Winning battles, losing wars (Japan Times) [re:Abuse]

[nosmokes]

original

Winning battles, losing wars
~snip~
.
.
.

On the other side of the globe, the United States recently released a report on the abuse of detainees held in U.S. facilities throughout Iraq and Afghanistan. The report, compiled by U.S. Army Inspector General Lt. Gen. Paul Mikolashek, identified 94 incidents of confirmed or possible abuse that occurred, yet concluded that the incidents were the result of "the failure of individuals" who did not follow known standards of discipline,or leaders who did not enforce those standards. It found no pattern of abuse or involvement by higher ranking individuals.

The report has been sharply criticized. It identified 20 deaths and 74 instances of abuse -- beatings, sexual assaults and thefts -- but did not address the use of unmuzzled dogs during interrogations or the existence of "ghost detainees" (captured people without a record of detention), even though other U.S. military reports have documented those practices. It concluded that the abuses involved a small percentage of the 50,000 detainees seized in Afghanistan and Iraq. The problems it did uncover were the result of individual "aberrations" rather than "systemic" problems. That's the same defense that has been used by the U.S. government since reports of the horrifying abuses first surfaced.

Those conclusions fly in the face of previous Army investigations that said interrogators and guards were poorly trained and supervised, that their orders were unclear, and that facilities in which detainees were kept were unsafe and unsanitary. Lt. Gen. Mikolashek's report does not disagree with those findings, but it differs on the question of culpability. Red Cross reports found that detainee abuse was part of a pattern that resembled torture and seemed to be tolerated by the government, particularly since the behavior continued even after being brought to the attention of U.S. officials.

The prisoner abuse scandal has badly damaged the image of the U.S., especially in light of the argument that the elimination of human-rights abuses was one justification for the U.S.-led coalition to topple the Taliban and Saddam Hussein.

The strongest and most important weapon the civilized world has in the struggle against terrorism is the freedom and dignity offered to citizens. If these are sacrificed for expediency, we will have lost the war. The greatest danger is that in fighting this threat, we will become like our enemies -- as appears to have been the case at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere. The law must remain supreme if we are to maintain our moral superiority in the struggle against terror and extremism.

The Japan Times: July 31, 2004
(C) All rights reserved

[gottaB]

1. It's an interesting comparison

but perhaps unfair to compare a legal ruling to an out-and-out whitewash. SCOTUS slapped down the Bush* Adminsitration pretty hard on the Guantanamo cases. The Indosesian Constituional Court barely ruled (5-4) against retroactively applying anti-terrorism laws--which isn't to say its not a victory for their constitutional government.

Japan Times is right about Mikolashek's report, though. It stinks. The damage to the US image is real, and this pathetic attempt to divert attention from Rumslfeld and the Office of the President isn't fooling anybody.