Ian Bruce
Defence Correspondent
COLONEL Tim Collins, the British officer who made world headlines with his rousing eve-of-battle speech before the invasion of Iraq, has been cleared of war crimes in a preliminary report by the army's special investigation branch.
Military sources confirmed yesterday that claims by Re Biastre, a part-time US army civil affairs major, that Colonel Collins had mistreated Iraqi prisoners, threatened civilians, and ''pistol-whipped'' a local Iraqi official were unfounded and ''based probably on a personal vendetta''.
Major Stan Coerr, a US Marine officer in charge of an ''Anglico'' team attached to the Royal Irish Regiment throughout the campaign to co-
ordinate American air support and prevent ''friendly fire'' incidents, said the entire episode was triggered by spite.
Major Biastre, 37, a school counsellor in upstate New York, had been humiliated verbally and arrested for insubordination by Colonel Collins when he breached orders, and then argued with his British superior.
Major Coerr described his fellow-countryman's allegations as ''ludicrous'' and ''spiteful'' and said he would serve with Colonel Collins ''any time, anywhere''. He has also volunteered to testify in the colonel's favour in any inquiry.
Colonel Collins, now on leave after relinquishing command of 1st battalion, the Royal Irish Regiment, to await a new promoted post, still faces another inquiry into his style of leadership of the unit two years ago and an alleged ''climate of bullying'' by fellow officers which may have contributed to the suicide of 18-year-old Ranger Paul Cochrane in South Armagh in 2001.
Major Biastre was in charge of a detachment from the US 402nd civil affairs battalion in southern Iraq. His job was to smooth relations between the military and local civilians.
Colonel Collins had him placed under arrest for insubordination and demanded that he be demoted after he found Major Biastre handing out lollipops to children in the town of Al Rumailah in defiance of standing orders. British concern was that children would be at risk of being knocked down by army vehicles if they expected sweets to be handed out by anyone in uniform.
Major Coerr said yesterday: ''Biastre had a chip on his shoulder from the moment he arrived. All of us understood the order not to hand out candy, as it caused the children to run towards military vehicles.
''When Biastre violated the rule and Colonel Collins confronted him, he said something like 'you do your job and I'll do mine'. The colonel ordered him to stand to attention and salute a senior officer.
''Biastre did so reluctantly and sloppily. I think they call it 'dumb insolence' in the British army. When he continued to argue, he was arrested. That's what started the vendetta. It was pure spite. He was embarrassed about being humiliated in front of his own men.''
When Major Biastre was later summoned to Colonel Collins's headquarters, he was made to wait at attention for 45 minutes before being seen. He then submitted a 2400-word statement based on hearsay evidence to US authorities about the British colonel's alleged conduct towards Iraqi soldiers and civilians.
The statement also complained that British officers had described George Bush as a ''cowboy'' and were openly critical of US methods and competence after a series of ''friendly fire'' tragedies.
The main allegation was that Colonel Collins had led a party to the house of Ayoub Yousif Naser, a headmaster, and had struck him with his pistol, fired a shot into the floor, and kicked and punched him.
Mr Naser, who has not made any complaint, turned out to be a senior official in Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party. He also had two Kalashnikov rifles buried in his garden. Friends said yesterday that Colonel Collins, 43, felt he was being ''hung out to dry''.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article