A chorus of indignation rises from former U.S. officials, castigating the Pentagon’s persistent Pentagon silence surrounding a catastrophic missile strike on an Iranian primary school earlier this year. The incident, which Iranian officials claim killed 168 people—including a shocking 110 children—has plunged Washington into an unusual state of obfuscation, drawing stark contrasts with past military responses to civilian casualties. For two long months since the February 28th attack in Minab, the Department of Defense has offered nothing more than a perfunctory “under investigation” statement, fueling accusations of a profound lack of transparency.
This baffling stonewall comes despite early March media reports suggesting U.S. military investigators believed American forces were likely—albeit unintentionally—responsible for hitting the school. Yet, a final conclusion remains elusive, buried beneath layers of official reticence. “This incident is currently under investigation,” repeated a Pentagon official when pressed by the BBC for answers on the strike and the swirling allegations of opacity. They promised more details “when they became available,” a phrase now ringing hollow to many.
Unprecedented Pentagon Silence
Indeed, the current stance is strikingly divergent from historical precedent. The BBC’s own review of three prior cases involving civilian fatalities in U.S. operations revealed significantly more information had been disclosed by the Pentagon within less than a month. Lt Col Rachel E VanLandingham, a retired Judge Advocate General and former senior legal adviser to US Central Command, unequivocally stated that the current position “strikingly departs from the standard response.” Past administrations, she noted, at least “demonstrated fidelity, a commitment to the laws of armed conflict,” a commitment she argues is conspicuously absent now.
The lack of candidness extends to the highest levels. President Trump, on March 7, unilaterally blamed Iran for the Minab strike without offering a shred of evidence. Days later, when confronted with video evidence of a U.S. Tomahawk missile hitting a military base adjacent to the school, his response was a dismissive, “I haven’t seen it,” coupled with an unfounded claim about Iran possessing Tomahawk missiles. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, questioned by the BBC, merely echoed the ongoing investigation, asserting, “We of course never target civilian targets,” a statement that has provided little reassurance.
The Department of Defense has studiously avoided answering critical questions, including whether the Iranian military base next to the school was a pre-planned target on February 28. This silence is particularly vexing given their willingness to discuss pre-planned operations in countless other instances during the conflict. Last month, independent confirmation emerged from the BBC: video clearly showed a U.S. Tomahawk missile impacting the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) base. Unnamed military officials, cited in U.S. media, indicated preliminary inquiries pointed to a U.S. missile striking the school due to outdated target coordinates. Yet, the Pentagon silence persists, steadfast and impenetrable.
Wes Bryant, formerly a senior adviser on civilian harm mitigation at the Pentagon, finds the situation deeply troubling. He explained that preliminary inquiries typically establish if civilian harm occurred and if U.S. forces operated in the vicinity. “When you meet both of those criteria, that’s the only time that an investigation is actually formally initiated,” Bryant said. This, he argued, strongly suggests the Pentagon already knows the U.S. caused the incident but is simply unwilling to acknowledge it. “To not even be able to have any comment on it whatsoever is just unacceptable,” he declared.
Congressional Demands for Transparency
Congressional Democrats, too, are demanding answers, having penned multiple letters to Hegseth about the Minab strike. Responses from the Pentagon have been notably devoid of substance, simply stating an investigating officer has been appointed and results will be shared. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, called the official response “pathetic and completely inadequate” after closed-door briefings offered no admission of U.S. responsibility. Republican Senator John Kennedy, however, broke ranks, condemning the strike as a “terrible, terrible mistake” to The New York Times on March 10.
The pattern is not new. Annie Shiel, a former State Department official, observed a historical trend where the U.S. initially denies involvement, only to be forced to backtrack by media and NGO reports. While the appointment of an external investigating officer offers a glimmer of hope for independence, Shiel “absolutely” expects further acknowledgement of any U.S. role even as the probe continues. Charles O Blaha, a veteran of the U.S. foreign service, suggested the current Pentagon silence might stem from an administration reluctant to contradict President Trump’s unsubstantiated claim blaming Iran, attributing it to a broader dismissal of “any negative news about the war they branded as unpatriotic.”
About the Author
