4/21/09

Last Thursday, the Obama administration released classified Bush-era legal memos in an effort to turn the page and provide transparency on the policy of torture pursued by the Bush administration. In response, Bush administration officials, worried about their failed reputations and legacy, vigorously attacked the Obama administration – claiming that revealing Bush-era torture techniques makes America less safe. With the release of these memos, conservatives have revealed their true colors, moving the debate from whether “enhanced interrogation” constitutes torture to simply arguing that torture works and that the United States should torture. Their arguments are ridiculous. Not only do the memos reveal that torture was ineffective at producing useful intelligence, but the very arguments made by Bush officials ignore the deep stain these acts have placed on the United States, undercutting the image of the United States as a land based on justice and rule of law. Moreover, the suggestion that these techniques prevented another terrorist attack against Americans is shameful when considering these acts have increased the threats faced by the brave men and women serving in the U.S. military. US military leaders say – and extremists brag on their websites -- that the use of torture, the abuse at Abu Ghraib prison, and the presence of Guantanamo prison served as a rallying cry for extremist groups like Al Qaeda and led to terrorists flocking to Iraq and Afghanistan to attack our troops. It is remarkable that conservatives and other Bush administration officials have taken to the op-ed pages and 24 hour news channels to defend their actions on the same week of the fifth anniversary of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, which served to undermine U.S. efforts in Iraq and endangered our troops. To turn the page on this disastrous era, it is essential – and a mark of strength and confidence -- to acknowledge what has happened. The Obama administration’s release of these memos is an important step to ensuring that the United States remains true to the principles on which it was founded.

Bush administration officials suffer from total lack of credibility after eight years of torturous failure.  Conservatives like Vice President Cheney, as well as Bush CIA Directors Michael Hayden and Porter Goss, have criticized the Obama administration for its release of torture memorandums from the Office of Legal Counsel, saying the techniques described are vital for protecting Americans.  However, their credibility is undercut by long records of distortion and abuse when it comes to intelligence matters.  Vice President Cheney has repeatedly conflated U.S. counterterrorism efforts with the war in Iraq, most recently in an interview with Jim Lehrer this year, saying “what Saddam Hussein represented was, especially in the aftermath of 9/11, was a terror-sponsoring state so designated by the State Department. He was making payments to the families of suicide bombers.”  In reality, the 9-11 Commission found that there was no operational relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq.  Former CIA Director Porter Goss’ reputation is similarly compromised; he was forced out amidst a cloud of scandal and allegations of “mismanagement of the spy agency,” according to ABC news.  Commenting on Goss’ ouster in 2006, analyst, now NATO Ambassador-designate Ivo Daalder said: “Porter Goss was such an absolute disaster for the agency and our national security that his departure comes not a day too soon."  [Vice President Cheney, 1/14/09. NSN Daily Update, 1/15/09. ABC, 5/08/06. Ivo Daalder, 5/06/06]

Despite desperate claims from Bush administration officials concerned about their legacy, terrorism and interrogation experts agree that torture doesn’t work. Dick Cheney claims “It [torture] worked. It's been enormously valuable in terms of saving lives.” But as counterterrorism expert Richard Clarke explains, “I don't know about you, but I'm sure if I were tortured, I think I would come to the same conclusion — that the way to stop the torture would be to say whatever they want.” Retired CIA agents have alleged that the torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was done in vain. “As for K.S.M. himself, who was waterboarded, reportedly hung for hours on end from his wrists, beaten, and subjected to other agonies for weeks, Bush said he provided ‘many details of other plots to kill innocent Americans’... But according to a former senior C.I.A. official, who read all the interrogation reports on K.S.M., ‘90 percent of it was total fucking bullshit.’ A former Pentagon analyst adds: “K.S.M. produced no actionable intelligence. He was trying to tell us how stupid we were.” [Fox News, 4/20/09. CBC, 10/27/08. Vanity Fair, 12/16/08]

Torture memos are part of a larger pattern of conservative failure that fueled attacks on our troops.  The revelations contained in the Office of Legal Council are only a facet of a broader pattern of conservative failure, which has violated America’s best values and failed to keep Americans safe.  For instance, the Bush administration’s practice of torture at detention sites such as Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib prison has provided our enemies with recruiting and propaganda vehicles.  A brief by the Cato Institute’s Malou Innocent cites U.S. Air Force interrogator Major Matthew Alexander: “I listened time and time again to foreign fighters, and Sunni Iraqis, state that the number one reason they had decided to pick up arms and join Al Qaeda was the abuses at Abu Ghraib and the authorized torture and abuse at Guantanamo Bay. My team of interrogators knew that we would become Al Qaeda's best recruiters if we resorted to torture." Moreover, the Senate Armed Services Committee report finds that “Al Qaeda and Taliban terrorists are taught to expect Americans to abuse them. They are recruited based on false propaganda that says the United States is out to destroy Islam. Treating detainees harshly only reinforces that distorted view, increases resistance to cooperation, and creates new enemies. Foreign reaction to the Abu Ghraib scandal and Guantanamo Bay has had a terrible impact on America’s international image, particularly in the Muslim World.”  Summarizing the foreign press’s reaction for Harvard’s Nieman Center, John Burke wrote, “Foreign reaction, be it from pro or anti-American nations, was overwhelmingly united.  Apart from the disgust over the violent images from the Iraqi prison, the most common sentiment was one of disbelief that the United States stubbornly refuses to discontinue its methods of incarceration by closing the Cuban penitentiary.  The foreign press didn’t necessarily claim a higher moral ground for their respective nations. But it was universally understood that the image of freedom, democracy and honor that the world’s sole superpower portrays is seriously compromised by its prison practices.”  In addition, after seven years of the “War on Terror,” the Bush administration’s military tribunal system has managed to convict only two terrorists – one of whom, Salim Hamdan, even the government admits was only a driver and not a senior level operative. Perpetrators of terrorist attacks against America, such as 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed, could have been in federal court long ago, like Zacharias Moussaoui or the World Trade Center 1993 attackers, each of whom received life in prison without the possibility of parole. Instead, they remain in the limbo of Guantanamo Bay, glorified as enemy combatants instead of being prosecuted as criminals. [Malou Innocent, 3/18/09. Senate Armed Services Committee, 12/08.  Washington Post, 6/17/08. Nieman Foundation, 2/20/06. Wall Street Journal, 7/24/08. NY Times, 11/3/08]

Obama takes a careful and deliberative approach to this sensitive topic, while conservatives play politics with national security.  Retired Navy Vice Admiral and current president of The American Security Project Lee Gunn describes Obama’s approach to this sensitive topic, “I'm very pleased that the President and the Attorney General have released the interrogation memos this afternoon... The Obama Administration has once again demonstrated the value of transparency in dealing with difficult issues and its confidence that the American people will evaluate the choices made by the previous administration fairly and objectively.”  Claims that the release of the memos would harm the intelligence community were belied by Obama’s reception yesterday at CIA headquarters, which Washington Post described: “Obama, greeted by raucous cheers in his first visit to the spy agency, thanked employees for their sacrifices and gave no hint of wavering from his pledge to oppose prosecutions of CIA workers who used interrogation methods that the president's own advisers have called torture.” Meanwhile, conservatives continue to play politics.  Initially they complained about releasing classified information.  As Michael Hayden and Michael Mukasey said in the Wall Street Journal, “public disclosure of the OLC opinions, and thus of the techniques themselves, assures that terrorists are now aware of the absolute limit of what the U.S. government could do to extract information from them, and can supplement their training accordingly and thus diminish the effectiveness of these techniques as they have the ones in the Army Field Manual.” Yet now, seeing a chance to prolong the controversy to his benefit, Dick Cheney hypocritically wants more classified information to be released.  He said on FOX News yesterday, “One of the things that I find a little bit disturbing about this recent disclosure is they put out the legal memos, the memos that the CIA got from the Office of Legal Counsel, but they didn’t put out the memos that showed the success of the effort...  And I’ve now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos so we can lay them out there — and the American people have a chance to see — what we obtained and what we learned and how good the intelligence was, as well as to see this debate over the legal opinions.” [Lee Gunn, 4/16/09. Washington Post, 4/21/09. Michael Hayden and Michael Mukasey, 4/17/09. Dick Cheney, 4/20/09]

What We’re Reading

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attacked Israel as a racist nation during his address to the UN conference on racism, prompting several countries to walk out.

The teenaged Somali pirate suspect arrived in New York to face trial.  After Dutch authorities were forced to set free captured pirates for jurisdictional reasons, Secretary of State Clinton said that releasing captured pirates sends the wrong signal and called for better international coordination.

Pressure grows on President Obama to hold an investigation into the torture memos (even from some former Bush administration officials) and release further memos. 

Violence continues in Iraq’s restive Diyala province.  A suicide bomber attacked U.S. troops meeting Iraqi officials in the provincial capital of Baquba.

Overseas computer spies broke into the Air Force’s Joint Strike Fighter project and traffic control system in recent months.

An army takeover quells violence in Ciudad Juarez, formerly the epicenter of Mexico’s drug violence, but also prompting questions over civil liberties.

South Africa goes to the polls tomorrow in what has been billed as the most important election since the end of apartheid.

Tamil Tiger rebels ignored a surrender deadline as thousands of Sri Lankan civilians continue to flee.

South Korea’s envoy arrived in North Korea for talks on a joint industrial complex, which have been delayed for procedural reasons.

President Obama proposed a $100 billion loan to the IMF.

President Obama has no plans to re-open negotiations on NAFTA, despite promises to do so to make a more advantageous agreement for certain areas of the U.S. during the campaign.

The Russian government pours money into Vladivostok through some questionable projects.

Commentary of the Day

Paul Kane advocates radical military reform: eliminating the Air Force, changing the promotion system, and instituting compulsory national service for all Americans once they turn 18.

William McGurn discusses President Obama’s decisions on detainee status at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.

Roula Khalaf examines how Arab states have a role in negotiations with Iran, and how Iran could be compelled to be a more constructive regional partner.

Anne Applebaum analyzes the underlying events of the recent protests in Moldova.