Rights group: US, UK should suspend military aid to Kenya over torture allegations

[struggle4progress]

Source: Associated Press

By KATHARINE HOURELD

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) -- A human rights group urged Britain and the United States on Monday to suspend military cooperation with Kenya, saying Britain helped train Kenyan troops who are now accused of torture and murder.

Human Rights Watch says military aid should be halted until there is an independent investigation into atrocities and action is taken against those responsible.

Britain and the U.S. provide millions in assistance and training to security forces in Kenya, which is considered a regional hub for controlling extremist Islamist groups in the Horn of Africa.

"The British people should be concerned that their money is being spent on training forces implicated in torture, murder and disappearances,'' said researcher Ben Rawlence, who wrote Monday's report ...

http://www.dailymail.com/News/200807280365

Read more: http://www.dailymail.com/News/200807280365

[slampoet]

1. In other news Madonna just called Paris Hilton "Slutty"

Pot? Meet kettle.

[struggle4progress]

2. Thank you ever so much for that vacuous noise

[Cherchez la Femme]

3. It's an apt metaphor

exactly what I thought (principle, not exact words); that we, who now torture and think nothing of it, should penalize others for doing exactly what we do.

Guess I'm vacuous too

and I dare say many, many other people.


Thanks for your superior proclamation.

[struggle4progress]

5. Let us carefully examine your apparent point of view:

US and UK arm and/or train Kenyan troops
Kenyan troops engage in human rights abuses
US and UK engage in human rights abuses
Therefore US and UK must continue to arm and/or train Kenyan troop, for to do otherwise would merely be hypocrisy

The major gist of this argument seems to be: if client state, armed (for some probably not altruistic reason) by a militarily powerful country, the militarily powerful country must forevermore continue to arm the client state, unless the militarily powerful country is blameless. Among its other defects, the argument completely overlooks the historical fact that militarily powerful countries often commit their crimes against human rights indirectly, using client states

:crazy: but thanks for playing

[Cherchez la Femme]

6. With all due respect

seriously

WHERE are you getting all this about 'US & UK training Kenyan troops and therefore must continue' from those posts?

The person you responded to who posted about pot meeting kettle was responding only to the hypocrisy of the US demanding a country be punished over torture.
That is all I got of that post, a simple statement about hypocrisy.
Now both their and my posts are contorted into... something. Something much more convoluted and involved than what was commented upon.
The poster said nothing about Kenya, nothing about anything to make you reason out that "Therefore US and UK must continue...."

The posts were pointing out mere hypocrisy, and I agree with that in itself.
As for the inter-country politics of it all and drawing some kind of other conclusions, so far I have seen no appropriate comment made.


So you think this is all a game?

And you won this little battle, of course, with your superior "reasoning" skills?
Good job. :eyes:

[struggle4progress]

7. You find it hypocritical for HRW to ask the UK and US to stop arming/training torturers?

Why is it hypocitical to ask governments to stop funding human rights abusers? Many human rights abuses have been committed by US-funded proxies: what's hypocritical about asking for an end to that? Would you find it hypocritical of the US and UK to stop funding proxies who torture, because both the US and UK also seem to have a history of torturing people directly?

The part of my post about 'US & UK training Kenyan troops' came directly from the Daily Mail article I linked:

... Britain and the U.S. provide millions in assistance and training to security forces in Kenya. "The British people should be concerned that their money is being spent on training forces implicated in torture, murder and disappearances'' ...

These ideas also appear in the HRW report:

“All the Men Have Gone”
War Crimes in Kenya’s Mt. Elgon Conflict

... Summary ...

... In a joint army-police operation, the security forces conducted mass round-ups of thousands of men and boys, tortured hundreds if not thousands in detention, and unlawfully killed dozens of others ...

... Recommendations ... To the governments of the US and UK

Suspend police and military assistance and cooperation programs until the Kenyan military and Kenyan police fully investigate and take appropriate action regarding allegations of torture and other abuses by their forces ...
http://hrw.org/reports/2008/kenya0708/

I can't imagine what you find hypocritical there. More importantly, I can't see any relevance to the charge of hypocrisy. The charge of hypocrisy is generally leveled in order to decreases the moral leverage of an abuse complaint: thus, in cases where one has only moral leverage, real hypocrisy eliminates any possibility of exerting influence; however, when relevant material leverage (such as military funding for the abusers) exists, why shouldn't it be used to exert influence to end the abuses? I am sorry you consider that a game, but the people being abused may not consider it a game

[gratuitous]

4. Human Rights Watch does superior work

But the statement by Ben Rawlence, that "the British people should be concerned that their money being spent on training forces implicated in torture, murder and disappearances" beggars adequate description.