Colonel says US watered down report on Shireen Abu Akleh’s killing

A former United States colonel who worked on a team that compiled a report on the Israeli military’s killing of Al Jazeera journalist and US citizen Shireen Abu Akleh has accused the administration of former US President Joe Biden of softening its findings in favour of Israel.

The statements from Colonel Steve Gabavics in an interview with the New York Times published on Monday represent the first time any military official involved in the report has spoken publicly. Gabavics had previously spoken anonymously for a documentary by the Zeteo news organisation.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The official, who left the government in January, recounted being “flabbergasted” by a State Department statement that described Abu Akleh’s May 11, 2022, killing as “the result of tragic circumstances”. The statement, the only official assessment of the killing to date by the US government, added that US officials “found no reason to believe that this was intentional”.

At the time Abu Akleh was fatally shot in the Jenin refugee camp in the occupied West Bank, Gabavics had been working at the inter-agency Office of the United States Security Coordinator, which oversees cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian security forces.

The office, led by Lieutenant General Michael R Fenzel, had been tasked by the Biden administration with compiling a report on the killing, which informed the State Department’s public account.

Gabavics and four unnamed officials told the New York Times that the official US government line did little to reflect the impassioned debate among those who compiled the report about whether the attack was intentional.

The report relied on findings from Israeli and Palestinian investigations, as well as visiting the site and overseeing a ballistic analysis. The US has never released its own investigation into the killing. While the FBI launched a probe in 2022, its status remains unknown.

Gabavics said he was among the officials who believed the shooting was intentional. The government’s watered-down account “continued to be on my conscience nonstop”, he told the New York Times.

‘Favouritism is always toward the Israelis’

While it was not clear if the soldier who fired the fatal shot was deliberately targeting Abu Akleh, he, at the very least, would have known he was targeting a journalist, Gabavics said.

The assessment is in line with several probes by rights groups, a United Nations investigative body, Palestinian officials, and media organisations, including Al Jazeera. For its part, Israel eventually admitted one of its soldiers was likely behind the killing, which it called “an accident”. It said that no personnel would be punished.

In support of his conclusion, Gabavics pointed to Israeli radio military traffic that showed soldiers were aware of journalists in the area at the time of the shooting. He added there had been no gunfire coming from the direction of the journalists at the time of the fatal shooting.

An Israeli military vehicle had been parked down the road from the group of journalists Abu Akleh was travelling with, which would have been clearly visible via a sniper scope, he said.

Gabavics said that the apparent precision of the shots did not indicate a spray of uncontrolled bullets. The fact that the soldier shot at a producer, then Abu Akleh, and then at another person who tried to help, also indicated intentionality.

He told the Times that for the shooting to have been an accident, “the most absurd thing in the world” would have had to happen.

“The individual popped out of the truck, just was randomly shooting, and happened to have really well-aimed shots and never looked down the scope. Which wouldn’t have happened,” he said.

Gabavics said he had reported his conclusion both orally and in writing to General Fenzel, but the account did not appear in the assessment shared with the State Department. Gabavics and several officials said he was subsequently sidelined from the review.

For his part, General Fenzel, in a statement to the Times, stood by his approach.

“Ultimately, I had to make judgements based on the full set of facts and information available to me,” he said. “I stand by the integrity of our work and remain confident that we reached the right conclusions.”

Gabavics said the incident underscored the US bias towards Israel he witnessed while working in the office. The US provides billions of dollars in military aid to Israel, which it has surged during the war in Gaza.

“The favouritism is always toward the Israelis. Very little of that goes to the Palestinians,” he said.

He added that Abu Akleh’s case has left the most lasting impact of any during his career.

“Because we had everything there,” he said.