Thomas Friedman, a hawk that's supported our Iraq trip wote:
"[A]bout the war-on-terrorism P.O.W. camp at Guantánamo Bay. Just shut it down and then plow it under. It has become worse than an embarrassment. I am convinced that more Americans are dying and will die if we keep the Gitmo prison open than if we shut it down. So, please, Mr. President, just shut it down.
If you want to appreciate how corrosive Guantánamo has become for America's standing abroad, don't read the Arab press. Don't read the Pakistani press. Don't read the Afghan press. Hop over here to London or go online and just read the British press! See what our closest allies are saying about Gitmo. And when you get done with that, read the Australian press and the Canadian press and the German press."
Rumsfeld once pondered whether we we're killing them faster than they were sprouting.
Friedman has it right, and the problem is wider than Guantánamo. I noticed last week that focus was also back on Afghanistan, with their President Karzai's visit to the US. There was some damning reporting of abuses by US troops in Afghanistan:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1489552,00.html
"Karzai, who is a staunch ally of America and owes his presidency to America's defeat of the Taliban in 2001, began his trip by speaking out strongly against US soldiers accused of abusing prisoners in Afghanistan.
"The allegations, first revealed in a New York Times story on Friday, detail horrific abuses carried out by US soldiers against Afghan suspects. They include harsh beatings and one incident where a prisoner was hung from the roof of his cell by his wrists. That prisoner, a 22-year-old taxi driver known as Dilawar, later died."
Both the US and British governments were under the kosh with Amnesty International in their annual report:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1492209,00.html
But IMO the constant drip effect of the reportage on US conduct is exceedingly damaging internationally. I don't think I can remember anything quite like it.
Aphra
any prisoners anywhere. The world-wide media loves to bash America, and will jump on the slightest indiscretion, but compared to the treatment prisoners get in most countries, America by and large comes out smelling like roses! IMHO, Amnesty International has become an utterly worthless organization. Do those idiots think that the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo even remotely resembles Germany's concentration camps of World War II or the treatment of prisoners in Saddam Hussein's prisons? Again, America isn't perfect, and certainly some improvement is called for, but relatively speaking, we're actually quite humane. You may not agree, but that's my opinion.
-- Modified on 5/29/2005 1:31:00 PM
I agree for the most part, but I wonder what we would do if occupied by an outside force? Just a point of thought...
In a way you're right: the world does love to bash America. The USA, through its strengths, power and status will attract bashing. It's inevitable. Other people do so like to push the mighty off their pedestals. This is the way of the world, and if America lost its superpower status to another all eyes would immediately turn towards its successor. We do so love to sit in judgement of success.
Having said that, I must add that as the primary proponent of democracy, the US lends itself vulnerable to criticism. If you hold up your own system as a holy grail (I'm sure you know what I mean by that) the consequence is bound to be that others will look at you askance, view you critically and make their views known if, in their opinion, you don't come up to snuff.
As you might expect, I consider that Amnesty International is a valid body, monitoring abuses throughout the world. Great Britain has been under the microscope on countless occasions, and justifiably so. The danger lies in any sense of smugness or self-satisfaction as far as the rule of law is concerned. We should always be vigilent about it.
It's inappropriate, really, to compare Guantamano with the likes of Hitler's concentration camps or Saddam's prisons. Hitler's death camps were industrialised death on an unimaginable scale. Saddam's prisons were the factional retreats of licensed sadists.
America is no more perfect than the UK or any other country, but that doesn't mean to say that we shouldn't strive for perfection.
Aphra
for perfection, but the world's constant bashing of America when it fails to achieve perfection is, in my view, not only out of line, but in most cases pure bullshit as well. To be critical of America's failings is one thing - to hold America in utter disdain out of obvious envy and jealousy simply doesn't cut it in my book. Furthermore, to trash America for every little transgression runs the risk of making the majority of Americans somewhat immune to international criticism. Indeed, to a large degree this has happened in Israel, where many feel that they will be condemned no matter what they do, so they might as well do what they feel is best for them and the hell with world opinion. I don't think feelings will get to that point in America, but the risk is there, and we'd be fools if we didn't recognize it as such.
As for Amnesty International, I disagree with you, as you surely realize. I think they've lost all legitimacy with their ever increasing stidency against the U.S. Comparing 500 living prisoners in Gitmo to the millions who died in the Gulags is sheer stupidity. Monitoring abuses is one thing, but making idiotic and outlandish statements is another, and Amnesty International, like the U.N., has lost sight of reality. I have felt for almost 40 years that the U.N. is useless, and as each day goes by I feel vindicated in that thought. But I once believed in Amnesty International. Unfortunately, I no longer do.
-- Modified on 5/30/2005 11:43:52 AM
The present criticism of America regarding Guantánamo isn't on account of the politics of envy, it's because of concern for the flouting of the prisoners' human rights. The soundbite by Amnesty International of Guantanamo being "the gulag of our time" was, imo, a reference to the process and method of detention itself, rather than the numbers. Yes, Amnesty should avoid this kind of pejorative phrasing which only serves to detract from their message.
Do you know, I don't think the outside world is so much concerned about "every little transgression", more about the perception of the scale of the erosion of general freedoms while at the same time espousing them. Here we could veer off into all sorts of issues, both international and US domestic. President Bush does so love to use the word "freedom" but one sits and wonders: freedom for what and for whom?
Aphra
because I think it may be useless to continue this much further. First, it was not a "soundbite" by Amnesty International, but rather a written report. I do, however, agree with your last last sentence when you said "Yes, Amnesty should avoid this kind of pejorative phrasing which only serves to detract from its message." That being true, why didn't they? Are they so incredibly stupid that they didn't realize what the reaction would be? In any case, it totally minimized whatever message they were trying to deliver. It may also sharply reduce any interest on the part of many in anything Amnesty has to say in the future.
I also disagree about the underlying thrust of much of the criticism about Gitmo. Sure, some of the criticism is genuine concern about human rights, although some of that I think is overdone, particularly when I recall watching the Trade Center catastrophe. But a good deal of it is, as you put it, the politics of envy. Again, the best example of that is Amnesty International. What else could possibly explain that idiotic comment about it being the "gulag of our time?" Sorry, prisoners that are living and being fed decently is not at all comparable IN ANY WAY to prisoners who were tortured, starved, and then eventually killed! While the process is admittedly slow, most of these prisoners now have lawyers or soon will. How many prisoners in the gulag had lawyers? Indeed, how many prisoners in the gulag had any family member that even knew of their whereabouts? I could continue in this vein, but I know you understand where I'm coming from, even if you don't necessarily agree.
-- Modified on 5/30/2005 4:51:54 PM