This Is a Compromise? A Rebellion?
Today most papers are running the story about the compromise reached by the White House and “rebel” members of the Senate over the prisoner detention bill.
For instance, from the NY Times:
The agreement says the executive branch is responsible for upholding the nations’ commitment to the Geneva Conventions, leaving it to the president to establish through executive rule any violations for the handling of terrorism suspects that fall short of a “grave breach.” Significantly, Senate aides said, those rules would have to be published in the Federal Register.[...]
The adjustment to the War Crimes Act, “will put the C.I.A. on notice of what they can and can’t do,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who, along with Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, joined Mr. McCain in leading resistance to the White House approach. “It would take off the table things that are not within American values.”
Asked about one of the most controversial interrogation techniques, a simulated drowning known as water-boarding, Mr. Graham said, “It is a technique that we need to let the world know we are no longer engaging in.”
A Washington Post editorial, however, notes that all is not so sunny in secret CIA prisons:
The bad news is that Mr. Bush, as he made clear yesterday, intends to continue using the CIA to secretly detain and abuse certain terrorist suspects. He will do so by issuing his own interpretation of the Geneva Conventions in an executive order and by relying on questionable Justice Department opinions that authorize such practices as exposing prisoners to hypothermia and prolonged sleep deprivation. Under the compromise agreed to yesterday, Congress would recognize his authority to take these steps and prevent prisoners from appealing them to U.S. courts. The bill would also immunize CIA personnel from prosecution for all but the most serious abuses and protect those who in the past violated U.S. law against war crimes.
In short, it’s hard to credit the statement by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) yesterday that “there’s no doubt that the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions have been preserved.” In effect, the agreement means that U.S. violations of international human rights law can continue as long as Mr. Bush is president, with Congress’s tacit assent.
What? How does this in any way stand to correct our copious human rights abuses or protect Americans captured by other parties? One wonders why Congress bothers passing laws at all, since nearly every bill is accompanied by a presidential signing statement or will be bypassed via an executive order. This bill does nothing so much as say, “We’re going to torture, and Congress doesn’t want to be held responsible later.”
In happier news, I heard a guy say on NPR yesterday that Donald Rumsfeld will have to be very careful about where he travels after he leaves the administration. He may be subject to the International Criminal Court and rounded up, much like Augusto Pinochet, and tried. Basically, and I don’t know how true this is, it sounds as though he’d better stick close to home. Actually all of Worldview was good yesterday (September 21). Have a listen.
Sphere: Related Content