On the day that the president delivered his State of the Union Address, Reuters released the results of a BBC poll of nearly 30,000 people in 28 nations that strongly disapprove of United States' foreign policy with respect to the war in Iraq, as well as our handling of those we detain at Guantanamo Bay, and elsewhere. As those most closely involved with the poll have suggested, it is not merely U.S. mishandling of the war, and human rights, but the hypocrisy of claiming to bring law and order to the Middle East when the U.S. is seen as itself a law breaker.
And on that same day, from the Associated Press, comes news that the European Parliament has given thumbs up to release of a report which says that many of the most prominent European Union member states, including England, Italy, Germany, Poland, and Ireland, knew about, and enabled the CIA to use their air space to transport terror suspects to clandestine holding cells, a practice known as extraordinary rendition. Indeed, some of the countries who reportedly participated in making their air space available to U.S. agents refused to join coalition forces in Iraq, and/or withdrew their forces from the beleaguered territory.
So it is then that while nearly 70% of the world condemns the American government's violations of Geneva Conventions, and conduct in Iraq, their own governments quietly look the other way, enabling the CIA to transport prisoners from countries that honor Geneva and forbid torture to those where torture has yet to be proscribed. If the findings of this parliamentary committee report are conclusive, one way or another, as a result of the actions of our president and his regime, all of Europe now has blood on its hands.
While, at this point, these are only allegations of misconduct, and complicity on the part of many prominent European nations in their collusion with the CIA flights, charges that date back to 2005, the refusal of a few powerful EU officials to comply with the probe suggests that something is rotten in the state of Denmark, and that the impetus for cooperation might involve some kind of behind the scenes quid pro quo.
Clearly, while the actions of our own government with respect to the treatment of those we detain at Guantanamo Bay, and other openly acknowledged holding cells worldwide are, at best, dubiously legal, the practice of holding a prisoner secretly, and without access to trial, is against the law in Europe, and those governments who are proven to have collaborated with the CIA in covertly moving prisoners will be in violation of that continent's human rights agreements, and subject to penalties. What are the penalties in the U.S. for breach of international covenants, and agreements?
In Europe, if a country's collaboration in extraordinary rendition can be substantiated, it will be held in violation of the Chicago Convention, a global agreement to ensure that the military and police get special permission to land aircraft. To proceed with this practice without express approval, in advance, is analogous to the NSA electronic surveillance program's practice of not obtaining FISA court warrants before monitoring telephone, and/or Internet activity of alleged terrorists. Importantly, both aiding and abetting the CIA in its practice of covertly transporting detainees using of airspace of a EU member state, and in monitoring emails of suspected terrorists without first obtaining a warrant from a FISA court are illegal practices, and could have some serious consequences, at least in Europe. By way of contrast, our government's ongoing, and expedited, data mining, and snooping has resulted only in handwringing, and half-hearted threats.to date,
While, to date, no European government has ponied up to the report's allegations, or acknowledged any complicity in these CIA covert "anti-terror operations" activities" and, for the most part, the European Parliament dismisses these allegations as being based on "hearsay," at least they are on the table, and open for discussion. And, although Conservative members of the EU suggest that the wording of the report is tentative, and not definitive, there is consensus that measures need to be taken to stop European airspace from being exploited for purposes of extraordinary rendition again.
If nothing else, one thing is obvious: Europe has been actively investigating breach of international covenants with respect to secret activities by our government for nearly two years now. Where is the dialogue, and discovery, about extraordinary rendition in our own Congress? Will there be an investigation, and demand for accountability from those who have engaged in this pernicious practice? How much will we, in this country, come to know about what our government has been doing in secret, and to whom, in violation of international law, using our tax dollars, and compromising our national security? We have heard barely a word about the practice from Congress; that needs to change before our worldwide approval rating ever will.
http://ladyjaynestahl.blogspot.com
Widely published, poet, playwright, essayist, and screenwriter; member of PEN American Center, and PEN USA. Jayne Lyn Stahl is a Huffington Post blogger.
What are the penalties in the U.S. for breach of international covenants, and agreements?
I'm not sure, but I think the Supreme Court would say that Bush is the decider on such important matters of national security during wartime, and I think he has already decided that he can't be subjected to any penalties for anything that he does.
The severest penalty I know of would be impeachment with a full blanket pardon immediately afterwards, but I guess Pelosi and Conyers have taken that off the table.
There have been some investigations started, so if we can just manage to get the rigged voting machines out of our elections, those victims who survive the next two years of being tortured, might no longer be tortured after that. That may be an unrealistic hope, of course, given the current political realities, and we may have to simply settle for having some independent experts audit a sufficient percentage of the torture to ensure that it was carried out in accordance with Alberto Gonzales' wishes.
The excruciating agonies that innocent victims are being subjected to this very moment as a matter of U.S. policy, don't seem to be real to those who have not yet experienced anything of the kind themselves. They seem to be operating under the principle that you can do whatever you want to others, because it is never likely to happen to you. The old Pastor Niehmoller philosophy. And as he himself explained before he died, by the time you realize that what goes around, comes around, it is much too late.
Most of the world considers the U.S. to be a rogue, outlaw nation, and Bush to be the most dangerous terrorist in the world. That doesn't seem to stop Pelosi from giving him standing ovations.
Of course if some miracle happens and the U.S. is forced to stop torturing people, and Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and the rest of the war criminals are sent to The Hague for trial, everybody in this country will insist that they had absolutely no idea that anything like that was going on. They never saw the pictures on TV or on magazine covers. Or if they did, they thought it was all lies by the liberal media to give aid and comfort to the terrorists. Isn't that what usually happens?
Sure Congress voted for everything Bush wanted. Sure England, Canada, Australia, Germany, and many other countries cooperated with his crimes against humanity. But they don't think of themselves as enablers. Either Bush did it all by himself with no help from anyone else, or it was all Ralph Nader's fault.
I know, I know. I'm angry, bitter, cynical, and negative. I should take some classes in biofeedback so that I could learn how to have positive thoughts while innocent people are being tortured in my name. Or at least be patient and wait for the appropriate time for the new Congressional majority to take action.
First they need some investigations in order to convince the American people of what 87% of the American people are already convinced of, that Bush should be impeached.
Then, after hearing the sworn testimony, they'll need to be able to get the votes in Congress, so they'll need to issue subpoenas and begin the discovery process. Surely the people being waterboarded, electroshocked, sodomized, and forcefed, won't mind waiting while the White House refuses to release the documents showing exactly what time of day Gonzales wrote the torture memo to Bush, and Congress goes to the Supreme Court to try to force him to release the documents, and the Supreme Court decides that Bush is the decider and that if he doesn't want to release the documents he doesn't have to and nobody can make him.
What's a couple of years of investigations when innocent people are only being subjected to the most inhuman treatment possible?
Did I say I was angry, bitter, cynical, and negative? I want to make sure I did so as to save others the trouble.
Thank you, Jayne Lyn Stahl, for yet another excellent op-ed. If more people spoke truth to power the way you do, I think I'd be feeling a lot more positive.
--Mark
by
Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 29 quicklinks, 76 diaries, 972 comments)
on Friday, January 26, 2007 at 5:27:23 AM
Bravo! I especially like what you said about Nancy Pelosi giving Bush standing ovations. Really, this spirit of open-ended cooperation must stop, honeymoon or no honeymoon. When you crawl into bed with a python, you figure out the quickest way to get out.
And here is my favorite part of your response: "We may have to simply settle for having some independent experts audit a sufficient percentage of the torture to ensure that it was carried out in accordance with Alberto Gonzales' wishes."
You're a tremendous writer, and I'm honored by your comment; thank you.
by
Jayne Lyn Stahl (168 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 64 comments)
on Friday, January 26, 2007 at 11:36:40 AM
I've submitted the above as a quicklink, but since it has to be approved by an editor before it can appear, I thought I'd also link it in this topic.
Canadian software engineer Maher Arar was mistakenly labelled a terrorist by Canadian authorities. He was arrested by U.S. authorities while visiting New York, and shipped to Syria where he endured a year of torture.
Mr. Arar will be getting a formal apology from the Canadian government, along with $8.5 million compensation plus his legal fees.
Arar is also suing the United States, but the U.S., despite the Canadian admission of their mistake, still has Arar on their terrorist watchlist, and is unlikely to ever admit guilt over anything for any reason, no matter how obviously guilty it may be. The U.S. claims it has some secret information tying Arar to terrorists, possibly obtained by having the Syrians torture the guy in the cell next to him, who had never seen him before in his life.
One of the most interesting things about torture is that you can get people to say anything you want. According to anti-torture activist attorney Jennifer Harbury, whose Guatemalan husband was tortured and killed by agents on the payroll of the CIA, at least three different people have confessed under torture to being Osama bin Ladin, however none of the three look anything like him.
Here's a link to an interview with Harbury in 2005:
Torture is an American tradition, and its most useful effect is that it is guaranteed to cause survivors, their friends, families, neighbors, and governments to hate us and to seek revenge. For believers, it has the added benefit of putting us in league with the Devil and condemning us to his realm. Sort of a WWJT: Who Would Jesus Torture?
--Mark
by
Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 29 quicklinks, 76 diaries, 972 comments)
on Friday, January 26, 2007 at 7:04:28 AM
As usual you have written very well and about a very important subject. You always make me think and for doing so I am grateful to you.
I am not surprised to find most of Europe in bed with Bush in this scandalous treatment of human beings.
One of the things that both you and Mark touch on which could be considered in more detail are the international agreements we have made. If I am not mistaken, every agreement the United States signs must be ratified by congress making it American law as well as international law. I believe this to be especially true with agreements such as the Geneva Convention. If that be true, it is not just European and International law that the Bush Administration has broken but American law. Every bully in the world gets by international law, but he is in deep trouble with our laws.
I know we all get very impatient for things to unfold, but in a representative democracy where the rule of law means everything, the law must not be violated but followed in the minutest detail. A good illustration is Watergate and the Plame case. One things leads to another which leads to another. We could list about ten or more critical issues that must be looked into legally. One can almost blame Congress if Bush ends up being impeached. If they had been doing their job as they should have been doing it, the Bush Administration would have been called on the carpet for their first illegalities. The things done in secret will come into the open every time. It is Congress' job to make sure things are brought into the open sooner than later so one small thing does not end up with the large mess we are in right now. In this case one small thing as turned in a dozen large things. The Republican Congress did the world no service and ended up allowing Bush to destroy his eight year administration.
OBHG,
Phil
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Saturday, January 27, 2007 at 1:35:46 PM
