Diplomat: Special ops kept from going to Benghazi

The report calls into question the veracity of White House accounts of the event.

THE WASHINGTON POSTMay 7, 2013 

WASHINGTON - As the weakly protected U.S. diplomatic compound in eastern Libya came under attack the night of Sept. 11, 2012, the deputy head of the embassy in Tripoli sought in vain to get the Pentagon to scramble fighter jets over Benghazi in a show of force that might have averted a second attack on a nearby CIA complex.

Hours later, according to excerpts of the account by the U.S. diplomat, Gregory Hicks, American officials in the Libyan capital sought permission to deploy four U.S. special operations troops to Benghazi aboard a Libyan military aircraft early the next morning. They were told to stand down.

GOING PUBLIC

Congressional investigators released a partial transcript of Hicks' testimony Monday in advance of a hearing on Wednesday at which he is scheduled to appear. His remarks are the first public account from a U.S. official who was in Libya at the time of the attacks about the options that were weighed as militants mobbed the American diplomatic outpost and CIA station in Benghazi, killing U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other government employees.

The account is certain to reignite a debate over whether the Obama administration has been sufficiently forthcoming in its public accounting of the events and missteps that resulted in the first death of a U.S. ambassador in the line of duty in a generation.

When it was all over and the jets had not been scrambled and the troops not dispatched, an American lieutenant colonel in Tripoli who commanded the four-man special ops team told Hicks he was sorry his men had been held back.

"I've never been so embarrassed in my life that a State Department officer has bigger balls than someone in the military," the officer told Hicks, according to the diplomat's account. Hicks called that "a nice compliment."

The administration has said that the independent review it commissioned after the Benghazi attack was exhaustive, and State Department officials have vowed to move swiftly to implement post-Benghazi reforms to make U.S. missions abroad safer. Republicans in Congress, however, say Hicks' account suggests the administration has not been entirely truthful.

"The White House and the Pentagon have allowed us to believe that there were no military options on the table," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, one of the lawmakers who has called for greater disclosure about the attacks, said in a phone interview Monday. "The model of the military is to leave no person behind, and it's stunning and unacceptable to think we had military willing and ready to go and the Pentagon told them to stand down. That's just not the American way."

HELP DENIED

Chaffetz said the four troops who were not allowed to travel to Benghazi would have arrived after the attack on the CIA base ended, but may have provided first aid to wounded personnel. He noted that the order to keep them from traveling was given before the second attack began.

A Pentagon spokesman said he would review the excerpt from the upcoming testimony. Defense Department officials have said they had no units that could have arrived in Benghazi in time to counter the attacks.

Idaho Statesman is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service