| Comments on the US use of torture, and Bush’s
new interrogation policy [7-28-07]
A week ago, President Bush set broad legal boundaries
for the CIA's harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects yesterday,
allowing the intelligence agency to resume a program that was
suspended last year after criticism that it violated U.S. and
international law. (But he won’t tell us what those boundaries are.)
We offer here a variety of reports and comments on
this important action, including an early
report from the Washington Post; a faith-based reflection
from the Rev. Carol Wickersham, of
No2Torture; an analysis by Retired Gen. P. X.
Kelley, who served as commandant of the Marine Corps from 1983
to 1987 under President Reagan; and a consideration of a
"Declaration Against Torture" put
forth some four months ago by 17 leading evangelicals, saying
torture is always wrong – and the criticisms leveled at them by
other evangelicals.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Bush approves new CIA
methods
Interrogations of detainees to resume
Read the
Washington Post report on Bush’s action, dated July 21,
2007 ..
It begins:
President Bush set broad legal boundaries for
the CIA's harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects yesterday,
allowing the intelligence agency to resume a program that was
suspended last year after criticism that it violated U.S. and
international law.
~~~~~~~~~~~
One Presbyterian's response
On Sunday, July 22, just two days after the
President’s order was announced, the Rev. Carol Wickersham of
No2Torture posted these faith-based reflections on the
No2Torture e-list:
Dear Friends,
I feel a sense of urgency to respond to
yesterday's Executive Order by President Bush. This order interprets
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions vis-a-vis CIA
interrogations.
While much of the rhetoric in this Order is
welcome, it is important to understand that it is just that --
rhetoric. The Order changes nothing. It does not have the force of
law; Congress has made it clear that torture is always illegal, and
what constitutes torture is defined by law, not by the President. In
addition, yesterday's order does not reveal which interrogation
techniques are considered by the President to be allowable; thus, it
is impossible to know if these fall within legal limits. And, even
if they did, the President has assumed power -- that is not his --
to change these definitions at will. It is this lack of definition
that has led to our nation's current ethical quagmire regarding the
treatment of detainees. This new Order puts our troops at greater
risk by sending the message to our enemies that these unspecified
"enhanced interrogation techniques" can be used without violating
international agreements. Furthermore, this order furthers the
Military Commissions Act by strengthening preemptive immunity for
those who who give or implement orders to torture.
Now, there may be those who say that such
critiques are essentially political and not faith-based. I would say
that it is impossible to read the gospel and not draw the conclusion
that Jesus condemned, in the harshest and most straight-forward
language, the hypocrisy and legalistic maneuverings of those in
power when that power was used to inflict suffering on the powerless
-- and certainly those held as detainees are currently powerless.
They may have committed crimes (though without a fair trial we will
never know) -- but they are also currently powerless. Remember, the
authorities of Jesus' day also invoked national security concerns.
Remember Caiaphas' words that "for the sake of the nation one person
must die." It was simple cost-benefit analysis and simply wrong.
Remember that Jesus was tortured to death because he was seen as a
threat.
In some ways the moral issue could not be more
simple. Torture is wrong, always wrong. (For five cogent theological
reasons, see
David
Gushee's analysis printed in Christianity Today.) In
other ways, the issue is nuanced and complex. As people of faith we
wade into the complexities in order to witness to what is simple.
Thus, my sense is that, in responding to this new Executive Order,
we must continue to press for what we have pressed for all along:
1) Without habeas corpus, there is no justice.
This is a bottom line requirement. Unless detainees can hear the
charges against them, there is no defense.
2) Defining what constitutes torture and who can
be held in detention (e.g. "enemy combatants") is the prerogative of
Congress as set forth in law and interpreted by the courts. It is
the Executive's job to implement, not define. This is the wisdom of
the Constitution; it takes into account the corrupting nature of
human power. Signing statements that flaunt this intention, that
thwart the very laws the signature purportedly enacts, are hypocrisy
at its worst. Several sermons could be preached about Jesus'
treatment of hypocrites, but this is not the place and I am not the
person.
3) Secrecy rarely protects us, and often endangers
us. "Nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing
secret that will not be known. Therefore, what you have said in the
dark will be heard in the light and what you have whispered behind
closed doors will be proclaimed from the housetops." (Luke 12:2-3)
Does this mean that we cannot have national security secrets? Of
course not. It means that even those secrets must be subject to
independent oversight -- again, checks and balances. In another
sphere yesterday, there was movement in a positive direction as the
courts stated that detainees and their attorneys must have access to
previously secret accusatory information.
4) All who give orders, as well as those who
follow orders must be held accountable. It is hubris and beyond
dangerous to set forth the proposition that some people are exempt
from the law so they can "do their job." Furthermore, as Abraham
Heschel said, "In a democracy, a few are guilty but all are
responsible." Friends, that means us.
5) All of our actions and advocacy must be
motivated out of love for God and our neighbors, especially those
neighbors who are at our mercy -- whatever labels we give them. We
need to remember that as we debate, the suffering continues
unabated.
There is a lot more to be added, and I trust that
in the days ahead we will have those conversations. I write this
today because so much is in play; thus, we must be "wise as serpents
and gentle as doves" -- not an easy stance in the best of times, and
a stance always attempted with utmost humility, but also assumed
with utmost confidence in God's power and grace.
pax, Carol
~~~~~~~~~~~
Analysis
War crimes and the White House
President Bush's new interrogation policy could
subject him to prosecution for war crimes, according to Retired Gen.
P.X. Kelley who served as commandant of the Marine Corps from 1983
to 1987 under President Reagan. He adds that this act "has
compromised our national honor and that may well promote the
commission of war crimes by Americans and place at risk the welfare
of captured American military forces for generations to come."
Read the article in the Washington Post. >>
Thanks to Bruce Gillette
~~~~~~~~~~~
An Evangelical
Call on Torture and the U.S.
Peter Steinfels of the New York Times
examines the statement issued four months ago by 17 prominent
evangelical leaders and scholars, called "An Evangelical Declaration
Against Torture: Protecting Human Rights in an Age of Terror." He
reports on the opposition to the statement by a number of other
evangelicals, including Mark D. Tooley, a leader in the
neoconservative Institute on Religion and Democracy, who dismissed
the declaration as the work of "pseudo-pacifist academics and
antiwar activists" who were contributing to "a barely disguised
crusade against the U.S. war against terror."
The full article >> [You may be
asked to register to access the full article, but it’s free.]
~~~~~~~~~~~
If you have comments to
add,
or other people's comments to share,
please send a
note,
and we'll add it here! |
