Reuel Marc Gerecht is as concerned about the competence of our terrorist interrogators as much as their morality. Not many know exactly what has been going on in Gitmo and elsewhere, but I suspect he’s right on both counts. He recognizes, as the administration seems unable to, that its haphazard, loop-hole-friendly, ad hoc approach to the detention and interrogation of enemy combatants has become a strategic and political mess; and may well have become a liability in the terror war. The very location of various detention centers – not on American soil – suggests worrying intent:
The administration has so far not convincingly explained why it put a counterterrorist prison in Cuba and why it allowed secret CIA detention facilities to sprout up overseas that are not directly tied to frontline combat operations. It is very hard not to conclude that those facilities are where they are because the Bush administration wanted them located where outside observation, access, and protests could be easily denied or controlled.
My own view, after reading both the directives made in the White House and the extraordinary array of incidents of abuse, torture and murder that subsequently occurred is that it takes stratospheric levels of trust and naivete not to conclude that the two are connected. Gerecht proposes civilian overseers; there will soon be Congressional proposals for greater oversight and clearer guidelines for interrogation. I concur with the general direction. I don’t think we can shut detention centers down. I support the capture of terror suspects in this war for indefinite detention if necessary. I don’t want to see this war watered down into a police operation. But if the administration continues to abuse the power it has, that will be the inevitable result. We have a chance now for transparent oversight, clearer interrogation rules and redeployment of detainees to a new center in America where they can be clearly seen to be covered by U.S. laws against cruel and inhumane treatment. Gerecht’s piece is a good place to continue thinking about what to do now.
WHAT WE DON’T WANT: This is not the image of democratization in Iraq that we want to foster. And I should say it’s not indicative of the real gains in freedom for Iraqis after Saddam, or the democratic promise of the future, despite the profound travails of the moment. But it’s a sign of the p.r. gift we gave to the Jihadists by mistreatment of prisoners, a gift we should be trying to take back.
The Dish 