BAGHDAD, Iraq — Haider Ahmed Rabia was stuck in traffic in Baghdad 13 years ago when guards with the American security contractor Blackwater opened fire with machine guns and grenade launchers, killing or wounding at least 31 Iraqi civilians. He still carries some of those bullets in his legs.
In 2014, he was one of the survivors and family members who flew to the United States to testify in the trial of four of those Blackwater guards, told that the evidence of his injury and his account of that deadly day could help bring justice.
“I went to America and saw the killers walking free, wearing suits,” he said in an interview in Baghdad on Wednesday. “I said, ‘Tomorrow I will return to my country, but will these killers face justice?’”
“Today,” he added, “they proved to me it was just theater.”
He was speaking of President Trump’s pardon this week of those four former Blackwater security contractors, who were convicted in 2014 in what a U.S. court determined were unprovoked shootings in Nisour Square.
The killings cast a harsh spotlight on how heavily armed American security contractors were acting with impunity after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, angering Iraqi officials whose own investigation also found no evidence to support Blackwater’s claims that the convoy had come under fire first.
It was the first time that many Americans began coming to grips with the growing role that Blackwater — founded by Erik D. Prince, a former Navy SEAL member and future ally of President Trump — was taking in the sprawling U.S. war on terrorism, winning billions of dollars in contracts as the firm racked up accusations of abuses with few consequences.
An already tense relationship between the United States and Iraq grew more bitter. And the backlash over the killings played a role in helping to speed the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, after Iraqi political leaders rejected American demands for immunity for all U.S. troops.
On Wednesday, Iraq’s foreign ministry urged the U.S. government to reconsider the decision to pardon the four former Blackwater guards, saying in a statement that the move was inconsistent with the U.S. administration’s “declared commitment to the values of human rights, justice and the rule of law.”
The investigation was one of the most logistically and legally difficult ones in recent Justice Department history, according to former department officials who worked directly on the case.
“We had never done anything like this before,” said Ronald C. Machen, the United States attorney for the District of Columbia at the time and the official who oversaw the case. “We had to send teams of F.B.I. agents and prosecutors over there to build the case from the ground up — they had to risk their lives to collect the evidence. We had to persuade Iraqis who lost loved ones to come over to testify.”
“And to think it all gets thrown away,” he added.
Amy Jeffress, a top national security prosecutor at the Justice Department who oversaw the case, said the pardons would have a lasting impact on the perception of the United States abroad. “These pardons send a terrible message to the Department of Justice and to our Iraqi partners who helped with this very difficult case — and of course to the victims,” she said.
The events in Nisour Square on Sept. 16, 2007, began with an explosion somewhere else: a roadside bomb detonating a few hundred yards from a heavily guarded compound where officials from the United States Agency for International Development were meeting.
In a city where security contractors referred to almost all of Baghdad as a high-risk “red zone,” Blackwater guards in armored vehicles stopped traffic in the square, a busy intersection about a mile away from the blast, to evacuate the American officials to Saddam Hussein’s former palace compound where the United States was based.
The Blackwater guards said they believed they came under fire first, though both Iraqi and U.S. investigations rejected their accounts. Other testimony indicated that an initial shot by a Blackwater guard killed a driver whose car kept rolling. That prompted a volley of machine gun fire and rocket-propelled grenades from the security contractors, who stopped only after 17 civilians were dead.
More than 30 Iraqi witnesses traveled to the United States in what was described by justice officials as the largest number of foreign citizens to testify at a U.S. criminal trial.
During the trial, survivors described the chaos and horror of seeing family members killed as bullets and grenades ripped through the thin metal of cheap cars. One father, Mohammed Hafedh Abdulrazzaq Kinani, sobbed uncontrollably as he testified about the death of his 9-year-old son, Ali.
A medical student, Ahmed Haithem Ahmed, and his mother, Mohassin Kathim, were the first to be killed, on an errand as their vehicle approached the square. Mr. Ahmed was shot in the head, and Ms. Kathim cradled his body, crying for help. The guards kept firing — round after round, and then an incendiary device, killing her as well.
Mr. Ahmed’s father later counted 40 bullet holes in the wreckage of the vehicle.
Four former Blackwater guards, Nicholas A. Slatten, Paul A. Slough, Evan S. Liberty and Dustin L. Heard, were convicted by a federal jury in 2014. Although 17 Iraqis were killed, the men were charged in 14 of the deaths that the F.B.I. found violated rules for deadly use of force.
Mr. Slatten, a former Army sniper who was accused of firing the first shots, was convicted of murder and given a life sentence, while the three others were sentenced to 30 years in prison on manslaughter and weapons charges. In 2019, those three men’s prison terms were cut roughly in half after a previous court ruling vacated the original sentencing.
For some survivors of the attack, President Trump’s pardon of the Blackwater contractors was a bitter reminder of what Iraqis have always viewed as a lack of concern over Iraqi lives.
Mr. Rabia, who is now 45 and works as an electricity ministry employee, still struggles with nerve damage in his legs.
He was driving his taxi in Nisour Square when the Blackwater convoy came through. It was four years after the U.S. invasion toppled Saddam Hussein. The country had fallen into a brutal civil war, and in the capital, U.S. forces and security contractors ruled the roads. Some vehicles carried signs with stark warnings: “Stay back 100 meters or you will be shot.”
Mr. Rabia said that Iraqi drivers were stuck, waiting for the Blackwater convoy to pass, when the contractors began opening up with their weapons. He was hit as he scrambled to crawl over to the passenger side of the taxi to escape.
Clemency Power ›
Presidential Pardons, Explained
President Trump has discussed potential pardons that could test the boundaries of his constitutional power to nullify criminal liability. Here’s some clarity on his ability to pardon.
- May a president issue prospective pardons before any charges or conviction? Yes. In Ex parte Garland, an 1866 case involving a former Confederate senator who had been pardoned by President Andrew Johnson, the Supreme Court said the pardon power “extends to every offense known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.” It is unusual for a president to issue a prospective pardon before any charges are filed, but there are examples, perhaps most famously President Gerald R. Ford’s pardon in 1974 of Richard M. Nixon to prevent him from being prosecuted after the Watergate scandal.
- May a president pardon his relatives and close allies? Yes. The Constitution does not bar pardons that raise the appearance of self-interest or a conflict of interest, even if they may provoke a political backlash and public shaming. In 2000, shortly before leaving office, President Bill Clinton issued a slew of controversial pardons, including to his half brother, Roger Clinton, over a 1985 cocaine conviction for which he had served about a year in prison, and to Susan H. McDougal, a onetime Clinton business partner who had been jailed as part of the Whitewater investigation.
- May a president issue a general pardon? This is unclear. Usually, pardons are written in a way that specifically describes which crimes or sets of activities they apply to. There is little precedent laying out the degree to which a pardon can be used to instead foreclose criminal liability for anything and everything.
- May a president pardon himself? This is unclear. There is no definitive answer because no president has ever tried to pardon himself and then faced prosecution anyway. As a result, there has never been a case which gave the Supreme Court a chance to resolve the question. In the absence of any controlling precedent, legal thinkers are divided about the matter.
- Find more answers here.
Source: Read Full Article