Fratricide: That's what the military calls 'friendly fire'

The Government faced a call last night for a full inquiry into the issue of "friendly fire" after it was revealed that one of America's top generals had disputed his own side's finding that two US pilots were not to blame for the death of a British soldier.

Last week cockpit footage showed that the pilots of two A-10 "tankbuster" aircraft who attacked British vehicles in southern Iraq in 2003, killing Lance Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, had been unclear about the position of their target, had not communicated clearly between themselves or with the forward air controller, and had engaged without specific clearance. After being told that they had killed one of their allies, one was heard to say: "We're in jail, dude."

Related articles

• Death in Iraq: Soldier 100
• New commander takes charge as US prepares to accuse Iran
• Noam Chomsky: The US says it is fighting for democracy - but is deaf to the cries of the Iraqis
• A private who never complained: the 101st Briton killed in action
• Search the news archive for more stories

The pilot who twice strafed the British convoy was revealed to be Lieutenant-Colonel Gus "Skeeter" Kohntopp. He and his wingman, a major, were members of the Idaho Air National Guard, on their first combat mission. It also emerged that Gus Kohntopp has since been promoted to full colonel.

A British board of inquiry report, released to L/Cpl Hull's inquest, found that "procedures were not followed" and that the pilots were "not clear to engage" when they attacked. It added that there were a number of failings in communications: "'stepped-on' or incomplete transmissions, non-standard terminology was used, important information was omitted and net discipline was poor".

The US sought to prevent the cockpit videos and the identities of the pilots becoming public. Last week, before the results of its inquiry were published, a Pentagon spokesman said the pilots "followed the procedures and processes for engaging targets", and as a result, neither was disciplined.

On Friday the British Ministry of Defence posted the report of the US inquiry on its website. It concluded that although the two US airmen and their ground controllers made mistakes, "no evidence was uncovered that would lead to the conclusion of criminal negligence, clear violation of procedures or reckless disregard on the part of anyone involved in this tragic accident".

But a memo dated 8 October 2003 by General John Abizaid, head of Central Command, which is responsible for both Iraq and Afghanistan, is attached. It says: "The findings of the [investigation] that cognitive and physical task overload, ineffective communication and failure to recognise identification panels contributed to the terrible loss of life, injury and damage are difficult to square with a finding that no procedures were violated."

The next section is blacked out on the website, but is believed to read: "In view of the above, the Commander, Coalition Forces Air Component Command, should reconsider the actions of the subordinate personnel for possible ... disciplinary action." But Central Command said last week that the investigation would not be reopened. A spokeswoman, Lt Col Teresa Connor, told The Independent on Sunday: "General Abizaid is a four-star general. He can draw whatever conclusions he wishes."

Although incidents such as these are commonly called "friendly fire" or "blue-on-blue" events, both the British and US militaries formally term them "fratricide". Last night the chairman of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Edward Leigh, a senior Conservative MP who has long pursued the issue, called for an inquiry into the lack of progress in preventing such deaths.

At the start of the 2003 war, all US military vehicles had electronic equipment called "blue-force tracker" which made them identifiable to American aircraft. Although some of this equipment was given to British forces, L/Cpl Hull's detachment was relying on fluorescent orange panels for visual recognition, mistaken by the A-10 pilots for Iraqi rockets.

"This hasn't been a big enough priority for the MoD," Mr Leigh told the IoS. "The technology has been available for years, but it is bogged down in Nato bureaucracy." Told of Gen Abizaid's comments, he called for the Government to take up the issue with Washington. "The point of holding a court-martial is not because you assume anyone is guilty, but to make sure the full facts come out."

Centcom's spokeswoman said: "You can be assured that when a tragic accident like this occurs, we learn everything we can from it and take appropriate steps to prevent a reoccurrence. In a complex combat environment, such incidents are never fully preventable."

The British inquiry pointed out that the incident closely paralleled one during the 1991 Gulf War. Nine men - six Royal Fusiliers and three Queen's Own Highlanders - died when two American A-10s mistook their Warrior armoured vehicles for Iraqi tanks.

Mel Gillespie, whose 19-year-old son Richard died in the attack, said the MoD's failure to update its battlefield identification system was a "disgrace."

"Fifteen years down the line they are still relying on orange tarpaulin and paint," he said. "These lads put their lives on the line, but they are treated like cannon fodder."

Barbara Thompson, who lost her son Lee, 19, said the authorities resisted a subsequent investigation, denying the existence of cockpit recordings and refusing to identify the pilots involved.

"What Matty Hull's family is going through - the lies and the deception - is exactly the same as what happened to us," she said.

Additional reporting by Martin Hodgson