Ep 7. Rules of Engagement

Rules of Engagement is the seventh episode of the 26th season of PBS’s acclaimed documentary series, Frontline. In this episode, Frontline examines the controversial American military policy on the use of force against insurgents in Afghanistan.

The episode takes a deep dive into the story of a U.S. Army sergeant by the name of First Class John Hatley and his platoon, who were commanded to hunt down and capture Taliban members responsible for planting explosive devices that were killing U.S. soldiers. The platoon’s tactics were highly aggressive and unconventional, sometimes making use of intimidation and death threats against the prisoners of war they captured. The U.S. Army leadership was aware of their tactics, which were said to have violated the Geneva Conventions, but allowed them to continue under the argument that they were necessary to save American lives.

The story is told through interviews with Hatley’s family members, former platoon members, military officials, and legal experts, providing insight into the reasoning of the soldiers on the ground and the higher-ups making the decisions. The episode’s interviews with Hatley’s family members—his wife, Ann, and his daughter, Jasmine—serve to humanize the soldier and provide a glimpse of what the soldiers and their families go through.

The episode also explores the broader policy of the U.S. military in its conduct during the war in Afghanistan. It examines the balance between following the rules of engagement and effectively combating the Taliban threat. While the U.S. military maintains that it follows strict protocols and adheres to the Geneva Conventions, critics argue that the military allows for a gray area when it comes to the treatment of insurgents.

Frontline provides a balanced view of the issue, presenting both sides of the argument. The U.S. Army officials and legal experts interviewed in the episode explain that the rules of engagement are designed to provide flexibility to the soldiers on the ground to respond to varied situations that may arise during combat. The rules are intended to help soldiers make time-sensitive decisions in the heat of battle, while still ensuring that they follow ethical conduct codes. However, some legal and human rights experts argue that the rules are too vague and often give soldiers too much latitude in their interpretation and application.

The episode also examines the question of accountability. The U.S. military’s system of justice relies on adherence to procedural rules and regulations, which can be challenging to enforce in a combat zone. An additional challenge arises from the lack of civilian oversight of the military in the decision-making process, leading to questions of transparency. The episode interviews military lawyers and independent human rights groups who argue that accountability is critical in situations where the military may be operating outside the law.

Rules of Engagement is a powerful episode that raises difficult questions surrounding American military policy. It challenges the viewer to question the ethics and legality of unconventional tactics employed by the military in its fight against insurgency. The episode paints a nuanced picture of the challenges and nuances of combat and the impact on the soldiers fighting on the front lines. It also raises questions about the accountability of military officials and policymakers in times of war. In the end, the episode offers no easy answers, which is indicative of the complex nature of this important issue.