If the SAS committed war crimes, where were the officers?

Despite the hundreds of millions spent investigating allegations of war crimes in Afghanistan, no government official, military veteran or investigative journalist has ever been able to publicly explain one of the great mysteries of the saga: where were the officers when prisoners and civilians were allegedly executed?

The investigation by former NSW judge Paul Brereton cleared army commanders of blame, arguing corporals and sergeants were responsible. Even though 39 Afghans were unlawfully killed, according to Justice Brereton, including when there were dozens of Australian soldiers in the vicinity, the only men charged with the war crime of murder are an ex-private, Oliver Schulz, and the famous former corporal Ben Roberts-Smith.

Into this fraught debate on Tuesday entered a former SAS officer who had previously operated mostly in the shadows.

Peter Winnall, a former major in the elite regiment, is regarded by special forces veterans as a member of the group responsible for publicising misconduct allegations that have come to dominate Australia’s memory of the war.

After being contacted on Monday by The Nightly over a social media comment critical of Mr Roberts-Smith, the business consultant published a 1300-word article in The Australian arguing for the civilian prosecution of the Victoria Cross awardee.

While that was not surprising, Mr Winnall raised the question of culpability by his own class, the officers. He seemed to argue, obliquely, that soldiers above the level of leaders and deputy leaders of five or six-man teams (roles held by Mr Roberts-Smith) could have been expected to know if dozens of Afghans were being murdered by their men.

“Accountability has been uneven,” he wrote. “At one end, individuals face investigation and trial. At the other, institutions have absorbed reputational damage. The layer between them remains largely unaccountable. Operations were planned. Tempo was set. Tactics were endorsed. Citations were written.

“These were not patrol-level decisions alone. If accountability is to have legitimacy, it cannot sit only at the bottom. Extending it upward is not an attack on the institution. It is a requirement of it.”

The official theory that junior SAS soldiers went rogue was endorsed in 2020 by then-Chief of the Defence Force Angus Campbell, who placed more emphasis on culture — which leaders set — than criminal intent, which is what prosecutors will have to prove.

“But warrior culture Justice Brereton is, I think, speaking to a slow deviation from normal and good culture in a military environment where, instead of seeking to serve others, you seek to serve yourself and to do so in a manner that creates power and authority and prestige,” he said in 2020.

Aggressive and competitive

General Campbell, a former SAS officer, commanded all Australian forces in the Middle East in 2011 and 2012, when Federal prosecutors allege prisoners were executed.

The commander of all special forces at the time was Maj-Gen. Peter Gilmore, also known as Gus, now the deputy head of a civilian intelligence service.

The Brereton inquiry was not commissioned until 2016, when Maj-Gen. Gilmore had returned to the regular army. He declined to be interviewed.

Other veterans say the SAS’s geographic isolation at its Perth headquarters, an unusually high number of non-commissioned officers, wide-ranging mission and limited job swaps with other units created an aggressive and competitive culture that should have been identified and shaped by commanders.

Neil James, the executive director of the Australian Defence Association, referred to “the apparent noble-cause corruption problem” which he wrote on May 3 was why “commanding officers of the SASR have had to regularly address the ‘Sergeant’s Mess problem’ when tackling discipline, professionalism and culture-change problems in the unit.”

The SAS normally operates in small teams, known as patrols, led by a sergeant or corporal. About four teams make up a platoon, known as a troop, which is led by a captain. Three troops form a squadron, which is led by a major. The SAS has four squadrons.

Mr Winnall joined the regiment as a troop commander and took over the 1st Squadron in time to arrive in Afghanistan a couple of weeks after 2nd Squadron won the 2010 Battle of Tizak, for which Mr Roberts-Smith was recognised with the Victoria Cross.

The battle was the high point of the war for the SAS, although Mr Roberts-Smith’s medal triggered internal jealousy that contributed to the allegations against him being made public. He has denied ever killing a prisoner, or ordering anyone else to do so, and has said he intends to plead not guilty.

Promoted through his army career, Mr Winnall runs a small Perth-based management consulting firm, Rekon Group. “People who know me know I am quite demanding and I don’t suffer fools,” he said on a corporate video several years ago.

“It’s rare that people I work with are able to exceed my expectations.”

Chain of command

One of Mr Roberts-Smith’s leading public supporters, Hugh Poate, supported Mr Winnall’s decision to raise officers’ potential culpability for breaches of military law.

“Accountability should be a top-down approach,” Mr Poate said today. “That’s why you have a chain of command in the first place.”

Mr Poate’s 23-year-old son, Robert, was killed with two other Australians in 2012 by an Afghan government soldier named Hekmatullah. Mr Roberts-Smith and his team were hunting the killer when he allegedly kicked Afghan Ali Jan off a river embankment in the village of Darwan and ordered him shot.

Mr Poate accused Australian governments of spending more money and resources to investigate and prosecute Mr Roberts-Smith and Mr Schulz than on seeking to have Hekmatullah’s death sentence carried out by the previous Afghan government. Hekmatullah is regarded as a hero by the Taliban regime.

“Successive governments in this country have failed to have anything to do with trying to ensure that Hekmatullah’s sentence imposed by a court of law is carried out,” he said today. “They have discouraged it.”

The Office of the Special Investigator, which prosecutes veterans over alleged war crimes, was allocated another $50 million in last week’s Budget.

The agency said it has spent $234.5 million since established in 2021, although Budget papers state it has been allocated more than $300m. The agency declined to explain the difference.

On the weekend Mr Winnall joked about the Darwan allegations. Responding to a satirical Instagram article proposing a paintball fight between Mr Roberts-Smith and one of his accusers, federal Liberal MP Andrew Hastie, he wrote: “I’d go watch except innocent bystanders likely to get kicked off a cliff!”

The names and photographs of his staff were removed from the firm’s website on Tuesday after the comment was reported by The Nightly. The comment was deleted.