature.
As the conflict in Iraq drags on and as resistance intensifies in advance of January's elections, an under-strength US force will continue to be exposed to increasing levels of physical and psychological stress. Many will succumb to what the US military refer to as combat stress reaction (CSR). The physical symptoms of CSR include hyperventilation and tachycardia along with muscle tremors and diarrhoea. The psychological symptoms are ominous and include aggressive hypervigilance and hyperarousal associated with the indiscriminate and brutal use of force. Indeed, the disinhibited use of force displayed by the US soldier on Monday's footage seems consistent with the psychological symptoms of CSR. The risk factors for CSR include repeated ambush or surprise attack along with prolonged exposure to risk of death or injury in the field - and an unpredictable exit strategy. These criteria match perfectly the profile of the US military's experience in Iraq.
As the cycle of violence in Iraq deteriorates and as hostages such as Margaret Hassan are brutally murdered, one can only hope that President Bush's cabinet reshuffle will bring about wiser counsel as to the manner in which military power is used as an instrument of US foreign policy.
Dr Tom Clonan is a retired army officer. He lectures in the School of Media, DIT