U.S. and Torture: For Mr. Obama, It's 'Hard to Be Gorby'
"There are no legal loopholes in the Convention on Torture that would justify pushy investigators - that's just how it's written. ... On the other hand, a
convention is a convention, whereas real-life is so much richer. Even in a
conventional war that can be conducted more or less according to the rules,
there are situations in which the talkativeness of a prisoner must be
stimulated. 'I was just obeying orders-This is no defense' is considered universal, although life tells a different story."
President Obama shows off his own Florida Gators jersey as the NCAA champs visit the White House, April 23. Has the president undermined his image as a 'New Gorbachev?'
After Barack Obama was hailed
as a new Gorbachev and a reformer, public opinion has
fluctuated about whether he's a real Gorbachev or just an impostor - and about
whether these incremental processes of perestroika [reform or
restructuring] are reformist enough.
The latest doubts about Obama's
Gorbachevian nature came after the U.S. president visited CIA headquarters [video
below] and assured U.S. chekists
[spies] that the administration "will be as vigorous in protecting you
as you are vigorous in protecting the American people." What was meant was
not at all to show a sympathetic attitude toward the chekists, but rather
to address to a specific dispute: will chekists who (in accordance with orders
from higher-ups) practiced "special techniques" - i.e. torture -
during interrogations of people suspected of terrorism, be prosecuted or not?
The methods of interrogation
employed at Guantanamo fit the definition of torture under U.N.
Convention. Guantanamo is under the jurisdiction of the United States, and
the Convention doesn't allow for circumstances that would excuse the use of
special methods: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever may be invoked
to justify torture, including war, threat of war, internal political
instability, public emergency, terrorist acts, violent crime, or any form of
armed conflict." There are no legal loopholes to justify pushy investigators
- that is just how the convention is written.
CIA
Director Leon Panetta listens as President Obama speaks
to
Central Intelligence Agency employees at CIA headquarters
On the other hand, a convention
is a convention, whereas real-life is so much richer. Even in a conventional war
that can be conducted more or less according to the rules, there are situations
(such as the capture of a potential "source" for example) in which the
talkativeness of a prisoner must be stimulated - and everyone in the army who
fights "for real" must impose such stimulation. In irregular warfare,
which is the type of war the United States is conducting, it's even more
difficult to imagine what methods not covered by the U.N. Convention the
Americans might have used to smash the Islamist underground, to wrench out of
its members names, passwords, meeting sites, etc. That's what former U.S. Vice
President Cheney means when he points out that the special techniques were "successful."
This is entirely possible. The use of torture during an investigation is
generally conducted not for the sake of sadistic satisfaction, but for the sake
of effectiveness.
It's another matter entirely
that this doesn't mesh well with international conventions and with the goal of
fighting for freedom in the world -but
also with the sacred (at least in words) principle that the phrase "I was
just following orders" doesn't relieve one of responsibility.
"I was just obeying
orders - This is no defense" is a principle established after 1945 and
considered universal, although life tells a different story. In reality, this
rule has been applied only to Nazi criminals. There the application of this
rule had to do first with the fact that the criminal orders far exceeded
anything hitherto known. Unlike mere deviations from ideal rules, which occur
in all wars, the organized and mass destruction of non-combatants was without
precedent in modern history.
Secondly, the entire top echelon of the Third
Reich ended up in the next world - and any war criminal has the capacity to
point a finger at the dead, who have no way of objecting. At that point, it was
impossible to prosecute those who gave the orders. But there was also a third
factor - a complete breakdown in continuity. The condition of post-WWII Germany
was characterized by the expression "zero hour." So the question, "if
we prosecute those who followed orders today, no one will follow them tomorrow"
wasn't a significant consideration to the allies.
Since the United States is
not in a "zero hour" situation, such considerations are rather
essential to the U.S. administration - which puts a natural limit on Obama's perestroika.
[Editor's Note: The author's
point is that unlike the defunct Third Reich, since the United States
continues to exist and needs people to follow orders - it cannot follow through
and punish CIA officials that obeyed the command to carry out waterboarding and
other illegal methods of interrogation].