Steitz calls for an Army explanation of protection failures
Danielle SteitzDirector of national security policy, Progressive Policy Institute
Danielle Steitz says commanders must avoid unnecessary risks and calls for an Army assessment of the warnings and protection failures described by Port Shuaiba survivors.
“Commanders owe a fundamental duty of care to their soldiers when it comes to force protection; while soldiers understand that they may be ordered into harm’s way to achieve a mission objective, it is incumbent upon commanders to avoid exposing them to unnecessary risk. The Army owes these soldiers and their families a clear-eyed assessment of what went wrong, why force protection warnings and intelligence assessments were disregarded, and why soldiers whose critical work reportedly required them to be within range of Iranian attacks were not adequately prepared or protected.”
Analysis
Where this statement fits
Did the military fail the troops wounded in the March 1 Iranian drone strike at Port Shuaiba?
On March 1, 2026, an Iranian drone struck a U.S. Army tactical operations center at Port Shuaiba, Kuwait, killing six soldiers of the Army Reserve's 103rd Sustainment Command and wounding dozens more. The next day Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described the drone as a "squirter" that made its way through air defenses and hit a fortified building. Survivors have since told CBS News and the Associated Press that the post had no defense against drones, that commanders had been warned, and that wounded soldiers waited days to be evacuated, were not recorded as combat wounded on arrival at Landstuhl and waited weeks or months for brain-injury care. The Pentagon says wounded troops are evaluated and may be admitted based on the severity of their injuries, the Army has rejected claims that it downplayed injuries, and the Army has not released its completed investigation. Democratic lawmakers have asked for answers. The dispute is over whether the military failed the troops at Port Shuaiba in how it protected them and how it cared for and documented the wounded.
Source and context
Analysis
About this source
Steitz's original commentary responds to Associated Press interviews with survivors and families. It records her assessment of commanders' duties and her call for an Army explanation.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Steitz wrote the assessment in the Progressive Policy Institute's Domain Awareness newsletter of October 8, 2026, after summarizing the Associated Press's interviews with survivors and with families of those killed. She first says the soldiers believed the installation was unprepared for the kind of drone attack they experienced. She then recounts a survivor's account that the unit's safety officer, Maj. Cody Khork, raised concerns about low-flying drones but was pushed by higher-ranking officers to clear soldiers to leave the bunkers; Khork was among the six killed minutes after an all-clear.
After the quotation
The assessment ends there. The newsletter moves on to an op-ed by Steitz and Mary Guenther about the Trump administration's restrictions on commercial remote sensing data over the Middle East.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The case asks whether the military failed the troops wounded in the March 1 drone strike at Port Shuaiba, in protecting them and in caring for them afterward. Steitz writes that commanders must avoid "exposing them to unnecessary risk" and that the Army owes soldiers and families an account of "why force protection warnings and intelligence assessments were disregarded" and why the troops were not adequately prepared or protected. That criticizes how the military protected the troops, so we labeled it Condemned. The closest competing label is Mixed or conditional, since she asks for the Army's assessment instead of stating its findings; it loses because she already describes the warnings as disregarded and the soldiers as not adequately protected.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseAmy McGrath faults the Army for not releasing its review of the Kuwait attack
“Six American soldiers were killed in Kuwait after warnings that their facility was vulnerable to a drone attack. The Army finished its review in June—and still hasn’t released it.”Read statement
Pentagon says wounded soldiers "received the care and treatment necessary in theater"
United States Department of Defense
“Soldiers wounded or otherwise injured during Operation Epic Fury received the care and treatment necessary in theater to return them to duty or evacuate them to a higher level of care outside the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility”Read statement
Army declines to comment on soldiers' accounts until families are briefed on investigation findings
United States Army
“Out of respect for the primary next of kin who will be scheduled for briefs on the official findings of the completed investigation, we will not comment on specific details, individual accounts, or leaked portions of the report at this time”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Steitz calls for an Army explanation of protection failures
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/5558-danielle-steitz-says-commanders-must-avoid-unnecessary-risks
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Steitz calls for an Army explanation of protection failures". First published: 2026-10-12. Last updated: 2026-10-12. https://disputeindex.com/events/5558-danielle-steitz-says-commanders-must-avoid-unnecessary-risks