A long-secret inquiry into the culture and command of Australia's Special Air Service Regiment (SASR) during the Afghanistan war has found that an 'abandonment of curiosity' by senior commanders and an 'inversion of authority' within units created a culture in which alleged war crimes could occur.
The inquiry was commissioned after the 2020 Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Afghanistan Inquiry (IGADF) found credible evidence of multiple unlawful killings by Australian special forces. The report was handed to the former chief of the defence force in 2022, but its executive summary was only published online recently. The full report will remain classified as it contains sensitive evidence from the original Afghanistan inquiry.
The inquiry sharply criticises higher military headquarters for failing to investigate alarming trends, such as a rising number of enemy killed in action with a corresponding lack of wounded insurgents or Australian casualties. 'It is extraordinary that no effective action was taken given the gravity of the matters the subject of rumours,' the report states.
The report paints a picture of an arrogant, closed culture within the SAS. It found a pervasive belief among some operators that they were 'exceptional' and 'untouchable', comparing the culture to a 'bikie gang'. It found a 'tendency to arrogance', an 'unhealthy imitation' of US special forces units, and that operational decisions were sometimes influenced by a desire for gallantry awards. The report also criticises the government and Special Operations Command for fostering the belief that the SAS was 'superior' rather than 'specialist', and criticises the over-deployment of special forces more broadly.
The inquiry found an inverted chain of command, where junior officers were 'effectively subservient' to non-commissioned officers. It criticised senior officers for knowingly allowing alcohol to be consumed in a dedicated drinking establishment in Afghanistan.
Former SAS captain turned Liberal MP Andrew Hastie welcomed the release. 'I lived a lot of what I read in that report,' he said. 'Rather than focusing on individuals, it spreads responsibility throughout the chain of command.'
The report notes that cultural reform efforts within the SAS were already underway as it completed its work, and it commends that attempt at change. The findings come as former SAS members Ben-Roberts Smith and Oliver Schulz are before the courts contesting war crimes charges.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The findings formally link widespread cultural problems within Australia's elite special forces to alleged war crimes, distributing accountability up the chain of command beyond just low-ranking soldiers.
- The report's sharp criticism of higher headquarters and senior commanders could have lasting repercussions for ADF leadership, promotion processes, and oversight of special forces.
- The public release of the executive summary adds significant political and public pressure to the ongoing war crimes prosecutions of former SAS members.
Background
The inquiry was commissioned in the wake of the 2020 Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Afghanistan Inquiry (the Brereton Report), which found 'credible evidence' of dozens of unlawful killings. That initial report was criticised by some for placing responsibility almost entirely at relatively low ranks. This second inquiry was tasked specifically with investigating the culture within the special forces and whether there were indicators that more senior commanders should have noticed and acted upon. The report was completed in 2022 but its summary was only made public recently.
Key Perspectives
The Inquiry report: Found deep systemic cultural problems, including an 'abandonment of curiosity' and 'inversion of authority', arguing that senior commanders ignored clearly alarming trends, creating an environment where alleged war crimes could flourish.
Former SAS Captain and Liberal MP Andrew Hastie: Welcomed the report's release, stating it confirmed unlawful conduct and that it correctly spreads responsibility throughout the chain of command rather than focusing only on individual soldiers.
Critics of the initial Afghanistan Inquiry: Have argued that the first inquiry wrongly placed the burden of alleged war crimes almost entirely on lower ranks, failing to adequately hold more senior ADF officers responsible.
Ben-Roberts Smith and Oliver Schulz: Both former SAS members who have been arrested and charged with war crimes and intend to contest the charges.
What to Watch
- The ongoing war crimes trials of Ben-Roberts Smith and Oliver Schulz and how the systemic findings of this report might influence legal arguments or public perception.
- The implementation and effectiveness of the cultural reforms within the SAS noted by the inquiry.
- Whether political pressure grows to release more of the full report or to reopen investigations into the roles of higher commanders named in the findings.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 2 sources: 6 supported.
Show each claim
- Partly supportedThe headline says the inquiry found an “abandonment of curiosity.”Just In: “Some commanders were alert to this data and rumours that accompanied it while others were not, which may suggest an abandonment of curiosity.”
- SupportedThe report says, “It is extraordinary that no effective action was taken given the gravity of the matters the subject of rumours.”Just In: ““It is extraordinary that no effective action was taken given the gravity of the matters the subject of rumours,” it found.”
- SupportedAndrew Hastie said, “I lived a lot of what I read in that report” and “Rather than focusing on individuals, it spreads responsibility throughout the chain of command.”Just In: ““I lived a lot of what I read in that report,” he told Radio National Breakfast. [...] “[The report] confirms there was unlawful conduct, that's not in dispute, but rather than focusing on individuals, it spreads responsibility throughout the chain of command.””
- Partly supportedThe summary says the report blames systemic cultural problems and an inverted chain of command for alleged war crimes.World news | The Guardian: ““The culture of the Special Operations Task Group … was not the cause of misconduct but created an environment which enabled misconduct by a few to occur.””
- Partly supportedThe opening says the inquiry found that abandonment of curiosity by senior commanders and an inversion of authority within units created a culture in which alleged war crimes could occur.Just In: “A long-secret inquiry into the cultural and command failures of Australian special forces operators during the war in Afghanistan has found that an "abandonment of curiosity" within the Australian Defence Force's leadership and an "inversion of authority" within units helped create a culture that allowed alleged war crimes to occur.”
- Partly supportedThe report compares the SAS culture to a “bikie gang.”Just In: “It described the SAS as extremely homogeneous, with a largely closed culture "described by some as akin to a 'bikie gang'"”
- SupportedThe report criticised higher headquarters for failing to act on alarming trends, including rising enemy killed-in-action figures and a lack of wounded insurgents or ADF casualties.Just In: “It sharply criticised the ADF's higher headquarters for not taking more of an interest in some of what it considers to be clearly alarming information [...] like the growing number of people being killed during operations.”
- SupportedThe inquiry followed the 2020 Afghanistan Inquiry, which found credible evidence of multiple unlawful killings.Just In: “The inquiry was commissioned in the wake of the 2020 release of the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Afghanistan Inquiry , which found "credible evidence" of dozens of unlawful killings.”
- SupportedThe report was handed to the former chief of the defence force in 2022, and its executive summary was published online recently.Just In: “The inquiry report was handed to the former chief of the defence force, Mark Binskin, in 2022, but the executive summary was only published online recently.”
- Not in the sourcesThe full report will remain classified because it contains sensitive evidence.Just In: “The full report has yet to be made public, but an executive summary was published online. [...] The full report will not be made public because it contains sensitive evidence from the original Afghanistan inquiry.”
- SupportedThe inquiry criticised senior officers for knowingly allowing alcohol to be consumed in a dedicated drinking establishment in Afghanistan.Just In: “It found some junior officers prioritised "mateship" over "leadership", and criticised senior officers for knowingly allowing alcohol to be consumed. "The creation of a dedicated drinking establishment within [special forces base] Camp Russell, particularly in an Islamic country, when there were clear orders that alcohol was not to be consumed, is striking," it found.”
- Partly supportedBen-Roberts Smith and Oliver Schulz are before the courts contesting war-crimes charges.Just In: “Former SAS Corporal and Victoria Cross recipient Ben-Roberts Smith was arrested and charged with war crimes earlier this year, which he intends to contest. Another former SAS trooper, Oliver Schulz, is also before the courts on war crimes charges, which he is contesting.”