August 19, 2016
The only officer aboard the two small US Navy boats seized by Iran in January, Lt. David Nartker, has been punished for his role in the incident and plans to appeal, the Navy said last Thursday.
However, the Navy failed to say what his punishment was or specifically why his punished.
It is widely suspected he was punished for allowing himself to be videotaped apologizing to Iran for entering Iranian waters, as the Pasdaran holding him captive demanded.
But some suspect his punishment was more likely for changing his assigned route from Kuwait to Bahrain so that he entered Iranian waters. The route he was given would have avoided Iranian waters.
Ten sailors were held overnight by Iran. Nartker, 27, an Annapolis graduate, was the only officer on the boats. He is a lieutenant, the third rank up the officer ranks and the equivalent of a captain in the Army.
Lt. Cmdr. Jennifer Cragg, a spokeswoman for Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, which oversees the riverine boats in the Persian Gulf, said the appeal could alter Nartker’s punishment
“Following [non-judicial] proceedings, members may appeal the findings to a higher authority. The appeal authority may set aside the punishment, decrease its severity, or deny the appeal, but may not increase the severity of the punishment,” Cragg said.
An investigation by the Navy into the incident was released June 30 and found a string of missteps led to the seizure, including that the crews were not prepared for the mission, had recently failed navigation tests, did not have enough sleep before leaving Kuwait and were using boats with broken equipment such as radios.
On August 4, Nartker and an enlisted sailor, who was not identified, appeared before Rear Adm. Frank Morneau, commander of the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, to hear the charges against them, according to the defense official.
All charges were dropped against the unidentified sailor. However, Nartker was notified he would face punishment, which could include confinement to quarters, forfeiture of pay or a career-ending letter of reprimand.
The appearance before Morneau, known more commonly as a Captain’s Mast, is a way to discipline officers or enlisted personnel for minor infringements that do not warrant a trial, called a court-martial in the armed forces. Due to the high-profile nature of the incident, the hearings were elevated from a captain to an admiral, another defense official familiar with the hearings told’Stars and Stripes, the daily newspaper for US military personnel.
The fallout from the incident has already resulted in the removal of the commodore and executive officer responsible for the vessels, Capt. Kyle Moses and Cmdr. Eric Rasch and a third officer in charge of the detachment in Kuwait, who was not named. All were “relieved of command,” meaning they were fired from their posts, but not kicked out of the Navy. Nine Navy personnel were considered for various levels of punishment, Cragg said.
In a statement provided to Stars and Stripes, Naval Expeditionary Combat Command outlined the completed hearings and the punishments levied to date:
- Four Navy officers went to Admiral’s Mast. Two received punitive letters of reprimand for violating Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, disobedience of a superior commissioned officer, and Article 92, dereliction in the performance of duties.
- One Navy officer was found not guilty of violating Article 92 and accountability actions for the fourth Navy officer have not yet been completed.
• Two enlisted personnel who were on the boats received a punitive letter of reprimand for violating Article 92.