commentary by Michael L. Bromley
copyright 2005

More entries: see Index

... of Politics

Mar 25/05: More torture!

Torture as a news event has given way to a few other stories (See some of my January entries in the index for the story's heights.) More importantly is that the story itself has evolved into old news. The only new in it is news of the U.S. Military cleaning house. Such as this, from the Associated Press:

Navy SEAL Court-Martial Full Of Secrets
March 21, 2005. SAN DIEGO - The court-martial of a Navy SEAL lieutenant accused of abusing a prisoner in Iraq is a case full of secrets - even the defendant's name is classified. The SEAL is accused of punching an Iraqi detainee in the arm and allowing his men to abuse the prisoner, who later died during CIA interrogation at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. He faces a trial set to begin Monday on charges of assault, dereliction of duty and conduct unbecoming an officer.

...Swirling around the case are reports that point to the involvement of the CIA's interrogation tactics in the death of the detainee - one of a handful of cases that the spy agency has referred to the Justice Department for possible prosecution. The SEALs acted as the CIA's warrant squad on dangerous "capture or kill" missions in Iraq, bursting into homes in the middle of the night and carting off suspects. A secret policy governed these missions under the SEAL credo of "speed, surprise and violence of action."

One's first thought depends on whether you agree or not with the mission. This case, however, ought to please all sides, for the subject at hand bombed and killed 12 at a Red Cross office. Good nab.

The SEALS got into trouble for smacking him around with guns and boots on the way to deliver him to the "Romper Room" at the SEAL base and to the CIA. From there, the CIA got mean, hanging him by cuffed wrists and pushing his chest against his backwards-turned arms, and so on. The guy died. Whether he gave up any intel along with his ghost is one of the secrets The AP says we're not going to hear.

Seems the SEALS's offenses were the rough delivery and taking photos of each other by him -- that is, as in the officer's case, for being ungentlemanly. Clearly, this happened before interrogators and jail guards learned that these are not the best of Kodak moments. The SEALS didn't kill him; the CIA did, or, to be more politic, he died under CIA supervision. The real tragedy in all this isn't prisoner mistreatment. Honestly, even if we do give a damn for this S.O.B., sympathies are for our own dignity and not that of the terrorist. Hopefully lives were saved by punching and pulling from him the address of a pile of artillery shells and AK47s that might otherwise have been used against Americans, Iraqi police, and civilian innocents.

Meanwhile, the usuals are all upset all over again. Here's the ever-pained New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman:

George W. to George W
Of all the stories about the abuse of prisoners of war by American soldiers and C.I.A. agents, surely none was more troubling and important than the March 16 report by my Times colleagues Douglas Jehl and Eric Schmitt that at least 26 prisoners have died in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002 - in what Army and Navy investigators have concluded or suspect were acts of criminal homicide.

Without noting that The Times report was triggered by the military's own investigations and prosecutions, such as that of the SEAL officer in The AP story, Friedman goes on to quote from a biography of George Washington that describes the cruel treatment of American prisoners by Hessians and Red Coats as opposed to the grace and generosity Washington ordered upon his own prisoners:

The words of the British commander, as much as the acts of his men," wrote Mr. Fischer, "reinforced the American resolve to run their own war in a different spirit. ... Washington ordered that Hessian captives would be treated as human beings with the same rights of humanity for which Americans were striving. The Hessians ... were amazed to be treated with decency and even kindness. At first they could not understand it." The same policy was extended to British prisoners.

As for Washington, so for the SEALS and the CIA: human dignity is not just its own reward. It starts there, but ultimately, there's a reason for it. Washington's policy was purposeful, and useful. If one has any wonder whether Washington kept the gloves on when dealing with nabbed spies -- non-uniformed combatants, that is, here's the answer:

John Andre, British spy. Washington refused
to shoot him like a "gentleman," and instead hung
him like a dog. Most insensitive.

Democratic principles aside, in times of war, a policy must above all else be effective to be in any way justified. It would seem that killing a prisoner is not a good trick of interrogation. I wish upon our boys and girls all the dignity of George Washington. We also need them to get the job done. There is no story here other than the military doing a supreme job at defeating evil without itself becoming it. I would never condemn an American soldier, sailor or agent for harming a terrorist. I would, however, want that the law be enforced. It comes down to that. As per The AP story:

During a pretrial hearing in January, a SEAL officer testified that the SEALs were taught that it was OK to use force to get a detainee's attention and were authorized to use deadly force. Prosecutors, however, insist they must be held accountable for a mission that got out of hand.
 

Here for previous entry
More entries: see index