The Bush Administration’s War Crimes Problem
By Larry Johnson on November 16, 2008 at 10:15 AM in Current Affairs
(bumped up by NoQuarter)
George Bush and Dick Cheney, and other members of their Administration who were involved in setting or executing policies on rendition, harsh interrogation, and secret prison camps, may want to rethink foreign vacations once they leave office. Why? Because there are several foreign jurists who are likely to pursue war crimes charges against George Bush and his colleagues.
Who is in the crosshairs besides Bush and Cheney? Don Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, John Ashcroft, Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, George Tenet, Director of CIA Ops–Jim Pavitt, Cofer Black, and John Yoo–just to name a few. This is just a list off the top of my head. Hopefully these guys are not planning to grab some beach time in the French Riviera or Aruba. In fact, their traveling days may be kaput. As soon as George Bush ends his term on 20 January, 2009 I expect we will start hearing about warrants for his arrest. We already have CIA officers and contractors on trial in Italy for their role in kidnapping Abu Omar, a muslim cleric living in Italy and sending him to Egypt, where he was tortured.
The cleric’s wife, Ghali Nabila, said her husband, Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, known as Abu Omar, was taken from Italy and transferred to a prison in Egypt, where, she said, he was repeatedly tortured. While acknowledging a program of “extraordinary rendition,” or abducting terrorism suspects outside the United States, the Bush administration claims that no one is sent to nations that torture.
The trial is underway but delayed while a judge decides whether information of a current witness will jeopardize Italian national security. A conviction in this trial, especially in Italy, which is one of the most conservative governments in Europe, will likely give impetus to more charges and potentially more trials.
Phil Giraldi, a former CIA colleague, wrote an excellent piece last December outlining some of the war crimes issues lurking on the horizon for CIA officers. Phil wrote:
Personal accountability has all but disappeared from the American political system. Bill Clinton lied to his entire cabinet about Monica Lewinsky and not a single cabinet member resigned in protest after he was forced to recant. When Alberto Gonzales lied repeatedly during testimony before Congress everyone knew exactly what he was doing but no leading Democrat was willing to impeach him. The hopelessly incompetent Michael Brown was able to resign from FEMA without sanction to “avoid further distraction from the ongoing mission” and later even blamed everyone else for his shortcomings. Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Tommy Franks, George Tenet, and Paul Bremer were all rewarded for their incompetence, some with medals and some with promotions. Recent resignations from the Bush administration stemming from the massive policy failures of the past seven years have frequently been couched in terms of “wanting to spend more time with my family” though sometimes a bit of candor creeps in a la Trent Lott, who believes it is time to step down and follow the money as a lobbyist. Public Diplomacy Tsarina Karen Hughes arguably plans to do both, returning to Texas to rejoin her family while also cashing in through lucrative speaking engagements. During her two and a half years of Texas-style soccer mom diplomacy at State Department and in spite of a large budget, Hughes only succeeded in increasing the number of foreigners who actively dislike the United States. Never is a resignation from government service framed in terms of “Hey, I screwed up.”
The embrace of illegal detentions and torture are among the truly horrific decisions that can be attributed to the Bush White House. It is ironic to read the media accounts surrounding the recent discovery by shocked U.S. Marines of an alleged al-Qaeda torture center in Iraq’s Diyala province because the Marines work for a government that itself publicly embraces torture as an interrogation technique. And it is not just the White House. Torture is bipartisan. The recent House of Representatives intelligence appropriations bill included a clause that requires CIA to abide by the Geneva Conventions in its interrogation and detention policies. One hundred and ninety-nine Congressmen from both parties voted “no.” Even if some of the Congressmen voted against the bill for other reasons, there is a strong sense that many politicians consider torture to be perfectly okay.
Spanish justice, Baltasar Garzon, is likely to be an important player in these matters. Garzon is the one who pursed charges against Augusto Pinochet, who was arrested in England and fought to avoid extradition to Spain for war crimes. Much of the legal basis for these charges rests on the Geneva Conventions, created in the aftermath of World War II. PBS reported on the matter back in 1999:
After the war, world leaders met in Geneva, Switzerland to revise the rules of war. Their goal was to outline the distinction between “civilized” warfare and savage butchery. The Geneva Conventions state that people who are not fighting, including soldiers who have laid down their weapons, must be treated humanely. Murder, mutilation and torture are all outlawed, as are hostage-taking and degrading treatment.
This will create some interesting challenges for the Obama Administration and likely Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I am sure there are many Americans who will bristle at the idea that foreign governments are trying our former leaders for what many in the United States perceive as legitimate efforts to protect this country. But there are many overseas who think otherwise and I am sure there is a strong minority, if not majority, in this country who share the save view.
The tension between international law and the detention of individuals believed by the Bush Administration to be terrorists will be at the top of the nettlesome issues awaiting the Obama team. The New York Times reported today:
That concern is at the center of a debate among national security, human rights and legal experts that has intensified since the election. Even some liberals are arguing that to deal realistically with terrorism, the new administration should seek Congressional authority for preventive detention of terrorism suspects deemed too dangerous to release even if they cannot be successfully prosecuted.
“You can’t be a purist and say there’s never any circumstance in which a democratic society can preventively detain someone,” said one civil liberties lawyer, David D. Cole, a Georgetown law professor who has been a critic of the Bush administration.
Although the nation has long had limited legal procedures for detaining dangerous people who have not been convicted of a crime, the issue has become particularly controversial in the context of Guantánamo, where some detainees have been held for almost seven years without being charged.
Whether the Obama administration should push for a preventive detention law has inspired “a very hot and serious debate,” said Ken Gude, a national security scholar at the liberal Center for American Progress, adding, “I’ve had conversations with progressives who think it is a good idea and conservatives who think it’s a terrible idea.”
If Obama’s vote on the FISA matter was any indication, George Bush and his former colleagues may not have much to worry about. But that is not likely to be the case outside of our nation’s boundaries.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
