MERIP
Middle East Research and Information Project
Middle East Report
Middle East Report Online
Newspaper Op-Eds

MiddleEastDesk.org
Press Room
Background

Contact Info
Subscribe
Back Issues
Internships
Giving
Search
Subscribe Online to
Middle East Report

Order a subscription and back issues to the award-winning magazine Middle East Report.

Click here for the order page.


SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS

Primer on Palestine, Israel and the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Click here (PDF)

[Click here for HTML version]

 

 

 

Banning Torture Affirms America's Humanity

Lisa Hajjar

Topeka Capital-Journal (11/19/05)
East Texas Review (11/24/05)
Joplin Globe (12/05/05)
The Journal-Register (11/21/05)
Morris Sun Tribune (11/30/05)
The Bulletin Online (12/12/05)
Minuteman Media

Torture, as President George W. Bush clearly knows, is against the law. The administration keeps reasserting this point because the US torture saga keeps deepening.

Under fire for the "enhanced interrogation techniques" employed in secret CIA jails and at Guantánamo Bay, Bush rejoined that the US faces an enemy "that lurks and plots and plans and wants to hurt America again. And so, you bet, we'll aggressively pursue them, but we'll do so under the law." He hastened to add: "We do not torture."

In fact, the US does torture. This is confirmed not just by the International Committee of the Red Cross, but also by FBI agents who were privy to interrogations, and US soldiers who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan and Cuba.

Torture is prohibited and criminalized under US federal and military laws, as well as international treaties. In 1994, Congress ratified the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The convention clearly states: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification for torture."

But, not long after the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration, most prominently Vice President Dick Cheney and his staff, was tempted to disregard those strong legal prohibitions as irrelevant to the "new paradigm." Their disdain for the rule of law led to authorization of "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- sleep deprivation, intimidation with military dogs, and sexual humiliation -- that are commonly denounced as torture, or tantamount to it.

The Senate's fight to ban these techniques, led by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), is not just about the morality or effectiveness of torture and not just about shoring up America's sagging reputation abroad. It is about keeping the president accountable to the law and about defending the rule of law itself.

The universally recognized baseline standard for the treatment of prisoners (including "unlawful combatants") is Geneva Convention Common Article 3, adopted in 1949 and subsequently incorporated into the US Uniform Code of Military Justice. Article 3 says that detained persons "shall in all circumstances be treated humanely." Therefore, certain specified acts "are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever" including "cruel treatment and torture," and "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."

The Bush administration ignored the legal prohibitions, 50 years of military practice and the warnings by top military lawyers that this would be a disaster. If the excuse was that our enemies were "the worst of the worst," the license to perpetrate torture and inhumane treatment mutated into the brutalization and degradation of run-of-the-mill prisoners at Guantánamo, and later, at Abu Ghraib. It has also led to the prosecution of over 100 US soldiers.

In October, McCain introduced an amendment that would ban torture and bring all interrogations conducted anywhere in the world by US agents back within the rubric of the law. The Senate voted 90-9, with many Republicans bucking the White House, to pass the amendment. In response, Vice President Dick Cheney is leading the White House effort to maintain an exemption for the CIA from the limitations on interrogation tactics McCain's measure would impose.

The right not to be tortured is a universal, inalienable human right. While, under some circumstances like defensive wars, a state may legally kill, there is no circumstance -- not one -- which allows a state to practice torture. When the Bush administration created a category of persons protected neither by the Geneva Conventions nor US courts, they stripped those persons of their human rights.

The McCain amendment against torture and dehumanizing treatment does not, therefore, simply give voice to America's better angels. To reverse the Bush administration's erosion of prohibitions against torture is to affirm that, in the United States, no one is above the law, and no one is outside the protections of the law.

---

Lisa Hajjar teaches in the Law and Society Program at the University of California-Santa Barbara. She is an editor of Middle East Report, published by the Middle East Research and Information Project. She wrote this for the Middle East Research and Information Project. MERIP, publisher of Middle East Report magazine, is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organization based in Washington, D.C. www.merip.org.

DonateNow

Search MERIP

MERIP OP-EDS
Want to Fight Terrorism? Think Globally, Act Locally
Globe and Mail (Toronto),
August 4, 2008
Khalid Mustafa Medani

Militant Islam is under global scrutiny for clues to conditions that foster its rise, and to strategies for reversing that growth. But the key is not in Islamic doctrine, US foreign policy or formal ties to various nations, as many analysts have asserted. It lies at the community level, with clan and local leaders. Full Story>>


Iraq’s Kurds Have to Choose
Globe and Mail (Toronto)
July 30, 2008
Joost Hiltermann

Kurdish parties have become kingmakers in Baghdad , and they know it. As no federal government can work without them, they are pulling every available political lever to expand the territory and resources they control, trying to build the foundation of an independent Kurdish state. But even more than territory, they need security. If everyone acts quickly and wisely, that understanding could help resolve one of the Iraq war’s thorniest issues. Full Story>>


Exiting Iraq Is Easier Than They Say
The Nation (web-only)
July 16, 2008
Chris Toensing

The debate over the war in Iraq follows a yellowing script: The minute someone suggests that the US move to withdraw its troops, war supporters cry “Havoc!” True to form, when no less a figure than Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki stated he wants a timeline for a US pullout, John McCain summoned the specter of dire consequences. “I’ve always said we’ll come home with honor and with victory and not through a set timetable,” McCain said. In his major foreign policy speech on July 15, Barack Obama affirmed his support for a withdrawal timetable, adding that the US must “get out as carefully as we were careless getting in.” Obama’s position is the correct one, but he, like many other war critics, has done too little to counter the refrain that withdrawal is simply “cutting and running,” a recipe for disaster. Full Story>>


Presidential Pandering on Palestine
Asheville Citizen-Times
July 4, 2008
Bayann Hamid

At the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) earlier this month, presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama competed over who would become the “candidate for Israel.” The match came to a draw when both candidates pledged undying and unconditional support for Israel. While their support for “Israel right or wrong” was unquestionable, at the end of all the commotion, the most pertinent question for Americans and the world remained unasked and unanswered: Who is the candidate for peace? Full Story>>


The Next President's Iran Dilemma
In These Times
February 6, 2008
Chris Toensing

Quick: Who is the strategic victor, to date, of the war in Iraq? Nearly everyone outside the Bush administration (and perhaps some within it) would answer: the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The catastrophe of the U.S. occupation of Iraq has bolstered the clerical regime in Tehran, while souring ordinary Iranians on the prospect of U.S.-delivered “democracy.” The occupation has done so by emplacing Iranian-backed Shiite Islamists in power in Baghdad and cooling the jets of those in Washington hoping to “shock and awe” Iran's mullahs. Full Story>>


Libya's Fat Cat
The Topeka Capital-Journal
January 11, 2008
Chris Toensing

Few dictators in the world are sitting prettier in 2008 than Col. Muammar Qaddafi of Libya. In a region full of potentates and presidents-for-life, his reign is supreme. Having seized power in a 1969 coup, he has ruled his country for longer than any other Arab head of state. And now, as wintry January begins, the colonel has quietly completed his journey back in from the cold. Full Story>>

  Home | Contact/Intern | Background Info | Middle East Report | MER Online | Newspaper Op-Eds | Giving

Copyright © MERIP. All rights reserved.