30 January 2010By
Shamus Cooke
“A year on, the [Obama]
administration continues to look the other way when it
comes to full disclosure of and remedy for
human rights violations
perpetrated by the U.S.A. in the name of countering
terrorism.”
–
Amnesty International
What
is Torture? It can be physical or physchological,
quick or unhurried. It implies lasting trauma
unbefitting a human. The U.N. defines torture as:
“
...any act by which severe pain or suffering, physical
or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for
such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third
person, information or a confession…” (U.N. Convention
Against Torture).
By
this definition the U.S. continues to practice
torture. Yes, Obama outlawed some especially shocking
forms of torture — water boarding, for example — but
other types of torture were not labeled “torture” and
thus continue.
Surprisingly, this fact was recently discussed at
length in
The New York Times, under an
Op-Ed piece appropriately entitled Torture’s
Loopholes. In it, an ex-interrogator explains
some of the more glaring examples of how the U.S.
currently tortures and argues for the practices to
end. In reference to Obama’s vow to end the
systematic, obscene torture under Bush, the article
states:
“…the
changes were not as drastic as most Americans think,
and elements of our interrogation policy continue to
be both inhumane and counterproductive.”
The
author says bluntly, “If I were to return to one of
the
war zones today… I would still be
allowed to abuse [torture] prisoners.”
The
article also explains how the U.S. “legally” continues
a practice that thousands of people in the U.S.
prison system already know to be
psychological torture:
“…extended
solitary confinement is torture,
as confirmed by many scientific studies. Even the
initial 30 days of isolation could be considered abuse
[torture].”
Other
forms of torture commonly practiced — since they are
part of the Military’s updated Field Manual — are
“…stress positions [shackling prisoners in painful
positions for extended periods of time], putting
detainees into close confinement or environmental
manipulation [hot or frigid rooms]…”
Also
mentioned as torture is sleep deprivation, a tactic
used in combination with 20-hour interrogation
sessions. The author concludes that these practices do
“not meet the minimum standard of humane treatment,
either in terms of American law or simple human
decency.” (January
20,
2010).
Unmentioned by the article are other forms of torture
institutionalized under the Obama administration. One
is “sensory
deprivation,” a deeply
traumatizing psychological torture described in detail
in
Naomi Klein’s
Shock Doctrine.
The new Army Field Manual says that the tactic —
though not called “sensory deprivation” — should be
used to “prolong the shock of capture,” and should
include “goggles or blindfolds and earmuffs” that
completely disconnects the senses from the outside
world, where the captive is able to experience only
the thoughts in their head.
Yet
another blatant form of torture that Obama refused to
stop practicing is “extraordinary
rendition,” or what critics call
“outsourcing torture.” This is the practice of flying
a prisoner to a country where torture is routinely
practiced, so that the prisoner can be interrogated.
As reported by The New York Times:
“The
Obama administration will continue the
Bush administration’s
practice of sending terrorism suspects to third
countries for detention and interrogation, but pledges
to closely monitor their treatment to ensure that they
are not tortured, administration officials said
Monday.” (August 24, 2009).
Human rights groups
instantly called Obama’s bluff: why transport
terrorism suspects to other countries at all? If not
for the fact that torture and other “harsh
interrogation methods” are routinely practiced there?
No justifiable answer has been given to these
questions.
Another common way the U.S. continues to outsource
torture is performed in the
Afghanistan
and
Iraq wars.
There, the U.S. military often arrests suspects and
hands over the interrogation duties to Iraqi or Afghan
security forces, knowing full well that they regularly
torture (this was also the strategy in the
Vietnam war).
Unfortunately, handing over someone to be tortured
means you are also guilty of the crime.
A less
obvious form of torture is the concept of “indefinite
detention” — holding someone in prison indefinitely
without a trial. The terrible experience of
hopelessness that a victim of this crime experiences,
over years, is a profound form of psychological
torture. This is one of the reasons why the American
Constitution guarantees
due process,
a legal detail that the Obama administration continues
to ignore.
In
connection,
The Washington Post
recently announced that the Obama administration will
detain 50 Guantanamo inmates “indefinitely,” without
any legal charges or chance of a trial. This act is
consistent with earlier statements made by Obama, when
he stated that “some detainees are too dangerous, to
be released.” Of course, there does not exist any
evidence to prove that these detainees are dangerous,
otherwise they would be prosecuted in a legal court.
The article reports that these detainees are
“un-prosecutable because officials fear trials…could
challenge evidence obtained through coercion
[torture].” (January 22, 2010).
The
Washington Post
article also reports that 35 additional Guantanamo
inmates will be tried in Federal or Military courts.
In the latter court, far less evidence — if any — is
needed, and the military jury can be handpicked to
deliver the preferred outcome.
Obama,
like Bush, has sought to undermine the
legal rights
of those detained and the victims of torture who seek
accountability. Obama continues to refuse to release
pictures (evidence) of detainee abuse, preventing
Americans from really understanding what their
government is guilty of. Obama has also refused
detainees in so-called “black
sites” (U.S.
Bagram Air Base,
for example) access to attorneys or courts. Finally,
by not prosecuting anyone for torture crimes in the
Bush administration, Obama is guaranteeing that the
worst forms of torture will continue, since
institutionalized behavior rarely stops unless rewards
or punishments are implemented.
In the
end, the act of torture is impossible to separate from
war in general. The “rules of war” are always ignored
by both sides, who implement the most barbaric acts to
terrorize their opponents into submission.
Obama’s wars, like Bush’s, are wars of conquest. U.S.
corporations want the oil and other raw materials in
the region. They also want to privatize the conquered
state-owned companies, and to sell U.S. products in
the new markets the war has opened them. Many
corporations benefit from the
act of war
itself (arms manufacturers and corporate-employed
mercenaries), or from the reconstruction opportunities
the destruction creates.
Working people have no interest in this type of war.
The hundreds of billions of dollars that Obama is
using for destruction should be used to create jobs
instead, or for health care, public education, social
services, etc. It is up to all working people to
organize themselves — through their unions and
community organizations — to broadcast this demand and
make it a reality.
Shamus Cooke is a social
service worker,
trade unionist,
and writer for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org).
He can be reached at
shamuscook@yahoo.com
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments