Eyes on Target: Inside Stories From the Brotherhood of the U.S. Navy SEALs
Page 21
The Deteriorating Security Environment in Benghazi
In spite of the TNC’s efforts after the revolution, U.S. officials were aware that Libya remained volatile. U.S. officials were particularly concerned with the numerous armed militias that operated freely throughout the country, including those in Benghazi with ties to al-Qa’ida and Ansar Al Sharia.4 In August 2012, the State Department warned U.S. citizens against traveling to Libya, explaining that “inter-militia conflict can erupt at any time or any place.”5
The deteriorating security environment in Benghazi throughout 2012 mirrored the declining situation in the rest of Libya. From June 2011 to July 2012, then-Regional Security Officer (RSO) for Libya Eric Nordstrom compiled a list of more than 200 security incidents in Libya, 50 of which took place in Benghazi.6 These incidents included violent acts directed against diplomats and diplomatic facilities, international organizations, and third-country nationals, as well as large-scale militia clashes.7 U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi came under direct fire twice in the months leading up to September 11, 2012: first in April 2012, when disgruntled Libyan contract guards allegedly threw a small improvised explosive device (IED) over the perimeter wall; and in June 2012, when unknown assailants used an IED to blow a hole in the perimeter wall.
The decisions by the British Embassy, United Nations, and the International Committee of the Red Cross to withdraw their personnel from Benghazi after armed assailants launched directed attacks against each organization were additional major indicators of the increasingly threatening environment. These developments caused Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Wood, who led the U.S. military’s efforts to supplement diplomatic security in Libya, to recommend that the State Department consider pulling out of Benghazi altogether. Lieutenant Colonel Wood explained that after the withdrawal of these other organizations, “it was apparent to me that we were the last [Western] flag flying in Benghazi. We were the last thing on their target list to remove from Benghazi.”8
Security Arrangements for the Benghazi Mission
Despite mounting security concerns, for most of 2012 the Benghazi Mission was forced to rely on fewer than the approved number of DS agents. Specifically, while the State Department memorandum signed by Under Secretary Kennedy stated that five agents would be provided, this was the case for only 23 days in 2012.9 Reports indicate the Benghazi Mission was typically staffed with only three DS agents, and sometimes as few as one DS agent.10
For its security, the Benghazi Mission used a combination of these few DS agents, as well as a U.S. Military Security Support Team (SST), and two Mobile Security Detachment (MSD) teams provided by the State Department. The SST consisted of 16 Defense Department special operations personnel. As commander of the SST, Lieutenant Colonel Wood reported to the U.S. Chief of Mission in Libya.11 The MSD teams each consisted of six DS agents, all of whom underwent advanced training to augment security at high-threat posts.12
In addition to the security provided by U.S. agencies, the Benghazi Mission used local, unarmed guards, who were responsible for activating the alarm in the event of an attack, as well as four armed members of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, who were to serve as a quick reaction force. The February 17 Martyrs Brigade was one of the militias that fought for Gadhafi’s overthrow. Numerous reports have indicated that the Brigade had extremist connections, and it had been implicated in the kidnapping of American citizens as well as in the threats against U.S. military assets. In addition, on September 8, 2012, just days before Ambassador Stevens arrived in Benghazi, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade told State Department officials that the group would no longer support U.S. movements in the city, including the Ambassador’s visit.13
Internal State Department Communications on Security
State Department officials in Washington acknowledged that the Benghazi Mission lacked sufficient resources to protect its personnel in a deteriorating security environment. However, in a cable signed by Secretary Clinton in April 2012, the State Department settled on a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including Benghazi. Specifically, despite acknowledging Ambassador Cretz’s March 2012 cable requesting additional security assets, the April plan called for the removal of the two remaining MSD teams, the third initially deployed MSD team having been previously removed. This reduced security footprint was of significant concern to U.S. Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz, who had requested the continued deployment of both MSD teams, or at least additional DS agents to replace them, and the full five DS agents for the Benghazi Mission that the December 2011 Kennedy memorandum documented would be stationed in Benghazi. His successor, Ambassador Christopher Stevens–who replaced him in May 2012–shared Ambassador Cretz’s concerns.
Critical Cables
During 2012, in numerous communications with the State Department, officials from the U.S. Mission in Libya stress both the inadequacy of security as well as the need for additional personnel. Two critical cables warrant specific mention:
• On March 28, 2012, Ambassador Cretz sends a cable to Secretary Clinton requesting additional security assets.
• On April 19, 2012, the response cable from the Department of State to Embassy Tripoli, bearing Secretary Clinton’s signature, acknowledges Ambassador Cretz’s request for additional security but instead articulates a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including the Benghazi Mission.
In addition, the April 2012 cable from Secretary Clinton recommended that the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the U.S. Mission in Libya conduct a “joint reassessment of the number of DS agents requested for Benghazi.”14 This prompted one frustrated Embassy Tripoli employee to remark to her colleagues that it “looks like no movement on the full complement of [five DS] personnel for Benghazi, but rather a reassessment to bring the numbers lower.”15
In May 2012, Ambassador Stevens replaced Ambassador Cretz and continued to make requests for additional security. In an email in early June, he told a State Department official that with national elections occurring in Libya in July and August, the U.S. Mission in Libya “would feel much safer if we could keep two MSD teams with us through this period [to support] our staff and [personal detail] for me and the [Deputy Chief of Mission] and any VIP visitors.”16 The State Department official replied that due to other commitments and limited resources, “unfortunately, MSD cannot support the request.”17
Despite the denial of Ambassador Stevens’ request, Embassy Tripoli officials persisted in their requests for additional security. In July 2012, for example, RSO Eric Nordstrom alerted DS officials in Washington that he intended to submit a formal cable request for an extension of the SST and MSD teams. DS personnel in Washington alerted Mr. Nordstrom that Ms. Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, was “reluctant to ask for an SST extension, apparently out of concern that it would be embarrassing to the [State Department] to continue to have to rely on [Defense Department] assets to protect our Mission.”18 Moreover, in response to Mr. Nordstrom’s intent to request an MSD extension, Ms. Lamb responded, “NO, I do not [I repeat] not want them to ask for the MSD team to stay!”19
Critical Emails
June 7, 2012: Ambassador Stevens asks the State Department to keep the two MSD teams the Clinton April cable ordered removed from Libya. This request is denied.
July 6, 2012: Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Lamb strongly asserts that Embassy Tripoli should not make a formal request for an extension of the SST and MSD teams.
On July 9, 2012, Ambassador Stevens responded with a cable that stressed that the security conditions in Libya had not met the requisite benchmarks established by the State Department and the U.S. Mission in Libya to warrant initiating a security drawdown.20 He requested that a sufficient number of security personnel, whether DS agents, or SST or MSD team members, be permitted to stay.21 Under Secretary Kennedy rejected the request for the SST extension, and both the SST and MSD teams were
subsequently withdrawn.22 Although the State Department made some modest physical security upgrades to the Benghazi Mission, the systematic withdrawal of existing security personnel resulted in a security posture for the Benghazi Mission that the State Department’s Accountability Review Board later determined was “inadequate for Benghazi.”23
Multiple Committees have reviewed the State Department documents cited in the previous sections and remain concerned that the documents do not reconcile with public comments Secretary Clinton made regarding how high in the State Department the security situation and requests were discussed. Despite acknowledging a security request made on April 19, 2012, Secretary Clinton made the following statements before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on January 23, 2013:
• “I have made it very clear that the security cables did not come to my attention or above the assistant secretary level where the ARB [Accountability Review Board] placed responsibility. Where, as I think Ambassador Pickering said, ‘the rubber hit the road.’ ”24
• “You know, Congressman, it was very disappointing to me that the [Accountability Review Board] concluded there were inadequacies and problems in the responsiveness of our team here in Washington to the security requests that were made by our team in Libya. And I was not aware of that going on, it was not brought to my attention, but obviously it’s something we’re fixing and intend to put into place protocols and systems to make sure it doesn’t happen again.… Well if I could–1.43 million cables a year come to the State Department. They are all addressed to me. They do not all come to me. They are reported through the bureaucracy.”25
In addition, it remains unclear why the State Department chose to reduce security in the face of such a challenging security environment and chose to deny multiple requests from Embassy Tripoli for more assistance. It is clear that funding–or a lack thereof–is not the reason for the reductions in security, as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Lamb testified and as emails reviewed by the Committees attest.26
Moreover, a lack of funding would not have been at issue with respect to the rejection of the request to extend the deployment of the SST, as that team was provided via the Defense Department at no expense to the State Department. The Administration owes the American people an explanation regarding these unanswered questions, which must be explored in greater depth in the weeks and months ahead.
II. The volatile security environment erupted on September 11, 2012, when militias composed of al-Qa’ida-affiliated extremists attacked U.S. interests in Benghazi.
The Committees have concluded that U.S. security personnel on the ground exhibited extreme bravery in conducting defensive actions and rescue operations in the face of coordinated and sophisticated attacks on the U.S. presence in Benghazi.
Ambassador Stevens’ Visit to Benghazi
Ambassador Stevens previously served in Libya as Deputy Chief of Mission (2007–2009) and as Special Representative to the Transitional National Council (March 2011–November 2011). He became U.S. Ambassador to Libya in May 2012. Ambassador Stevens traveled to Benghazi on September 10, 2012, to fill staffing gaps between principal officers in Benghazi and to allow him to reconnect with local contacts. He also planned to attend the establishment of a new American Corner at a local Benghazi school.27 It has been reported to multiple Committee staff - but not confirmed - that an additional purpose of his visit was to personally assess the security situation in Benghazi in order to lend more urgency to his planned request for additional security resources from Washington.
The Attack on the Benghazi Mission Begins
On September 11, 2012, there were a total of 28 U.S. personnel on the ground at the Benghazi Mission and at the Annex in Benghazi, including Ambassador Stevens.28
At appropriately 9:40 PM,29 dozens of armed men approached the Benghazi Mission and quickly breached the front gate, setting fire to the guard house and main diplomatic building. The attackers were members of extremist groups, including the Libya-based Ansar al-Sharia (AAS) and al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). A State Department officer in the Benghazi Mission’s Tactical Operations Center (TOC) immediately notified the Annex, Embassy Tripoli, and State Department Headquarters that the Benghazi Mission was under attack and requested assistance. At no point did U.S. officials on the ground report a protest.30
At the time of the attack, Ambassador Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and a DS agent were located in Villa C, the main building of the Benghazi Mission. At approximately 10:00 PM, within 20 minutes of the attack, Ambassador Stevens, Mr. Smith, and the DS agent suffered debilitating effects from smoke inhalation due to the heavy smoke as the main diplomatic building burned. All three tried to escape by crawling along the floor towards a window. Due to the thick smoke, the DS agent unknowingly lost contact with Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith at some point along the smoke-filled escape route. After crawling out of a window and realizing the Ambassador and Mr. Smith were not with him, the DS agent, under gunfire, repeatedly re-entered the burning building to search for them. As he was doing so, the DS agent also used his radio to call for help. Security officers from other parts of the Benghazi Mission responded and joined the DS agent’s search for the missing individuals.
Within 25 minutes of the initial assault, a security team at the Annex was notified and departed for the Benghazi Mission. The security team tried unsuccessfully to secure heavy weapons from militia members encountered along the way, and the team faced some resistance, including gunfire, in getting to the Benghazi Mission. Over the course of the next hour, the Annex security team joined the Benghazi Mission team in searching for Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith. Together, the teams repelled sporadic gunfire and RPG fire while assembling all the remaining U.S. personnel at the facility.
While the security officers were able to retrieve the body of Mr. Smith, they were unable to locate Ambassador Stevens. After 90 minutes of repeated attempts to enter the burning main diplomatic building to search for the Ambassador, the teams assessed the security situation had deteriorated to the point that they were forced to abandon their search. The Annex security team loaded all U.S. personnel into vehicles and started the process of departing for the Annex, with the first vehicle departing at 11:15 PM and the second vehicle departing at 11:30 PM. Meanwhile, at approximately 11:10 PM, Defense Department unarmed surveillance aircraft arrived overhead. As the vehicles exited the Benghazi Mission, they encountered heavy gunfire and at least one roadblock in their route to the Annex.
Escalation at the Annex
At approximately 12:30 AM, a team of seven U.S. personnel departed Tripoli. This team arrived in Benghazi at 1:30 AM. At around 5:15 AM, within 15 minutes of the Tripoli team’s arrival at the Annex, a short but deadly and coordinated terrorist attack began on the annex.31 The attack, which included small arms, RPG, and well-aimed mortar fire, mortally wounded two American security officers, Mr. Tyrone Woods and Mr. Doherty, and severely wounded two other U.S. personnel. At 6:05 AM, the 31 survivors from the initial attack on the Benghazi Mission departed the Annex for the Benghazi airport. The surviving Americans departed Benghazi along with three of the four fallen Americans at 7:40 AM on September 12, 2012. The C-17 deployed from Germany departed Tripoli at 7:17 PM, carrying the American survivors and the remains of Mr. Smith, Mr. Woods, and Mr. Doherty. The plane arrived in Ramstein, Germany at 10:19 PM on September 12, 2012.
Timeline for Ambassador Stevens
Due to the deteriorating security situation and exhaustive, but unsuccessful search for Ambassador Stevens, the security teams made the decision to evacuate the survivors of the attack on the Benghazi Mission and the remains of Mr. Smith about 90 minutes after the attack began. The evacuation began at approximately 11:30 PM.
At approximately 1:00 AM on September 12, 2012, local Libyans found the remains of Ambassador Stevens in the main diplomatic building at the Benghazi Mission and transported him to the hospital. The Libyans apparently did not realize who the Ambassa
dor was, but they alerted the State Department of his location by using the cell phone that was in the Ambassador’s pocket. Libyan doctors tried unsuccessfully to resuscitate Ambassador Stevens upon his arrival at the hospital. At 8:15 PM that evening, his remains were transported from the hospital to the Benghazi airport to begin the journey to Tripoli, to Germany, and then finally home.
The Defense Department’s Timeline
At 9:59 PM,32 within twenty minutes of the initial attack, Defense Department officials directed an unarmed, unmanned surveillance aircraft to reposition overhead of the Benghazi Mission. The aircraft arrived at 11:10 PM, approximately 20 minutes before the evacuation of the Benghazi Mission began.
In Washington, at 10:32 PM, an officer in the National Military Command Center at the Pentagon,33 after receiving initial reports of the incident from the State Department, notified the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff. The information was quickly passed to Secretary of Defense, Mr. Leon E. Panetta, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin E. Dempsey. Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey attended a previously scheduled meeting with the President at the White House at 11:00 PM, approximately 80 minutes after the attack began. The Defense Department reported that principals discussed potential responses to the ongoing situation.34