SAS Death Squads: NATO's Phoenix Program in Afghanistan?

A small number of NATO's Special Forces stand accused of war crime murders in Afghanistan. Based on what I was told during my British army service in 2012 Helmand and the public reports I've read since, I've no doubt those murders did occur. The intention of this report is to defend those frontline operators regardless of their crimes (with caveats*) and instead place blame where it truly lies - with the very highest echelons of those soldiers' chain-of-command. Hold the Generals & Government Ministers to account and such practices would stop overnight.

Crown Immunity

Members of the British and Australian Special Air Service (SAS) are being investigated for the extra judicial killings (EJKs) of detained prisoners in Afghanistan – summary executions, murders. The only reason that's happening is because other Special Forces (SF) soldiers have been reporting the perpetrators since 2011 (documented below). They were rejecting such self-defeating tactics and refusing to remain complicit-by-silence in what were brutal murders. One of those whistleblowers, Australian commando Kevin Frost, paid with his life. Another SAS whistleblower medic Dusty Miller is fighting for his own survival against ongoing establishment retribution. In March 2012 Dusty reported the EJK of an Afghan farmer to his senior regimental medical officer as soon as he returned from a mission where a wounded prisoner he was treating was taken away by a senior officer who stomped him to death, leaving boot imprints on the corpse's chest. The main reason these matters have not been addressed before is because the EJKs were NATO’s unofficial policy and There Is A Massive Cover-up Going On. EJKs were implemented by the most senior NATO commanders and the perpetrators were rewarded with medals and a blessing from the highest echelon of the British & Australian Commonwealth militaries – the British Crown. That blessing, inferred by a handshake between the old queen and SAS Sergeant Ben Roberts-Smith VC in 2013 gave him effective Crown Immunity. That immunity comes from an Oath sworn by all British Commonwealth soldiers, police, politicians and judges:

"I do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Her Heirs and Successors"

Sgt Ben Roberts-Smith VC meets Queen Elizabeth II

That Crown Immunity was renewed for ex-British General David Richards (now a Baron in the House of Lords) in 2023. Britain’s new monarch Charles Mountbatten-Windsor asked Richards to carry his Sword of Spiritual Justice at the coronation. That was just a few months after the Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan (IIA) began into EJKs that occurred under Richards command as Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS 2010-13). In the months before the IIA was announced Richards went from having one of the longest registers of interests in the House of Lords to having one of the shortest via a slew of resignations and company closures. Richards resigned two company directorships (here and here) in February 2022 and dissolved his and his wife’s company Palliser Associates in September 2022. He appears to have been clearing the decks before the IIA began in December 2022. Therefore in 2023 Charles Mountbatten-Windsor was sending a message to the police, politicians and judges responsible for enforcing the law – Richards is under the 'king's protection'. That’s even more significant because in addition to the EJKs that occurred during his 2010-13 tenure as CDS, I believe Richards instigated the first NATO EJKs in 2006. Richards was commanding ISAF (NATO’s mission in Afghanistan) on 21 August 2006 when he wrote this in his diary:

ex-General David Richards (left) carrying Charles Mountbatten-Windsor's Sword of Spiritual Justice

“The good news is that the operation I authorized yesterday was 100% successful.
Nine Taliban killed in a field in Helmand, one of them a known IED maker & commander.”

Richards didn’t describe those killed on his orders as 'enemy combatants killed in a firefight’ . He called them known individuals 'killed in a field’, a euphemism for EJKs from The Troubles, Britain’s thirty-year brutal suppression of the republican movement in the north of Ireland. Richards served three operational tours in Ireland between 1971 and 1989.

In 2016 Richards abused his role in the House of Lords by proposing the retrospective disapplication of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Laws to Britain's recent operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Richards cited flawed legal action being taken against veterans but failed to mention the families of British soldiers killed in Snatch Land Rovers (that they called 'Mobile Coffins') using ECHR Laws to hold the Ministry of Defence to account. He also failed to mention the law change he proposed would protect him from prosecution too. Richards was forced to apologise to the House of Lords' Commissioner for Standards after I reported his conflicting interests:

"... as a former serving soldier he [Richards] was one of a group of persons who could possibly benefit from retrospective disapplication of the ECHR. Lord Richards apologised for not anticipating that he might have had a declarable relevant interest... "

Report on the Conduct of Baron Richards

The Phoenix Program and NATO's Kill-Capture Missions

Between 1968 and 1972 the CIA and their proxies tortured and killed approximately 20,000-40,000 alledged enemy infiltrators during America’s war in Vietnam. It was called the Phoenix Program. Some say the CIA were brutal murderers of unarmed civilian cadre. Others called the infiltrators spies and say America was fighting fire-with-fire – using the same ruthless tactics the Viet Cong had during the 1968 Tet Offensive. Regardless of any legal or moral judgements (and with the benefit of hindsight) we know it was a failed tactic – America still lost that war. The comparison of SAS kill/capture missions to the CIA’s Phoenix Program was made by the most qualified of commentators, Frank Ledwidge. He's a British army veteran, barrister and lecturer who was the official justice advisor in Helmand for seven months from June 2007 (just after General David Richards’ 06/07 tenure as ISAF commander). In his 2013 book Investment in Blood: The True Cost of Britain's Afghan War Ledwidge wrote:

“A new military approach was introduced: the ‘capture or kill’ policy…
there was at least as much killing as there was capturing. This tactic, like so much else
in the current phase of the Afghan War, was more than a little redolent of the desperate days
of the Vietnam War, when the CIA instituted Operation Phoenix to target key Viet Cong officials.”

Frank Ledwidge's books Investment in Blood and Losing Small Wars are essential reading, the most comprehensive and honest accounts of Britain’s occupation of Helmand. In 2017 Ledwidge replied to my tweet (pictured right) saying:

"Loads more on war crimes to come out idc [in due course], SF [Special Forces] got a free ride"

Investment in Blood: The True Cost of Britain's Afghan War

Perhaps the most startling references to the kill / capture missions were made by veteran and later government minister for veterans Johnny Mercer in his book We Were Warriors. As an SF operations officer in 2008 Helmand Mercer wasn’t on the ground; his was a support role based in a headquarters. When describing the missions he appears to implicate himself, Prime Ministers and government ministers with knowledge of EJKs in real time, simply by their presence in the Special Forces’ operations room:

"In almost all cases these individuals resisted strongly, and attempted detentions
became killings. It would be inappropriate to outline the methods employed... ”

"For a start, as a task force we killed a lot of people, and I had a role in that...
Our targets were f***ing bad people, and there was nothing wrong with ending their lives."

“Government ministers - including the Prime Minister - and other political decision makers would regularly visit our compound... I was impressed by then Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague’s capacity to absorb information. He was very sharp and asked the questioned you’d expect... David Cameron was also very good, if very tired. I fear we sent him to sleep... Gordon Brown’s visit just before I arrived apparently didn’t go so well. He asked the team to fast forward some Predator drone footage of the blokes ‘on target’ because he didn’t want to see it."

When he was veterans minister Mercer was a vocal advocate for the 2021 Overseas Operation Bill proposing a five year time limit on war crimes prosecutions. But he also admits that in 2019 he was shown a memo from 2011 in which a SF commander alleged SAS EJKs were occuring. The memo cited ‘rumours’ among elite troops about the SAS “conducting summary executions of supposed Taliban affiliates” (Source Declassified UK). That 2011 memo reported:

“In some instances this has involved the deliberate killing [of] individuals after they have been restrained by [SAS soldiers] and the subsequent fabrication of evidence to suggest a lawful killing in self defence.”

Johnny Mercer appearing at an IIA hearing. Note his book implicating government ministers is on the desk as Mercer gives his evidence.

The 2011 SAS memo detailing SAS extra judicial executions

"Mr Mercer repeatedly refused to reveal the names of the "multiple officers" who he said had approached him during his time as a backbench MP [2015-July 2019], and privately warned him there might be truth to the allegations of extrajudicial killings by special forces. Defending his decision not to disclose the names, he told the inquiry last month: "The one thing you can hold on to is your integrity and I will be doing that with these individuals." (BBC source)

The kill / capture euphemism features heavily in a frontline SAS soldier's EJK confession that removes any doubt that summary executions did occur, as read out to the ongoing IIA inquiry by the Daily Mail's Mark Nicol:

“… when I get my orders that night, before I go on that helicopter, my orders are, right, this is the target set, this is where we are going… and then the Officer Commanding open brief is 'kill, capture, it's not the other way round, it's kill, capture, and that's what our orders are at Tier 1 level, it is kill, capture... it is not a secret I'd say, it is kill, capture, them main words, kill, capture, it was never the other way round." ( IIA YouTube)

“I took him back in, he was a major commander, I got it, I thought I’d fucked up because my [team leader] was like [inaudible] that, [redacted] ‘take him back in and do a search’, I sort of read between the lines there, done what I needed to do and he was like ‘yeah’, fucking… pulled a pistol out on the search so I, that was my thing behind it. And then when we went to the bar afterwards, I went quietly, I was like that ‘have fucked up hereby doing what I did?’ But he went ‘No, I will never give you anyone to take anywhere if it isn’t for a reason’ …we’re hunting these men individually, hunting them so [inaudible].” ( IIA YouTube)

People must appreciate the institutional pressure to follow orders regardless of legality when deployed on operations. This SAS veteran confessing to executing a prisoner is probably an outstanding soldier, pressured by his Officer Commanding and Team Leader to commit murder. The fact he told a journalist about it shows he regrets that decision and does have a moral compass. 'Just following orders' must be considered a legal defence because refusing illegal orders on the frontline can be very harmful to a soldier's wellbeing. I know that personally from my experience after refusing to stone Afghan children in 2012 Helmand.

Frontline Reality
The SAS EJKs only occurred after they were placed in the most abhorrent of situations - working for corrupt governments with dysfunctional judicial systems. Prisoners handed over to the Afghan police were often freed without charge – via bribes, connections, corruption and culture. Known bomb makers kept returning to the battlefield. They had two choices: accept that captured enemy forces / affiliates would return to the battlefield time-and-time again, or remove them from the battlefield in a permanent sense. In his diary published here a medic attached to British Special Forces states:

"Two Watch List 2 Taliban captured locally by the ANP [Afghan National Police] but taken to Lash [Lashkar Gah]. Due to be released due to lack of evidence. We will watch and redetain when released. Being on the watchlist is enough for us. They will be TQ’d [Tactically Questioned] and taken to Torchlight in Bastion. Hope we get them."

It confirms known Taliban / affiliates who were arrested but then released by Afghan security forces continued to be targeted by NATO kill / capture operations. The Torchlight temporary prisoner holding facility in Camp Bastion was the only option left for them to remove known insurgents from the battlefield. But I know from my guard duty there in July 2012 that Torchlight wasn't accepting new prisoners because they had the same problem - nowhere to send them! We didn't have prisoner-of-war camps so that left the SAS with one option - remove captured enemy from the battle space permanently. Permanently as in dead, executed in cold blood. That might appear to be the nature of war to some but these men were being arrested in their homes, often dragged out of bed in front of their family. They may have been the enemy but they were not armed or a threat - they were prisoners securely detained in our custody by an overwhelming force.

Medic: On Return from Afghanistan I Was Never the Same, I Was Broken

Internal British SF emails from February 2011 reveal tensions between SAS soldiers and their Afghan SF allies escalated to ‘an exceptionally hostile atmosphere, with a pistol drawn at one stage’ after the Afghan SF had protested about SAS EJKs. The Commanding Officer of the Afghan unit was clear that those killed were ‘teachers and farmers’, and said that ‘2 men were shot trying to run away, and that the other 2 men were “assassinated” on target after they had already been detained and searched.’ Emails between two British SF officers discussing the same operation on 16 February 2011 are revealing:

‘Is this about latest massacre! I’ve heard a couple of rumours.’ (Source: Unredacted).

* CAVEATS: While the EJKs may have started with senior insurgent commanders or bomb-makers, it appears to have first been extended to anyone affiliated to the Taliban, then extended to any fighting age males which ultimately led to merciless revenge killings by the likes of Ben Roberts-Smith VC. But I still say it's the Generals and Government Ministers who are responsible because they gave the perpetrators hero status and ensured the whistleblowers were ignored and abandoned. If a soldier's crimes are covered-up / endorsed by their senior commanders then those commanders accept legal responsibility for whatever was done. Hold the Generals & Government Ministers to account and EJKs would stop overnight.

Testimony at the British IIA inquiry revealed the SAS member who admitted executing an Afghan prisoner also said our Afghan SF allies who opposed EJKs were sent on a particularly deadly mission to teach them a lesson. One of the Afghan SF soldiers was KIA as a result. After NATO's 2021 exit from Afghanistan the BBC's Panorama program reported"A UK Special Forces officer personally rejected 1,585 resettlement applications from Afghans with credible links to special forces". It is alleged he was obstructing their potential appearance as witnesses to any subsequent EJK trials.

British journalist Ben Anderson highlighted another frontline reality of the SAS kill/capture missions – the repercussions suffered by frontline troops in forward operating bases. In his 2012 book No Worse Enemy (essential reading) Anderson notes “There had been a recruitment surge, as young men joined the Taliban to get their revenge. The increase in special forces’ kill-or-capture raids exacerbated the problem.” SAS veteran Tom Petch makes the same point in his outstanding 2013 film debut The Patrol. It follows a fictional British army unit in Helmand who are woken one night by an unexpected SF fire fight in a neighbouring valley. The officer calls it ‘part of kill or capture’ before a private soldier comments:

“Someone’s going to get it for that… It’s all good the SAS out there playing boy scouts,
but they’ll be gone in the morning… It means that Terry’s [Taliban] going to be pissed-off at
having their beauty sleep disturbed. They’re going to be looking for someone to take it out on.”

Tom Petch makes a historical reference to SAS kill / capture missions in his 2023 book Speed, Aggression, Surprise – the definitive history of the SAS's origin in North Africa during World War Two. He states very clearly:

Rear Echelon Euphemisms

The existence of the SAS kill / capture missions was not a secret. They were front page news with a new euphamism coined for EJKs - 'remove from the battlefield'. In September 2010 the Telegraph reported:

“Quarter of Senior Taliban Killed by SAS in 'Kill or Capture' Targeting
More than sixty-five senior insurgent commanders or bomb-makers have been
'removed from the battlefield' by SAS troopers, leading to significant disruption of the insurgency"

British Defence Secretary Philip Hammond used the same phrase when visiting Camp Bastion in September 2012:

"… tracking people down and removing them from the battlefield…
… [was not the best way of finding a settlement]" - Guardian newspaper 2012

'Remove from the battlefield’ was a euphemism Hammond used to refer to the extra-judicial killings on 29 August 2012 that I think President Karzai had summoned him and the Australian minister to Kabul to speak about. Hammond's assertion that it 'was not the best way to finding a settlement' appears to be a admission, a public concession to President Karzai.

Telegraph newspaper 2010

The Cover Up & Accountability

I was told about EJKs in June 2012, a couple of months into my first operational deployment. We’d conducted one large operation (Op Shafuq) in April but nothing since; during a smoke break I asked a corporal about the low tempo. I don’t remember which euphemism he used but the meaning was clear – the SAS were busy running death squads. My memory is hazy because I immediately ended the conversation, shaking my head and saying “I don’t want to know”. I chose to ignore war crimes for my own piece of mind. We’d had SAS Bushmaster vehicles in our workshop and I secured the airfield they departed and returned to. I guarded their prisoners in Torchlight, thinking they were lucky for not being executed. I was complicit in SAS crimes by providing material support and turning a deliberate blind eye. I was a small part of the long shaft behind the tip of the spear.

Me (circled back row) in 2012 Helmand

In 2014 the Royal Military Police (RMP) were initially tasked with investigating the killings listed below that occurred during just three Deliberate Detention Operations (DDO) in 2011 Helmand (source aoav.org):

• 7th February – Nine killed
• 9th February – Eight killed, one detained
• 16th February – Four killed, one detained

The frequency and number of those deaths give context to the internal SAS emails that show officers reacted with disbelief to such reports, describing them as "quite incredible" and referring to the squadron's "latest massacre". In 2016 the RMP investigation, named Operation Northmoor, setup headquarters at one of Britain’s most beautiful but also most remote mainland RAF bases – St Mawgan in Cornwall, a couple of miles from Newquay. The investigation wound down in 2017 and closed in 2019. Its own advisor, ex-police officer Professor Sir Jon Murphy, called it "flawed and consequently ineffective".