LONDON: US officials remain deeply divided over the 2022 killing by Israel of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in the West Bank, with new revelations suggesting the State Department delivered an “equivocal assessment” intentionally, and “soft-pedaled to appease Israel,” The New York Times reported on Monday.
Abu Akleh, a celebrated Al Jazeera journalist, was shot while wearing a blue press vest as she covered an Israeli raid in the Jenin refugee camp in the occupied West Bank.
Though initial Israeli statements blamed Palestinian gunmen, the regime’s military — under intense pressure from the international community — later acknowledged that she was very likely shot by an Israeli soldier who “misidentified” her.
Col. Steve Gabavics, a retired US military policeman involved in the investigation, told the NYT he was certain the Israeli sniper knew he was targeting a journalist — even if not Abu Akleh specifically.
Based on military radio records, the journalists’ visible location, and the precision of the shots, Gabavics stressed the evidence strongly pointed to a deliberate act.
Gabavics said he clashed with his then-superior, Lt. Gen. Michael R. Fenzel, over whether the shooting was intentional.
He was ultimately sidelined, and the US report stopped short of calling the killing deliberate.
Gabavics said that he and his colleagues “were just flabbergasted that this is what they put out,” adding that the decision by the US not to call it intentional “continued to be on my conscience nonstop.”
“The favoritism is always toward the Israelis. Very little of that goes to the Palestinians,” he said of his experience working in the office.
The official US review concluded that “gunfire from IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) positions was likely responsible for the death of Shireen Abu Akleh” but “found no reason to believe this was intentional, but rather the result of tragic circumstances.”
However, NYT sources said that based on evidence gathered the intent was clear but softened for political reasons.
Fenzel maintained in statements to the NYT that investigators lacked “sufficient evidence” to prove intent, insisting he “stands by the integrity” of the work and the final conclusions.
Abu Akleh’s killing sparked global condemnation and renewed debate about the targeting of Palestinian journalists, an issue acutely highlighted during Tel Aviv’s war on Gaza.
Multiple independent inquiries — including those by the NYT, UN, and other organizations — have largely contradicted Israeli and US official assessments, pointing to evidence of a deliberate shooting.
Earlier this year, a documentary from American network Zeteo reportedly identified the Israeli soldier responsible for the fatal shot — who was later killed by a roadside bomb in Jenin in 2024.
The film cited anonymous US officials who said the initial report had concluded the shooting was intentional, but the wording was later softened to avoid diplomatic fallout.
Gabavics was confirmed by Monday’s NYT investigation as the official who first raised concerns about the decision-making.
More than three years after the incident, Abu Akleh’s death remains a contentious point for both US officials and international observers.
Of all the cases he worked, Gabavics said “this was the one that probably bothered me the most,” because “we had everything there.”
