From [HERE] A U.S. drone strike in Kabul that killed 10 civilians as the Afghanistan war came to its chaotic end was not the result of criminal negligence among military personnel who conducted the operation, senior defense officials said Wednesday, and no punishment has been recommended following a classified investigation into the incident.

The Aug. 29 attack in Kabul, initially defended by the Defense Department as a “righteous strike,” was carried out after commanders mistakenly believed they had identified an Islamic State operative driving a white sedan packed with explosives. In fact, as military leaders subsequently acknowledged, he was a longtime aid worker for a U.S.-based group hauling water cans for his family. Seven children and three adults died in the strike.

Lt. Gen. Sami D. Said (in photo), the Air Force inspector general tapped to lead an independent probe of how the disastrous strike unfolded, said the strike did not violate rules of international warfare. It did, however, expose what Said called confirmation bias among commanders and analysts who misread drone surveillance of the driver’s movements as threatening to U.S. troops racing to evacuate Afghan allies from Kabul’s airport.

“When you go, ‘That is a suspicious person,’ every activity they take thereafter, you start seeing it through that lens,” Said said.

Days before the botched drone strike, 13 U.S. troops and more than 170 Afghans were killed in an Islamic State suicide bombing. In the aftermath, intelligence suggested another attack on U.S. forces was possible.

“Individuals involved in this strike interviewed during this investigation truly believed at the time that they were targeting an imminent threat to U.S. forces on HKIA,” the general said, referring to Hamid Karzai International Airport.

Said said the rules of engagement used to carry out the drone strike were understandable given the “perceived very high threat to U.S. forces,” but poor communication among those involved meant the intelligence they were interpreting was not subject to the necessary skepticism.

While the report ruled out criminal violations, it left any accountability decisions to commanders, according to Said. “They could read it and go, ‘This is subpar performance’ … and decide to take adverse action,” he said.

U.S. Central Command, which oversaw the operation, did not address questions about what accountability actions may be taken. Navy Capt. Bill Urban, a spokesman for the command, said officials are reviewing the investigation’s findings and recommendations.

The Defense Department initially said no civilians appeared to be killed in the attack. Upon further review of drone video feeds, children could be seen in the area two minutes before the missile was fired, Said said.

Said’s report recommended the military change how it conducts time-sensitive strikes in urban environments. It calls specifically for a review of pre-strike procedures used to determine the risk to civilians, which in this case failed to detect the presence of children. [MORE]