The 1999 Kosovo BSM Fiasco
In a couple of earlier comments and a previous article, I’ve referenced something I’ve called the “1999 Kosovo BSM Fiasco”. However, it occurs to me that many regular readers of TAH – especially those who are younger – might not know the history of that little escapade, and might have also missed the references. So I decided to write and post a brief summary of what happened and what resulted afterwards.
Background
In 1999, the US found itself engaged in hostilities with Serbia as part of NATO. The primary hostile actions were US and NATO airstrikes against targets in Serbia and Kosovo. The NATO operation was called Allied Force; the US operation was called Noble Anvil.
USAF and USN forces participated in this air campaign. Since the campaign involved hostilities, the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) was an authorized award for those participating in the operation.
Unfortunately, the USAF and, to a lesser degree, the USN decided to interpret the phrase “in connection with military operations against an armed enemy” inanely loosely. The resulting fiasco severely cheapened the BSM.
The Fiasco
The USAF awarded a number of . . . well, rather questionable BSMs during this operation. They awarded one to a Lieutenant Colonel commanding a squadron at Whiteman AFB, MO – because his squadron’s aircraft had bombed Kosovo. They awarded the BSM to three Colonels in Ramstein AB, Germany – because they’d been involved in planning. The Civil Engineering commander at Aviano AB, Italy, also received one for supporting combat operations by setting up a tent city. Obviously, none of these are in Serbia, Kosovo, Albania, or the rest of the combat zone for this operation. These individuals apparently never even entered the designated combat zone.
All told, the USAF awarded 185 BSMs for participation in these operations. Few of the personnel receiving them seem to have actually set foot in Serbia or Kosovo. None of the pilots flying over Serbia and Kosovo received one – the BSM cannot be awarded for actions involving aerial flight. In fact, the majority – if not virtually all – USAF BSM recipients for Serbia/Kosovo seem to have served at safe, peaceful locations CONUS, Germany, or Italy. I’ve only been able to find information showing 5 that actually set foot in Serbia or Kosovo. They were USAF enlisted personnel who participated in operations to rescue downed aircrews; four of these individuals deservedly received the BSM with “V” device for valor, the fifth a BSM sans “V”.
The USAF’s justification at the time? According to a USAF Lieutenant Colonel, “The Air Force has its own philosophy” (regarding awards), and that the awards were not at the time prohibited by existing law or regulation. And at the time (1999-2000), that Lieutenant Colonel was exactly correct.
The Navy also participated in the fiasco, albeit to a lesser extent. The USN and USMC awarded 70 BSMs for participation in these operations. One went to the Navy Captain serving as Executive Assistant to the Commander of the US contingent to the NATO operation – serving in Naples, Italy. Indeed, per then-Brig. Gen. James Amos, USMC, of the 5 members of that US component commander’s staff who received the BSM only one apparently actually served in the designated combat zone.
To be fair, in the Navy’s case things aren’t quite so blatantly bad. Many of the other BSMs awarded by the Navy were awarded to personnel serving on ships that supported operations from within sea areas designated as part of the combat zone. Thus at least a significant fraction of the Navy and USMC BSMs awarded during Kosovo were “honest” ones. But not all.
As is normally the case, the award of USAF and USN BSMs for Kosovo/Serbia was rank-skewed. Well, it is the equivalent of a MSM when awarded for service vice heroism, so that’s somewhat to be expected. But here it seems to have been somewhat more rank-skewed than usual. The references discuss that in detail.
In contrast, the Army – which had the majority of forces present on the ground in Albania and Kosovo, easily within Serbian artillery range – took a different tack regarding the BSM for Allied Force. The Army awarded precisely zero BSMs in conjunction with operations in Serbia/Albania/Kosovo during the operation.
The Army had over 5,000 boots-on-ground at the time.
Aftermath
When all of this became publicly known there was substantial outcry. And in a rare case of Congress actually fixing something via passing a new law, the 2001 Defense Authorization Act introduced a new requirement for the BSM. Henceforth, the BSM could only be awarded to individuals for actions performed while entitled to hostile fire or imminent danger pay. That statutory restriction remains in effect today and is found at 10 USC 1133.
Further details concerning this fiasco can be found here. The articles detailing the situation are from Stars and Stripes in mid-2000; full-text versions of the original Stars and Stripes articles are included at the link as references 1, 2, and 3 and follow the initial commentary there. They’re still rather disturbing today, more than a decade after the problem has been fixed.
If you’re still wondering about why the USAF reputedly was the driving force behind the new “Distinguished Warfare Medal” (DWM), perhaps the above might help you understand. The new abomination that is the DWM is not the first time the USAF has tried to legitimize giving combat decorations to those who never came within a thousand miles of a combat zone.
Category: Historical, Military issues, Veterans Issues
Hondo: Thanks for the history lesson. I have never heard this story, honestly. It does remind me of an article I read a while back where the Airforce, by 2004, had given out THOUSANDS of medals for actions in Iraq while the USMC had only given out a thousand or so (and I think the Army gave our a lot too). Begs the question: How could the AF give out more medals than a service with more boots on the ground? I will dig for the article. Thanks again. Us youngins need a good history now and then.
Wasn’t hard to find. It still pisses me off reading this.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4243092/#.UTCgcI6fN0U
“More than 69,000 awards and other honors have been handed out by the Air Force for the Iraq war, according to Air Force Capt. Richard Johnson. The list also includes four Air Force Crosses, one step below the Medal of Honor, plus 21 Silver Stars and over 1,900 Bronze Stars.
The Army trails just behind with 40,000 medals issued and approved, including 111 Silver Stars and more than 13,000 Bronze Stars.”
“The Marines, however, appear to have found a way to keep inflation in check.
Stephen Mackey, director of the Marine Corps medals and decorations branch, says the Corps has issued no Silver Stars or Navy Crosses to date for Iraq war service.
“We have a good number of medals in the pipeline, and it represents about the right scale given the scope and fighting the Marines did,” he says.
Medals to date include 200 Bronze Stars, 447 Purple Hearts, a number of air and commendation medals. A bit over 1,000 in all.”
Keep in mind: This was not even a year after OIF started.
Very interesting read.
This is 2012:
Of the 13,354 Bronze Stars the Air Force has awarded for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, 839 were awarded with valor for combat heroism, according to the Air Force.
Meanwhile, the Army has awarded 45,701 Bronze Stars for meritorious service and another 1,602 medals with “V” devices for operations in and around Afghanistan. The service also awarded another 108,775 Bronze Stars for meritorious service and 2,489 medals with “V” devices for the Iraq War.
That means about 6.3 percent of the Bronze Stars awarded by the Air Force are for combat valor, compared with about 2.6 percent of the medals awarded by the Army.
What cmts 1 and 4 said. VERY good stuff.
EdUSMCleg: for what it’s worth, the Army also awarded 21,649 PHs for Iraqi Freedom, 8,256 PHs so far for Enduring Freedom, and 349 PHs so far for New Dawn (the follow-on to Iraqi Freedom). That’s a total of over 30,000 PHs.
Marines aren’t that much better at dodging bullets/shrapnel/IEDs than soldiers. This implies that a whole lot more soldiers have been under fire than Marines – which in turn may explain much of the disparity in the number of other awards.
https://www.hrc.army.mil/TAGD/Awards%20and%20Decorations%20Statistics%20by%20Conflict
That said: the USMC does have the reputation for being the “stingiest” among the services regarding awards. IMO they’re doing some of their folks a grave injustice – because the numbers seem simply too far out of whack.
I say “seem” because I don’t have access to the total number of man-months USMC vice Army folks have served in Iraq and Afghanistan (USMC tours are shorter, so we can’t directly compare numbers who’ve served in each place). I thus can’t say with any certainty how different the two services really are with respect to awarding combat-zone decorations. But on the surface the difference does seem rather striking.
Very good read … now I know!
Hondo: I totally agree. I mean, the Army obviously has many more boots on the ground than the USMC. We are a small force and aren’t built to “occupy”. Therefore, it makes sense that they would have more combat awards. USMC is just as “bad at war” at times lol
The USMC is definitely more stingy with awards, and to a fault in my opinion. I have a warrant/citation for my NAM(V) that reads like a lot of BS(V) in another service. (I don’t actually care for the award, but am using it to prove a point). It was written up as a BS(V), but my Gunny apparently said “No one gets anything higher than a NAM(V) until the LT or I get something. We are in charge of you fuckers, so anything you do reflects on us”. No bullshit. Again, I could care less, but that also meant that the guys I wrote up for something higher than a NAVCOM got shit on too. You see this all over the place and it means service members aren’t being recognized as they should be. I have no problem with the Army awarding as many as they have, but the AF awarding more than the USMC? Something is wrong there.
What the hell is “Heroic achievement”, anyways hahahaha. Every time I read that on my or another Marine’s warrant I laugh. I wrote a kid up for a Silver Star once and they knocked it down to a NAVCOM(V) and the only reason I can figure is because he survived the actions he performed. That kid got robbed for sure.
I’d not heard of this going in with the Kosovo thing in 1999, but I have heard of that sort of problem since then. I was an Army officer assigned to an AFB for a little while and worked with a lot of AF officers. Many of them sported BSMs for service, but not all of them had actually deployed out of CONUS. I got to know one well and asked her about it and the story was that she was assigned to CENTCOM at MacDill AFB in support of OIF1 and rated it from her work there. As much as I’d like to get all exercised about it, I can’t really because I saw BSMs go to Army officers on deployment who pretty much did the same thing, just with the marginally greater risk of injury from indirect fire rather than a traffic accident in Tampa.
So, maybe the Army avoided the problem in 1999, but we’re right back manning the awards firehose now. And, although it was before my time, I understand that it didn’t start in 2001. There were plenty of Desert Storm guys around who told me about the deluge of CIBs and medals that the Army vomited out in 1991.
I suspect that it also has something to do with the various services wanting to legitimize their contributions to the conflicts.
Tom: if what the lady told you is correct, I’d love to know the details. By 2003 there was a legal (e.g, Federal law, not USAF reg) requirement to be in receipt of hostile fire/imminent danger pay while performing the acts for which a BSM was awarded. Unless she was making regular trips to the AOR, what she describes would not be legal – Tampa was never part of the OIF HFP/IDP zone.
I don’t really have any issue with folks who actually deployed to theater and went somewhere with actual hostilities getting a combat decoration (even IDF or perimeter fire kills people at times). Folks stateside, or in areas with no real threat? Different story. In my book, if you want a combat decoration, then go where you’re in danger of getting hurt or killed by enemy action. Otherwise, fuggedaboutit.
Blanket CIBs and the like are IMO a related but somewhat different issue. Regs for the CIB/CMB/CAB are explicit, but it’s clear that many units have “bent” or blatantly ignored the rules for the CIB since Vietnam in order to “take care of their folks”. Shouldn’t happen, but I don’t know any way to prevent abuse of the system if the folks having award authority don’t have the integrity to do the right thing. That’s true regarding the abuse of personal decorations as well.
I was a Battalion Adjutant in OIF2. I keep reading anecdotes about awards for valor getting downgraded by higher commanders and am really surprised by it. During our deployment, our battalion recommended different troops for two Silver Stars, one Soldier’s Medal, five Bronze Stars for valor, and a few (less than ten) ARCOMs for valor. (These were our valor awards only, of course there was also a cluster of service BSMs and ARCOMs, but I’m not getting into that mess)
All of our valor awards were approved. None were downgraded. It makes me think that we should have submitted more or submitted higher awards. I can think of one Silver Star and one BSMv in particular that seemed to be deserving of something higher – at least to me reading the recommendation and statements, I was not a witness.
I think the problem arose from the CoC’s unfamiliarity with wartime awards and their attitude towards them. Things like Silver Stars and DSCs were foreign to us then. They were for things we read about or saw in movies. Not for the guys we knew. This was OIF2 and no one had any real combat experience in the whole battalion. I think that combined with this battalion’s command climate resulted in alot of self suppression of valor awards.
I’m afraid that’s all the detail I know. This was a few years ago and paths have parted – sorry. She was an AF major at the time (2005) and was at MacDill during OIF1. She was good at her job and probably deserved some sort of recognition. Her CoC gave her the BSM for service. That’s about the end of it.
Definitely a good read, and I’ve seen plenty of people get medals overseas just because of “who they knew and who they blew”!
SSG Cox is not going to like this…
I served with Cpl Jason Dunham when he was killed in Iraq in 2004. It was basically an open and shut case that he wrestled with the insurgent who attacked him, took his helmet off, put it on top of a grenade, rolled the insurgent that pulled the grenade out on top of said helmet/grenade, and saved a few of us running to help out. He died a couple weeks later and we were all devastated. Our Company Commander put him in for the Medal of Honor and it took 5 years of us fighting for it for him to finally be awarded what he deserved. There was so much politics involved we almost gave up on it. The dude gave his life by taking a grenade blast and saved other Marines. We all saw it- plenty of witnesses.
I understand the scrutiny that an award that high brings, but holy s@%t it was an uphill battle. There needs to be standard criteria for all services or something. If someone did something, everyone around them believes it is warranted, then give it to them. If I write up my Marine for a BS(V) and all the witness statements say it is warranted because they were there and actually saw what happened, give it to him! Messed up that some dude in an office somewhere can knock it down. The whole “criteria” is an antiquated idea anyways. Let the commanders/leaders in the field make their own decisions. Can’t imagine it would be much worse than what we have now.
Tom: thanks. My guess would be the lady made at least some trips to theater in order to meet the legal requirement. Could be another “cheapie”, but it’s probably technically legit. The legal requirement had been on the books for over 2 years at that point, and I doubt that the USAF would have risked getting whacked a second time that soon for blatant abuse.
Regarding your unit: frankly, what you describe is about how the system should work if it’s working correctly. Sounds to me like your Bn Cdr and his Bde Cdr were (1) in good synch with the GOs they worked for, and (2) had the trust and confidence of those GOs regarding of screening awards before submitting same (and thus would not submit inflated recommendations). When that’s the case, it’s been my experience that what goes up usually gets approved. It’s when that’s not the case that things end up getting downgraded by higher HQ.
@16, Shhhhh or he’s going to start blowing up the Bronze Star thread again.
Wasn’t the Bronze Star created in WW2 as an answer to the Air Medal? And awarded to infantrymen who qualified for the CIB which means that they actually had bullets fired at them? Or artillerymen in combat?
When did we get to the point where staff officers are awarded Bronze Stars? I also raise my eyebrows at Sailors on ships receiving Bronze Stars. Huh?! It is a hard life at sea, that is for sure, but rarely in the last 25 years has a U.S. ship been in a fight at sea, certainly not in the Adriatic.
This award stuff is completely out of control. I am all for ensuring that we all receive recognition for the great sacrifices we make, but come on.
The provision for hostile fire or imminent danger pay will do little these days to restrict the award of the BSM, because if you pull a list of places that this covers, it’s a majority of the world. It’s downright silly how many places are considered to HF/IDP eligible, yet there hasn’t been a shot fired in anger for years or more, if ever.
I was in Bosnia at this time and remember the bombings but don’t remember this
It’s well documented, apparently. I just read up on it. Interesting stuff.
@ 16 Green Thumb …. ain’t that the truth … laughing!
No more Red Bull for SSG Cox!
EdUSMCleg: unfortunately, the “commander’s judgement” factor is – bluntly – a huge part of the problem with awards. Without standard criteria/examples/definitions, commanders are free to interpret regulations and award whatever is within their authority. A hardass will be stingy as hell, while a liberal guy/gal may award decorations far beyond what’s warranted by the actual situation or performance.
I don’t know how to 100% fix the judgement issue, and I don’t think it truly can be 100% “fixed” – people have their own opinions, and it’s rare that two people will view the same situation exactly the same way. But standardized criteria/examples and definitions can IMO go a long way towards helping fix the situation.
Case in point: what exactly constitutes “combat”? Believe it or not, neither the DoD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (JP 1-02) nor the Army’s Operational Terms and Graphics (FM 1-02, also concurrently MCRP 5-12A) actually defines the term “combat” – though the term is used throughout both documents.
The Manual of Military Decorations and Awards (DoDM 1348.33-V1) does, but the definition there is IMO so overly broad (“Armed fighting, battle, any struggle or conflict, strife”) as to be not particularly useful – under that definition, a gang fight, suppressing a riot, an argument or a wrestling match/fistfight could conceivably qualify (“armed fighting” for the first two, “strife” for the third, “any struggle” for the last). I don’t believe those are exactly what we’re looking for regarding military “combat” – even if they technically meet the requirements of the definition.
If we don’t even have a standard, joint definition of what we mean by “combat”, how can we hope to standardize the award of combat decorations and what they mean?
LCDR M(Ret): the BSM was indeed originally intended to be the ground equivalent of the Air Medal. However, the use of the decoraiton has changed over the years. Since the creation of the MSM in 1969, the BSM and MSM have been essentially the same decoration when presented for service or achievement vice heroism. (The criteria for the two when awarded for service or achievement are virtually word-for-word identical less the requirement for “connection with military operations against an armed enemy” the BSM requires). Between 1969 and 2001, the BSM was awarded if such meritorious service was performed in a designated combat zone, while the MSM was presented otherwise. A 2004 policy change, retroactive to Sep 11 2001, allowed the MSM to be awarded for duties in a combat zone that could legitimately be characterized as “noncombat service”.
Indeed, a prior version of the Navy award reg (SECNAVINST 1650.1) explicitly equated the two medals. I believe it was SECNAVINST 1650.1F (a 1990s version), and that the language specifically said that “the BSM is the combat-zone equivalent of the MSM” when presented for service or achievement (perhaps not an exact quote, but very close). I distinctly remember reading that and being a bit surprised that the Navy was so clearly stating that fact in print.
Unfortunately, that version was prior to the 2002 version (SECNAVINST 1650.1G), and I’ve not been able to locate a softcopy of one prior to that. The current version is 1650.1H (2006), so 1650.1F is 2 versions back.
Hondo – actually, that’s a fresh view of my OIF2 awards experience; I appreciate it.
I think you are right about the relationship between the Bn and Bde commanders, but the approval authority was another story. Our Bde deployed to Al Anbar and was OPCON to the 1st, later 2nd, MARDIV. Because of that, all of our awards for valor skipped the division and went to the MNCI commander. No body, not even the Bde commander, knew the MNCI commander and he never came out to our AO. I don’t know for sure, but I think we should have done a little more for some of the troops in the valor awards department.
Good points, Hondo. Thanks again.
[…] first became an issue during the 1999 Kosovo BSM fiasco. At that time, award of the BSM did not explicitly require service in a combat zone per se – it […]
We had a CPL transferred to our company and had an award ceremony for him for actions in Iraq. His Navy Achievement Medal citation was heroic as shit resulting in the saving other Marines lives and dead bad guys. He got a fricken NAM with a V… All of us were just floored that it was a NAM which is considered a joke in the Corps.
NAM’s and certificates of commendation is the Corps way of saying “good job” to enlisted but without higher actually meaning it. In my experience higher doesn’t like it when enlisted has things they don’t which I have no doubt contributes to enlisted Marines rarely being awarded anything.
When I say “enlisted” I’m talking about non SNCO’s, the guys getting shit done.
I’d heard mention of the AF’s Kosovo BSMs, but this is the first time I’ve heard details. As for the injustice of the awards system, I think it has gone two ways–justifiable combat awards for heroism have become more rare or under-awarded, while inflated awards for merit have become more widespread. Hopefully that makes sense, but here is my take on the subject: Combat awards: since the authorization of the “V” device for Commendation Medals and Achievement Medals (the Army does not allow the Army Achievement Medal to be awarded for valor, however), it seems that more and more junior enlisted, NCOs, and officers are decorated for heroism under fire with the least possible medal. I’ve yet to meet a junior Soldier (though I know some are out there) who has been awarded anything higher than an ARCOM/V, and based on some of the comments here and other places, it seems as though our Marine brothers-in-arms often award the NAM with “V” for actions that would have probably justified a BSM/V or even a Silver Star forty years ago. Now, I know my opinion is probably flawed, in part because our recent and ongoing wars haven’t been the massive conventional slugfests of WWII or Korea. We also have much better technology and protective measures than our forbears in Vietnam had, leading to a much lower overall KIA rate (though casualty numbers shouldn’t affect valor awards). Still, it seems as though Vietnam and earlier wars led to much higher numbers of the “big four” (MOH, Service Cross, SS, BSM/V) being awarded. Part of that reason is doubtlessly due to the lack of other valor awards in WWII and Korea, and part of it is probably due to the smaller unit actions that took/take place in Iraq and Afghanistan. I’ve recently read a few WWII-era General Officer bios, and it is amazing to see the extent of their decorations. Most of the divisional commanders–be they well-known or long-forgotten today–had multiple awards of the Distinguished Service Cross and/or Silver Star. Similarly, I just started a bio of Chesty Puller, and his five Navy… Read more »
[…] once in a great while, Congress actually steps in and makes DoD get something right. The 1999 Kosovo BSM Fiasco is a primary example. In reaction to the USAF’s abuse of the BSM during the Kosovo conflict, […]
I was involved in the Kosovo Campaign in ’99 on the USS Vella Gulf and I think it’s ridiculous than any sailors sitting in the Adriatic were awarded the BSM. All we did was sit far away from the coast and fire missiles and launch jets.
Why would any of us deserve a BSM for firing off a missile and then grabbing some ice cream and watching a movie?