Published
March 15th, 2008
in
Surveys |
Comments Off
Foreign Policy magazine and the Center for New American Security (CNAS) surveyed more than 3400 retired and active duty officers on the state of the U.S. military. Forty-four percent disagreed with the statement, “Torture is never acceptable.”
Lt. Col. John A. Nagl, who helped write the Army’s counterinsurgency field manual, remarked at the survey’s launch event on February 19, 2008:
I was both surprised and disturbed by the number of serving and retired military officers who thought that torture might be acceptable. Frankly, I joined the military to fight against people who torture. And the fact that 44% thought that it might acceptable… Some of that might be a reflection of the Jack Bauer effect, and the extraordinarily hypothetical one in a million million sort of cases. But we the American military have to be very careful, I think, to preserve our most treasured attribute, which is our reputation for being the good guys, and I was very disturbed by that.
Summary of the panel discussion from the Center for Defense Information
President Bush vetoed a bill to require the CIA to limit interrogation methods to those outlined in the Army manual. Congress failed to override the veto on a party-line vote. Father Jonathan Morris (Fox News) argues that President Bush’s intentions are good, but not his philosophy.
President Bush has referred to these specialized procedures as “efficient,” “necessary,” “legal,” and “safe.” The problem here is that none of his adjectives get to the heart of what’s wrong with torture. Efficiency and necessity are purely pragmatic concepts. Under their banner, the world has witnessed every sort of evil. And legality and safety are equally unconvincing justifications. Does making something legal make it right? And safety? The twisted suggestion that some torture is safe obfuscates the horrid nature of torture, a degradation of human dignity and liberty.
The U.N. investigator on torture, Manfred Nowak, was denied access to U.S.-run jails in Iraq. The British government has agreed to allow him to visit their detainees in Iraq. Reuters, March 11
The Pentagon discovered nearly 50 tapes documenting interrogations of two suspects. The tapes do not appear to reveal any unlawful treatment. The New York Times, March 11
The first U.S. war tribunals since World War II are underway. An Afghan prisoner on trial for throwing a grenade in Afghanistan when he was 16 compared U.S. forces to the Taliban government that imprisoned and killed people without trial. He claims he was tortured. Reuters, March 12
The week ended with the House holding a rare secret session to discuss non-secret material, and the start of a four-day protest by hundreds of veterans and active-duty soldiers of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars at a gathering called Winter Solder (interview at Democracy Now!).
International
The use of waterboarding by the United States affected a case in Canada against two suspected Al Qaeda operatives. Canada threw out evidence obtained through the CIA’s waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah, stating that “torture is morally repugnant and not particularly reliable” and that Canada “does not knowingly use information which has been obtained through torture.” Tainted Evidence by Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball, Newsweek, March 5. NPR interview.
Afghan detainees are not covered by Canada’s bill of rights, a Canadian judge ruled. Canadians had halted transfers of Taliban insurgency prisoners to Afghan authorities after evidence of torture. Transfers will resume. International Herald Tribune, March 12
“July 21st, a bunch of guys got on buses in London with bombs, and they escaped. The British police got them all in ten days, and the break in the case came when the parents of Muktar Said Ibrahim, loyal British Muslims, turned in their son when they saw the security video. Would they have turned him if they knew their son was going to be tortured? The answer is: obviously not. Right? We know the kinds of things that work in policing. The FBI knows it. This is a standard practice. And the more we torture, the less it is that people will surrender to us.”
Scott Shane wrote in The New York Times about the challenge of bringing scientific rigor to the art of interrogation. (March 9)
“We undertake this work because we believe that every human being bears the image of our maker. That’s why we’re doing this. No one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave.” President Bush, speaking to the National Religious Broadcasters convention (March 11)
Jon: What do you think of the more coercive stuff, the waterboarding and such?
Ronald: I think it was fine in that particular situation. Most of the time the CIA does not want to use waterboarding, they want to use cooperation. But in that case there was a threat that there would be a second wave of attacks. These guys were not talking, they had to get information, and they did, and they stopped plots that would have killed millions of people.
Jon: Does that hurt or help us in the long run?
Ronald: I think, in the long run, if we protected ourselves from another attack, that’s the most importing thing
Jon: Is it?
…
Jon: But the thing about waterboarding that always struck me is, even if it saves some lives, do we give up too much of our soul to do that? Because isn’t the measure of a country how it handles itself in difficult times, not in easy times? It’s very easy to say we abide by the Geneva Conventions, until we found out somebody wants to hurt us, and then, hey man, everybody for themselves.
Ronald: Well, the Geneva Conventions actually allow this because these people are not regular military people in uniforms.
Jon: Geneva Conventions allows you to waterboard people who don’t wear uniforms?
Ronald: Yeah, because these are people who behead people, they don’t abide by Geneva Conventions.
Jon: That might be a technicality. I’m not sure the spirit of the Geneva Conventions is like, hey look, if they don’t have a hat, do whatever you want.
Ronald: Our own special operations forces are in fact subjected to waterboarding as part of their training.
Jon: Because they might have it done to them…
Ronald: Exactly. And it’s not torture in the sense that it’s painful, that’s what torture is defined as. It’s harsh, it’s scary…
Jon: That’s an argument that’s hard to make. Drowning someone is torture… One more thing. The only point I was going to make is we prosecuted the Japanese for waterboarding our soldiers in World War II.
Ronald: It was a different kind of waterboarding, it actually involved…
Jon: What, do we waterboard on Tempurpedics? What do you mean? How different? What kind of water?
Ronald: Using real water as opposed to just covering them in cellophane and giving the impression, but the important thing is…
Jon: So this is like the mock apple pie of waterboarding that we do, not a real type waterboarding thing…
Ronald: …and actually it was only used three times, and not since 2003. Now they’re not going to use it anymore, so it really is moot. The important thing is… we have not been attacked. It’s because of these measures, it’s because of the Patriot Act, even though that’s demonized…
Jon: It’s hard to point to causation because they’re so secretive. I mean it’s… what they’re saying is trust us, it’s because of this, even though a lot of the other things you’ve found out about us have turned out to be less than credible.
As expected, President Bush vetoed the Intelligence Authorization Act which included a provision to limit the CIA to interrogation techniques included in the Army Field Manual.
President Bush is expected to veto the Intelligence Authorization Bill which would require the CIA to follow the interrogation guidelines in the Army Field Manual. His radio address this weekend is expected to address this issue. See the New York Times editorial “Horrifying and Unnecessary,” March 2, 2008, which describes the restrictions President Bush opposes.
The PBS show NOW aired an excellent segment tonight (March 7) on torture featuring an interview with Alex Gibney, director of “Taxi to the Dark Side.” The online site has a good overview of the main issues.
Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, the Defense Intelligence Agency director, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he considers waterboarding to be inhumane, and that the interrogation techniques allowed by the Army Field Manual are effective (YouTube). CIA Director Michael Hayden said in a statement to the Associated Press that interrogation techniques not in the Army Field Manual would be outlawed. Hopefully President Bush will clarify this weekend in his radio address. Pamela Hess, AP via Boston Globe, February 27, 2008
In spite of public assurances to the contrary, the United States and Britain admitted that two planes carrying rendered suspects landed in the British territory of Diego Garcia in 2002. There are claims that a CIA detention center was located on Diego Garcia, and that prisoners were held in prison ships outside Britain’s three-mile territorial zone. See “British island ‘used by US for rendition’” by Jamie Doward, guardian.co.uk, March 2, 2008.
Background
“The Water Cure: Debating torture and counterinsurgency—a century ago” by Paul Kramer, The New Yorker, February 25, 2008. (Note: the administration would probably claim that modern-day waterboarding is not the same as described in this article, so the comparison is unfair. The current method of invoking terror by suffocation and simulated drowning does not fill the lungs or stomach with water to the same extent.)
Opinion
“To stand against torture and arbitrary detention is not to be squeamish. It is to be civilized.” From “When We Torture” by Nicholas D. Kristof, The New York Times, February 14, 2008.
“That torture is even a subject of debate in this country is a flabbergasting development. That dozens of America’s most admired military leaders find themselves openly opposing the commander in chief on such a question is equally surprising.” From “Torture shocks” by James Carroll, The Boston Globe, March 3, 2008
“They assert that our enemies are more evil than any previously encountered, and therefore we are justified in jettisoning two centuries of enlightenment in which the United States of America was morally superior to any despotic regime that would stoop to the barbaric practice of torture.” From “Torture just turns us into barbarians” by Tom Decoursey, Wednesday Journal of Oak Park and River Forest, March 4, 2008
International Perspective
“The leader of a democratic country should be a symbol of that country’s values. The US rightly prides itself on the principle of justice for all. What does it say then if Bush condones torture? It says that the principle and the practice have split apart.” From “There is no excuse for torture” by Warwick McFadyen, The Age (Australia), March 7, 2008
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that countries cannot deport foreign nationals to countries where there would be a real risk of torture or ill-treatment. Britain argued to balance the risk of torture against the treat to national security. See “The ban stays absolute” in The Economist, February 28, 2008, or “Legal Opinion: Why governments can’t carry on turning a blind eye to torture” by Robert Verkaik, The Independent (UK), March 5, 2008
:
. Here’s a transcript of their discussion about interrogation techniques and waterboarding:
Stand up and speak out to ban torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.