Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 64621 / 251,287

Articles

Brazil Sri Lanka United Kingdom Sweden 00. Editorial United States Latin America Egypt Jordan Yemen Thailand

Browse latest releases

2010/11 2010/12 2011/01 2011/02 2011/03 2011/04 2011/05 2011/06 2011/07 2011/08

Browse by creation date

66 72 73 75 79 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN SECRET SECRET//NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Community resources

Follow us on Twitter Check our Reddit Twitter this Digg this page Contact us on IRC

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 03OTTAWA1758, AFGHANISTAN FRIENDLY FIRE INCIDENT: CANADIAN

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #03OTTAWA1758.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
03OTTAWA1758 2003-06-20 18:33 2011-08-24 01:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Ottawa 
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
 
UNCLAS OTTAWA 001758 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL MOPS CA AF
SUBJECT: AFGHANISTAN FRIENDLY FIRE INCIDENT: CANADIAN 
REACTION TO DECISION NOT TO PROCEED WITH COURTS MARTIAL 
AGAINST U.S. PILOTS 
 
1. (SBU) The Canadian Government reacted very evenly to the 
June 19 decision by U.S. Air Force LTGEN Bruce Carlson not to 
proceed with courts martial against two pilots who mistakenly 
bombed Canadian troops in Afghanistan.  Prime Minister 
Chretien said the matter is now closed as far as the Canadian 
Government is concerned.  Canadian Chief of Defense Staff GEN 
Henault issued a statement expressing sympathy with the 
soldiers' families, reiterating the Canadian Forces' 
commitment to contributing to international peace and 
security (including in ISAF), and pledging to work with 
allies to mitigate the possibility of such incidents in the 
future. 
 
2. (SBU) The families of the four Canadian soldiers killed in 
the April 2002 incident said they had expected the decision, 
but most were upset that stronger action was not being taken 
against the two pilots.  A common refrain among the families 
was a concern that the pilots not be allowed to fly again for 
the U.S. Air Force.  One of the pilots will receive a 
reprimand and is leaving the Air Force.  The second pilot 
still faces disciplinary proceedings that could result in a 
reprimand, 30 days confinement to quarters, loss of one 
month's pay, and/or no longer being permitted to fly for the 
Air Force.  The family of one of the Canadian soldiers filed 
a wrongful death claim against the U.S. military earlier this 
year, and that case is ongoing. 
 
3. (SBU) COMMENT: More than one year after the fact, there is 
a greater realization here now that the friendly fire 
incident, while tragic, is one of many affecting allied 
forces.  Canadians will continue to scrutinize disciplinary 
measures taken against the pilots, but most consider the Air 
Force's handling of the case thus far to have been 
even-handed. 
CELLUCCI