The prisoners captured in Afghanistan and detained in makeshift cells in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are the baddest of the bad, incorrigibles who can never be trusted to return to society. Unlike ordinary prisoners of war who lay down their arms and await the end of the hostilities, these men remain prepared to use terrorist tactics and kill civilians, even if it means taking their own lives.
"These people would gnaw hydraulic lines in the back of a C-17 to bring it down," said Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. No wonder there is little sympathy for this first wave of al-Qaida fighters. Humanitarian groups have protested their living conditions, but most Americans think the prisoners are getting a pretty good deal. After all, the Caribbean has a far more pleasant climate than the chilly mountains of Afghanistan, and the men know where their next meal is coming from even if it isn't their preferred diet.
If this situation were temporary, the problems associated with their housing wouldn't carry such implication. But these men are likely to be incarcerated for a long time. Keeping them in open-air cells, where they are subject to the elements, is a violation of the Geneva Convention. The Pentagon points out that it is under no obligation to adhere to the Geneva Convention, which protects uniformed soldiers serving a state, not stateless terrorists targeting civilians. But unless Guantanamo Bay becomes a permanent prison, at some point, the U.S. government will have to face the issues of where to imprison these men and whether they are too dangerous to disperse in the American penal system.
The second question that arises from their treatment is one that is rarely discussed in polite company: the issue of torture and of what is permissible in a civilized society. Reasonable people can disagree on whether being forced to sleep while wet from rain or having bright lights shined in one's face 24 hours a day fall within acceptable limits of torture or not. That said, it must be pointed out that neither Timothy McVeigh nor Manuel Noriega nor any of the other heinous criminals of the recent past were subjected to this kind of treatment. Of course, they had lawyers to represent them. The al-Qaida prisoners will have no recourse to legal representation.
If it is determined that these prisoners have information that can help prevent a future terrorist attack or lead to Osama bin Laden, then figuring out how best to extract that information is a legitimate exercise. Sleep deprivation might work. But it is puzzling that the Pentagon is advertising its intent to resort to such means. German submariners captured during World War II were tortured, but the episode was kept secret for more than 50 years. Information forcibly gained from them helped turn the Battle of the Atlantic against Germany and was a turning point in the war.
The Bush administration has said that it will abide by international law, but it is clearly making things up as it goes along. There is no written body of law to cover men who are illegal combatants, so the U.S. military is improvising. The Geneva Convention protects religious expression, and the men are allowed their Qurans and the use of one of two towels they are issued as a prayer mat. Whether they can provide useful intelligence about al-Qaida or bin Laden is questionable al-Qaida cells operate independently and on a need-to-know basis. Only a handful of the 19 hijackers knew they were going to their deaths on the morning of Sept. 11.
If the goal is to gain information, these men can be incarcerated like any criminal and pulled out one by one and interrogated. If the U.S. military chooses to employ torture, it won't be the first or the last time.
No comments
Commenting is turned off for this story.