Hager book alleges possible war crime by NZ troops in Afghanistan

Nicky Hager at the launch of his new book, co-authored with John Stephenson (Rob Hosking)

Writer and activist Nicky Hager ended his joint press conference with co-author Jon Stephenson calling on Prime Minister Bill English to take further action about what the two allege was a "possible" war crime committed by New Zealand troops in 2010.

The pair launched their new book, Hit and Run, in Wellington. It alleges that after a raid by Afghan insurgents in 2010, the New Zealand SAS organised a retaliatory action that went horribly wrong. 

The retaliation, which the then defence minister Wayne Mapp and the chief of defence staff referred up to then prime minister John Key for approval, hit a village not occupied by insurgents. Several civilians, including children, were killed, and more were injured.

The two allege there has been a consistent refusal by the New Zealand authorities to acknowledge the incident or to admit any culpability. 

However, the two also say Mr Mapp had growing reservations about what actually happened and whether he was being told the truth. 

The book was not – as many had speculated – an attack on Mr Key, revealing the "real" reasons he resigned last year, and neither was it a revisit to the themes of Dirty Politics, the book Mr Hager published in 2014 and which blew that year's election campaign off course. 

 

 


18 · Got a question about this story? Leave it in Comments & Questions below.

This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags

Post Comment

18 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

So we with the Americans killed six and wounded fifteen civilians and I assume no one fired at us as there were no insurgents there. That sounds pretty bad.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

You make some big assumptions. So easy for people like Hager to see war as black and white. It's clearly not and it sickens me that this weed insists on stirring the pot for personal gain.
Chuck him into battle and he would run for the hills.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 1

As a noted rugby captain said "We ain't playing Tiddlywinks". And the SAS surely were not doing that. Why would you assume that no enemy fire was encountered? And to suggest "possible" war crimes without any evidence is just totally irresponsible of Hager and sounds a bit like Trump tactics.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Why do the media keep giving Hagar oxygen? Very, very few of his claims have stood up over time. He really is a non event.

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 1

I think the great Prussian theorist of war Clausewitz main point is that war plans always go wrong to a degree, and can not be expected to work with the expected speed, efficiency and effectiveness.There is a certain natural friction, unknown factors, hidden landmines and obstacles such as Mr N Hager himself, and he himself from his legitimate days as a physicist will be aware of how difficult these factors make measuring the speed of the force of progress. In NZ both the pro American lobby and the dominant 'one belt to China' political and diplomatic party see Hager as a third force green random and guerrilla bandit, a political and legal obstacle to the official policy of selective targeting avoiding peripheral damage which unofficially since the days of Air Marshall Le May as head of the USAF, Sam Elworthy as Britain's RAFMarshall and CDS and Robert Strange McNamara as Defence Sec for LBJ and JFK
means warfare as percentage atrocities, illegal cross border strikes by the Marines and Brit and Australian SAS into Borneo, Cambodia, up river with Captain Kurtz and supposedly accurate drone and Tomahawk hits. To disguise the horrors McNamara decided the partially elite US officer core would be replaced by 'officers and gentlemen' who would really need the uniform and not throw their medals away like John Kerry. It is not entirely a good thing that NZ alone in the mid 1960s decided under CDS Peter Phipps that the NZ would ban our SAS from such patrols, that our Canberra's would not join their older RAAF sister Canberra's in devastating strikes against targets selected by the US and with the USAF calling the RAAF the precise moment to release their bombs or even joining the RAN Destroyers and DEs still carrying RN 4.5s in coastal bombardment So our forces were just for patrol and anti sub which in reality meant they were nothing or a pure nuclear deterrent force as that is all the A4 Orion Leander or Canberra were useful for. I mean torpedoes are s doubtful answer in the Falklands 50 mk 46/and stingray failed against the St Luis although dropped from Argentine Navy trackers and Sea Kings they twice locked on to an old RN diesel Oberon. In 1968 the US achieved a unique blue on blue with Skipjack Scorpion sinking itself with its own torpedoes.Effective action against modern post 1945!sub's let alone nuclear ones has always required anti.ship missiles to hit them when they are around the surface or TacticalNuclear weapons. Obamas failed presidency and defence policies showed high moral differentiation by so called defence intellectuals like Mr Hager is probably ,'moral imbecility' as the great and much derided Captain of HMS Brilliant in 1982 , said.CPR John Coward was no More a hero than Rommel to his own men. They believed their 40mm Bofors 60 more effective than Seawolf mach 3/anti missile.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Just look at the bombing of German cities in the latter part of the second world war. Up to two million men, woman and children were killed. You don't hear a dicky bird about that, because it was allied airmen that did it.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Possibly the retention of a strike wing for the RNZAF and extending and strenthening the runways at the major RNZAF bases Ohakea and Whenuapai would be a more useful way of presenting a credible defence posture. Trumps bomber build up will constitue a more effective way of attacking Irans military industrial complex in future than special force raids, by themselves. obviously the fire bomb raids on Tokyo, Hamburg and Dresden were controversial and a lot of literatiure has covered them, but destructiion from the air may be more palatable and sellable to the electorate. and in many respects it may be more effective.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Yes death delivered from the air does seem to be more acceptable in the modern world than people killed by a soldiers gun. Strange that.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Bore fest of the year. In war, as in life, sh#t happens.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

It's about acknowledging the sh#t. While it is true that there is a process cost to acknowledgement of the sh#t, to not do so sets a society up for ultimate doom in the long run. Truth can be buried and that is contrary to the late Leonard Cohen's poetic renditions that some truth lives and some truth dies. Only we die around the truth and the truth always lives, we just have to unbury it. I haven't read Nicky's book but I make this statement on principle.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I rather our guys shooting at them than them shooting at me.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

When Hager holds ISIL,AL QUEDA and all their mates accountable for war crimes then maybe,just maybe i will read his book.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Good point.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Nicky Hager is a Left Foot Weasel.
You are just a shit stirrer and should be shoved on the front line which you know SO MUCH ABOUT with a High Vis Jacket.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Stop holding back, say what you feel.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

I presume Hagr the Horrible will be writing a book about the innocent civilians killed today in London.
IF not,why not.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Mark Sainsbury said this a m, "The terrorist in London did nothing more than our soldiers did"
That from someone who believes he should be called a journalist and listened to!!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

What makes us better than terrorists, if not our expectation of higher standards than theirs?

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

NZ Market Snapshot

Forex

Sym Price Change
USD 0.7490 -0.0014 -0.19%
AUD 0.9397 -0.0012 -0.13%
EUR 0.6411 -0.0006 -0.09%
GBP 0.5726 -0.0011 -0.19%
HKD 5.8483 -0.0111 -0.19%
JPY 83.2210 -0.1370 -0.16%

Commods

Commodity Price Change Time
Gold Index 1260.0 -1.660 2017-07-27T00:
Oil Brent 51.5 0.550 2017-07-27T00:
Oil Nymex 49.0 0.300 2017-07-27T00:
Silver Index 16.5 0.081 2017-07-27T00:

Indices

Symbol Open High Last %
NZX 50 7711.7 7711.8 7711.7 -0.81%
NASDAQ 6459.8 6460.8 6422.8 -0.63%
DAX 12230.1 12293.9 12305.1 -0.76%
DJI 21717.4 21798.5 21711.0 0.39%
FTSE 7452.3 7461.9 7452.3 -0.12%
HKSE 27008.0 27047.9 27131.2 -0.51%
NI225 20048.5 20056.2 20079.6 -0.42%
ASX 5785.0 5785.0 5785.0 -1.35%