worldpolicy.org

If inconsistencies are the hallmark of truth—an odd truism suggested by U.S. prosecutor David M. Rody during the recently-concluded trial of Aafia Siddiqui—then there was plenty of “truth” to go around on both sides of the proceeding, which concluded February 3 with guilty verdicts on all seven counts of attempted murder and assault.

At first glance, Siddiqui’s story is a perplexing one, albeit one that shows some familiar patterns, at least on the surface. Siddiqui—a 37-year-old Pakistani woman accused by the United States of associating with al Qaeda—began life with all the trappings of upper-middle class achievement. Born to a well-off family in Karachi, she went on to earn a BA from the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a PhD in cognitive neuroscience from Brandeis University, and eventually married a Pakistani physician, with whom she had three children.

While Siddiqui’s life looked like a relatively conventional narrative of success prior to 9/11, after the World Trade Center attacks, Siddiqui became increasingly concerned about American hostility toward Muslims, a concern that eventually pushed her and her husband to move their young family back to Karachi.

At some point after her post-9/11 return to Pakistan, Siddiqui’s story begins to get murky. FBI officials, having suspected her of working as an al Qaeda operative, placed her on a list of suspected al Qaeda affiliates, which prompted her to disappear into thin air in March 2003. (Within Pakistan, it is commonly believed that she was picked up by the Pakistani intelligence service ISI and later handed over to the CIA. In one of her outbursts throughout the trial, Siddiqui claimed she was kept in a secret prison and that her children were tortured.) Read the rest of this entry »

U.S. officials unveiled a new detention facility at Bagram air field in Afghanistan, promising greater openness and better living conditions for inmates. The existing facility at Bagram has been shrouded in secrecy, garnering criticism for human rights abuses after two of its inmates died last year following interrogations. The prison, which holds its roughly 700 detainees without charges, will close by the end of the year, and the U.S. military plans to move its inmates to the new $60 million housing complex. “The new facility…provides improved detainee living conditions…as well as vocational, technical, and other programs to assist with peaceful reintegration of released detainees,” Brig. Gen. Mark Martins, head of the detention facilities at Bagram, told international journalists on a tour of the new facility, tentatively named Detention Facility in Parwan, on Sunday. “You are here because transparency certainly benefits the effort.” Human rights groups have praised some aspects of the new facility, including the separation of hard-core insurgents from those who may be reconciled with society and the move to open administrative hearings, in which detainees are assessed for their readiness to be released, to outsiders as well as to the detainees themselves. But many critics still call for President Barack Obama to further reform the U.S.’ Afghan detention policies. “All detainees in Afghanistan are entitled to minimum protections, including the right to legal counsel, and to be able to challenge the legal and factual basis for the detention before an independent and impartial tribunal,” rights groups Amnesty International, Human Rights First, and Human Rights Watch said in a joint statement. “The U.S. reforms still fall short of providing detainees with those rights.” Transfers of prisoners to the new facility are expected to begin within the next two weeks.

Israeli officials on Monday continued to denounce the Palestinian Authority’s intention to unilaterally declare statehood and seek formal recognition from the United Nations. Senior Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, announced the gambit on Saturday and, on Sunday—the twenty-first anniversary of Yasser Arafat’s declaration of statehood—President Mahmoud Abbas added, “God willing, we will soon have an independent state with its capital in [East] Jerusalem” under 1967 borders. Many observers consider the proposal a political tactic to force Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to reengage peace negotiations, stalled since the Gaza war last December, and restrict further settlement construction in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. An Al Jazeera reporter in Ramallah relayed, “What [Palestinians] want [now] is something a lot more concrete. They know it won’t immediately result in the withdrawal of Israeli occupation troops from their territory, but they want the Israelis to stand in front of an international collective will that says this is what needs to be done in order for peace to be realized.” The statements incited a furor of criticisms from the Israeli government. Netanyahu declared, “Any unilateral action will undo the framework of past accords and lead to unilateral actions from Israel.” Transport Minister Yisrael Katz later added, “Let them not threaten us with unilateral measures; we can also take unilateral measures such as annexing the settlement blocs.” Without U.S. support, the Palestinian proposal is not likely to be approved by the requisite two-thirds of the UN General Assembly.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull offered a landmark apology to hundreds of thousands of “forgotten Australians” and former child migrants who were abused or neglected in state facilities. In an emotional ceremony in the capital of Canberra, Rudd apologized for what he called “an ugly chapter” in Australia’s history. “The truth is this is an ugly story, and its ugliness must be told without fear or favor if we are to confront fully the demons of our past,” he said to a crowd at Parliament House. “We are sorry. Sorry for the tragedy—the absolute tragedy—of childhoods lost,” he continued. Between 1930 and 1970, approximately 500,000 children were abused or neglected in orphanages or homes in the Australian institutional care system. Of these, many were part of the Child Migrants Program, a scheme designed to bring “good white stock” to Commonwealth countries like Australia and Canada. Under the program, the United Kingdom sent poor children to these countries promising a “better life.” But, in many cases, families were never notified that their children had been sent away, the children were falsely informed that they were orphans, and, once they arrived, they faced extreme cruelty and neglect while in state care. “You were failed by the system of care,” Turnbull added, choking back tears. “Today we acknowledge that, already feeling alone, abandoned and left without love, many of you were beaten and abused, physically, sexually, mentally—treated like objects not people—leaving you to feel of even less worth…For far too long, your stories were not believed when they should have been, and for that too we apologize, and we are sorry.” Roughly 7,000 survivors of the program currently live in Australia, including Laurie Humphreys, who attended Rudd’s apology. “The word ’sorry’ doesn’t mean much. You can’t say sorry for a lost childhood,” the former child migrant worker told Time magazine. “But you can acknowledge it, and that’s what I needed.” U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown is expected to offer a similar apology sometime in the new year.

America’s European partners in its war on terror are not committing on when or whether to take in any detainees from Guantánamo. “There was nobody very hot about this, that’s perfectly true,” said Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg on January 26, after a meeting of the European Union. His nation holds the rotating presidency of the 27 member EU which includes 21 of the 26 members of NATO.

Austria is against taking any released prisoners. The parliament of Finland is split on the issue. Denmark would need to change its asylum laws to accept any detainees. Sweden sees no political or national security benefit in admitting them. Poland has no experience in dealing with this kind of prisoners. Italy and Spain would consider a U.S. request only if endorsed by the EU.

European opposition to this plan is vociferous. “I do not understand why we give the impression that Germany needs to accept prisoners. Guantánamo was established by the U.S. We did not run it. We did not use it,” says Wolfgang Bosbach, deputy leader of the Christian Democrats.

“Don’t forget these inmates are not kittens-it’s a risk for us to bring them into Europe.” says the Dutch Foreign Minister, Maxime Verhagen. London has already made a “significant contribution,” said U.K. Foreign Secretary David Miliband. England has already accepted nine of its citizens and six of its residents formerly imprisoned at Guantánamo.

France has found little support for its plan to lead an EU fact-finding mission to Guantánamo to ascertain the background of the current detainees and assess the security risks in accepting at least 60 persons who, while they face no charges in the United States, are likely to be tortured or persecuted if returned to the countries of their origin. Read the rest of this entry »

The courtrooms of America sometimes take us by surprise. Last week, Charles “Chuckie” Taylor, the son of the former Liberian president and notorious warlord, Charles Taylor, was sentenced in a Miami court to 97 years in prison for torture. It was the first time that an American court had applied a law passed in 1994 allowing the prosecution of citizens who commit torture overseas. (Taylor was born in the United States, but then moved to Liberia to join his father.)

Is there now one law in America for those who commit torture overseas and those who commit it at home with the authority of government? Perhaps not for much longer. In a recent television interview, President-elect Barack Obama said that his designate for attorney general, Eric Holder, would investigate whether some senior members of the Bush administration should be prosecuted for their part in torture, although he said that his belief was that “what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future.”

Also, last week, Obama said that he had given his new appointees to top intelligence positions a clear charge to restore the nation’s stance on human rights. “Under my administration the United States does not torture.” Obama should also have reminded his audience that it was during the presidency of Ronald Reagan that the U.S. helped push for the United Nations to agree to a legally binding treaty against torture, and then propelled Congress to rapidly ratify it. (It is this treaty, mind you, that provides the legal underpinning for the prosecution of Taylor.) Read the rest of this entry »

Last week, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg announced a decision in a German case, Gäfgen v. Germany, that is relevant to the “war on terror,” even though the case itself had nothing to do with terrorism.

In 2002, a German law student, Magnus Gäfgen, kidnapped and killed an 11-year-old child. In the course of subsequent ransom demands, he was caught by the police, who, at the time, believed the child was still alive. Under orders from a superior, a police officer threatened Gäfgen with great pain if he didn’t tell them where the boy was (they were prepared to follow through on the threat, though this never happened). Gäfgen thereupon confessed, and the boy’s body was found. Later, after being informed that the coerced confession could not be used against him, he repeated it.

The German courts found him guilty, based on the later confession; Gäfgen then appealed to Strasbourg, claiming his rights to freedom from torture and fair trial had been violated. The police officer and his superior, meanwhile, were found guilty of coercion and instruction to coerce. Because their motive was saving the child’s life, however, and the situation was one of great pressure, the German court found mitigating circumstances and suspended their sentences—in effect finding them guilty but refraining from punishing them.

The case set off a countrywide debate in Germany about the legitimacy of torture, obviously playing into broader concerns with the use of torture in the “war on terror” and the revelations from Afghanistan, Abu Ghraib, and Guantanamo Bay. Read the rest of this entry »