The United States and torture

[chickenfeet]

OK, I'm confused now. Until recently the US has maintained that it does not use or condone torture but has been very careful to define torture in extremely restricted terms, i.e. acts likely to lead to death or organ failure. Thus techniques which the CIA is known to use, such as waterboarding and stress positions, are were excluded from the US government's definition of torture. Now the Secretary of State is saying that the US adheres to all its obligations under international law including the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT). Now CAT clearly outlaws interrogation techniques that Dick Cheney, for one, has publicly defended as legal and, in his view, necessary. So what's going on? Is US policy shifting? Is there a split in the administration? After all, it's no secret that most officials at State are fairly horrified by current US policy in a number of areas. Is it cynicism on Rice's part? Or is Rice being hung out to dry? Kremlin White House watchers please comment. This is really getting as hard to read as the Chinese.

Comments

[kay.livejournal.com]

Funny you mention it .. Rice is currently under attack in Europe because of the secret CIA flights in which they kidnap people and take them out of the country (On European soil without permission for this, apparently they mistake . The US government has finally admitted they do this now and European leaders are furious because of it. From the looks of it they will start denying the US military support because of this. Rice stated they don't torture them but they use 'enhanced interrogation' techniques, yet refuses to make clear what they think are enhanced interrogation techniques. Several cases have reported that people are being kidnapped and tortured, some have been admitted by Rice and she tries to shrug them off as 'mistakes'.

There are secret US detention centers stationed in Eastern Europe where prisoners, against our international human right laws, are being held and 'interrogated, which is all coming out now. Slowly they're getting in serious trouble.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I understand that up until now the administration has maintained that its "enhanced interrogation techniques" were not "torture" though clearly they were "degrading or inhuman treatment" within the meaning of CAT. It has also, until today, maintained that CAT didn't apply to US personnel working outside the US. Today, Rice has said that CAT ""extends to US personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the US or outside the US," (at least according to the BBC). That appears to be a significant shift in policy. And again from the BBC, "US officials travelling with Ms Rice were quoted by Reuters news agency as saying it represented a marked shift in US policy."

So is this a policy shift or a split or just another pack of lies designed to put up a smoke screen? I can't tell.

[mehdi-caps.livejournal.com]

Just another pack of lies, in my opinion. They are so convinced that torturing "enemies" (including guys that are totally innocent, by the way, and that they release with a kick in the ass in lieu of apologies) is the good thing to do that they're not going to stop now.

[kay.livejournal.com]

Meant to say apparently they are mistaking kidnapping for rendition :/

[glowingwhispers.livejournal.com]

I've been reading NYT colounmist M. Dowd. If she's right, Cheney is ruining George W.'s histortical reading so the admin is tryin to separate themselves from him to try to contain matters.

[a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com]

well ... a cynical person might say that Rice is technically correct, in that policy-wise, the US doesn't torture. Unfortunately, there are always those few bad apples who ignore policy, so people have been tortured. A really cynical person might point to certain parts of government as being the bad apple barrell ...

but then that cynical person would also not be a patriot.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Well a moderately observant and not necessarily cynical person might point out that the Vice President of the United States is on the record as stating that the CIA uses "enhanced interrogation techniques", as a matter of policy, which are in clear violation of CAT. The statements of Rice and Cheney cannot both be true.

[oakenguy.livejournal.com]

Remember Colin Powell's assertions about WMDs in front of the UN? In this administration, the SoS says what they're told to say and then later on get to be shocked, shocked! if facts contradicting them come to light.

[karen2205]

Waterboarding?

[glowingwhispers.livejournal.com]

I had exactly the same question.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Strapping a prisoner to a board and then submerging them until they are almost drowned. It's a good example of a CIA technique that the Americans do not consider to be torture.

[a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com]

Well, there's that piece of clingfilm they put over the prisoner's face, so that their bodies just *respond* as if they are being drowned, but there's none of that messy water in the lungs evidence ...

Sorry -- there's just no other way for me to deal rationally with things that make me this sick and angry except for huge amounts of seething sarcasm ...

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

It's difficult. I am sickened by the whole thing too and I wish there was the slightest chance of Bush and cronies answering for their crimes in court but I'm not optimistic. I'm trying to push my revulsion into the background in order to figure out what, if anything, is happening. One implication of Rice's comments today is that the administration is admitting that it was breaking both US and international law by permitting the "enhanced techniques". Does that open up the possibility of prosecution in the US at some future date? I don't know. Also, CAT requires the signatories to prosecute violators who come into their hands where the country that would normally have jurisdiction cannot or will not prosecute. This has potentially interesting implications.

[karen2205]

Ahh. That definitely counts as torture in my book.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Just about anybody's except the Americans I suspect.

[forthright.livejournal.com]

How about: The Bush administration is arrogant enough and secure enough in American imperial power that they don't believe there will be any consequences, domestic or international, no matter how inconsistent they seem to be. Rice and Cheney don't have to be consistent with one another. They are large; they contain multitudes.