NEW YORK—Legislation intended to prevent the U.S. intelligence community and military from using torture has been stopped in its tracks. President Bush, speaking to the nation in his Saturday radio address, said he had vetoed the intelligence authorization bill, saying it would diminish "vital tools" needed to prevent attacks against the U.S.
"The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror—the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives," said President Bush in the address.
Human rights organizations are crying foul at the veto and the rationale behind it.
"President Bush's veto, in essence, spat on domestic and international law and compromised human rights to justify illegal, ineffective and immoral practices," said Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty International USA in a statement released by the human rights organization.
Section 327 of the 2008 Intelligence Authorization Act (H.R. 2082) would have created a single standard for all intelligence gathering during interrogation of enemy combatants. Notably, the standard includes stipulations for the humane treatment of prisoners.
Support From Retired Military
The veto comes on the heels of a firestorm of criticism and questions raised in recent months in Washington, D.C. and beyond over the use of what the Bush administration has dubbed "enhanced interrogation techniques."
The techniques include methods such as waterboarding, in which the detainee's mouth and throat are doused with water to simulate drowning. The aim is to extract intelligence information, which the Bush administration says has helped prevent post-9/11 terrorist attacks around the world.
Yet some of the most vocal critics of the interrogation techniques have been those with decades of first-hand military experience. Dozens of high-ranking retired military officers, including a former commandant of the Marine Corps sent a letter to congress on Feb. 18.
The letter, which was addressed to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, was signed by 43 retired military officers from the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force. It argues that the guide for interrogation should be the much-lauded Army Field Manual. The Field Manual, which has been used for decades by the military to guide interrogation techniques, was updated in 2006 to reflect the current war on terror. It strictly prohibits torture and guides interrogators to use humane treatment.
"The current situation, in which the military operates under one set of interrogation rules that are public and the CIA operates under a separate, secret set of rules, is unwise and impractical," states the letter. "In order to ensure adherence across the government to the requirements of the Geneva Conventions and to maintain the integrity of the humane treatment standards on which our own troops rely, we believe that all U.S. personnel—military and civilian—should be held to a single standard of humane treatment reflected in the Army Field Manual."
Speaking Out to the Public
Human Rights First (HRF), a non-profit organization that advocates for human rights, has been lobbying heavily for a policy change, and gaining support from the likes of former members of the military. At a public forum event last week in New York City, HRF hosted two signatories of the letter to congress, Maj. Gen. Fred Haynes and Brig. Gen. James Cullen, before a standing room only audience of over 100 people.
Maj. Gen. Haynes, a retired Marine Corps combat veteran of three wars, was part of history as an operations officer for the 28th Regiment—famed for the iconic raising of the American flag at Mt. Suribachi after the battle of Iwo Jima in World War II. Today, Haynes is still in the thick of history, as part of the chorus of retired military voices calling for the end of torture on enemy combatants. He says that lessons from one of the bloodiest battles of World War II and decades of experience are what shape his opinions about the U.S.'s current policy about torture.
"When we were in Iwo Jima, I had one simple rule for my men—treat anyone you capture the way you would want to be treated," said Maj. Gen. Haynes at the event.
Haynes tells of a vivid lesson learned after capturing one particular enemy combatant during the battle of Iwo Jima.
"My unit captured about 16 Japanese," recalled Haynes. "Among those was a man who on the 17th of March, just at first light came out of a cave. The man's name was Taizo Sakai. Sakai turned out to be the chief code clerk for the commanding general of all the Japanese forces on Iwo Jima."
Haynes noted that at no time was Sakai tortured for information, but was an extremely useful POW to American forces.
"He [Sakai] became one of the best of the prisoners we captured," said Haynes. "He was familiar with the status of morale, he knew a great deal about Okinawa which we were to invade a couple of weeks later, and he was familiar with the Japanese situation in Manchuria and elsewhere in Asia."
The enduring lesson still inspires him decades later. "The morale of the story that has stuck with me since then is pretty simple. If you treat people right, you are likely to get good information," said Haynes. "I have never heard of good information coming from individuals who have been tortured. I can't speak from experience that they don't produce good information, but I can almost guarantee it based on human nature. I have always dealt with my troops in very simple terms. I just tell them, 'Just treat them the way that you would like to be treated.' It is kind of a golden rule for the military."
Retired Army Brig. Gen. James Cullen, who also spoke at the event, was a member of the Judge Advocate General's Corps and has over 26 years of military experience. Cullen says the law, as applied to the use of torture, is crystal clear. He cites the Geneva Convention and the Military Code of Justice, which forbid any member of the military to obey an immoral order, such as torture.
"The law is very clear," said Cullen. "Certainly the military understands what our obligations are under domestic law and under our treaty obligations."
Cullen adds that the problem is not a few bad apples who have taken matters into their own hands, but the result of a trickle-down effect of leadership willing to use any means necessary, whether moral or not.
"The problem we have is the crisis of conscience that seems to afflict some in national leadership," said Cullen.
Devon Chaffee, an associate attorney in HRF's Washington, D.C. office who also spoke at the event, aptly summed up the argument for adhering to a single, humane standard for interrogation.
"Cruelty doesn't make us more secure," said Chaffee. "In fact, using torture and other forms of cruelty puts our troops at risk and it endangers our national security. "
Feeds