Trump Approves Fort Hood Gunner Execution, First US Military Firing Squad in Decades

The U.S. Department of Defense recently confirmed that President Donald Trump has approved the execution of former U.S. Army Major and psychiatrist Nidal Hasan, who was convicted in the Fort Hood, Texas, shooting. The approved method of execution will be a firing squad, a rare form of capital punishment. This decision marks a significant turning point in the administration of the death penalty within the U.S. federal and military justice systems and sets a historical precedent, as it will be the first execution carried out by the U.S. military in over half a century, since 1961. The case has been mired in legal proceedings for more than 15 years since the incident in 2009. With the highest executive authority now approving the execution order, this incident—the deadliest military base shooting in modern U.S. history—has once again come into sharp public focus.

The tragedy, which shocked the nation and the international community, took place on November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood Army Base in Texas. At the time, Major Hasan, who served as a psychiatrist, suddenly lost control and opened fire with a concealed semi-automatic pistol at a waiting center where military personnel were undergoing administrative and medical processing prior to overseas deployment. This indiscriminate assault resulted in the deaths of 13 people, including 12 active-duty service members and one civilian, and left more than 30 others injured. Hasan was shot and subdued by police at the scene, leaving him paralyzed from the chest down and dependent on a wheelchair. The incident exposed severe vulnerabilities in the U.S. military’s mental health safeguards and base security management, sparking widespread societal discussion regarding military psychological trauma and religious radicalization.

During the subsequent military judicial trial, Hasan displayed strong resistance and ideological motives. He even proudly admitted to the crimes in court, claiming he attacked U.S. military personnel to protect Muslim brethren in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although his defense team attempted to argue for mitigated punishment based on his mental state and religious fervor, the panel of military judges concluded that the evidence was conclusive and that he showed no remorse. In 2013, they unanimously found him guilty on dozens of counts, including murder and attempted murder, and sentenced him to death. However, due to the rigorous procedures for executing death sentences in U.S. military prisons, which require multiple levels of appeals and final presidential approval, the sentence remained indefinitely suspended for a decade until President Trump formally signed the approval order.

One of the most prominent aspects of this case is the rare choice of execution method. Under U.S. military law, lethal injection is the standard method for military executions, though other methods may be permitted if allowed by the condemned or specific regulations. Hasan’s approved execution by firing squad will mark the first time the U.S. military has used this method since August 1961, when Army Private John Bennett was executed for rape and murder. In contemporary U.S. judicial practice, most states and the federal system have fully switched to lethal injection or the electric chair, leaving the firing squad largely in historical memory or as a backup option in a very few states. The military’s decision to reinstate the firing squad has triggered extensive debate among human rights groups and legal experts regarding legal procedures and technical execution, highlighting the uniqueness of this case in military judicial history.

The approval and impending execution of this case carry profound symbolic significance for U.S. society, the military, and the victims' families. For the families of service members who lost loved ones in the 2009 incident, this decision may bring a sense of delayed justice and some emotional solace, even though 15 years of waiting have turned their grief into resignation. On the other hand, the case has reignited intense domestic debates over the abolition of the death penalty, the efficiency of federal and military judicial enforcement, and the boundaries of state power. Human rights organizations opposing the death penalty have criticized the firing squad as a barbaric and outdated punishment that violates humanitarian principles, while supporters argue that the most severe legal sanctions are necessary to deter those who commit such heinous acts of terrorism and murder. With the issuance of President Trump’s approval order, this 15-year legal marathon has entered its final countdown, and the details of the subsequent execution and the resulting legal repercussions will continue to draw intense attention from various sectors.

(Source: Central News Agency)