Summary: What are the consequences for the US from its use of torture on a scale with few precedents among developed nations in the modern era (and those examples considered shameful)? We can only guess, but there are some obvious ones — although seldom mentioned. Also, here are a few interesting notes from the “debate”. This is a follow-up to this morning’s post, The protests start about CIA torture as the echoes die on protests about NSA surveillance. Expect the same result.
“indifference to evil is worse than evil itself. In a free society some are guilty, but all are responsible.”
— Abraham Joshua Heschel (1907–1972), “The Reasons for My Involvement in the Peace Movement” (1972)
Contents
- Consequences of using torture
- Growls about accountability
- A rare note of realism
- The experts counter-attack
- The Right counter-attacks
- Fox News sees the torture debate
- Posts in this series about CIA torture
- A last note, about brothers in arms
(1) Consequences of using torture
What’s the bottom line of these repeated revelations about US torture? Other than welcoming evil into our hearts, the long-term price of which will prove large beyond imagining. Consider the factors involved in Realpolitik. Owning the moral high ground often provides substantial advantages in mobilizing support, both domestic and foreign. Sometimes owning the moral high ground provides a decisive advantage.
Americans should know this better than most. The Founders carefully cultivated support in Britain, explaining that we were fighting for our rights as “Englishmen” — such as no taxation without representation. That paid off big after Yorktown, with a collapse of support in Britain and eventually a peace treaty highly favorable to us.
The moral high ground proved even more decisive in the Civil War. Both Britain and France saw large gains from a Confederate Victory, but faced internal opposition from those uninterested in even a profitable alliance with evil. The War could easily have ended differently if the South had external support (much as the Revolution would have ended quickly without French support).
Our belief in American moral exceptionalism gains substance from our WWII crusade against fascism, and our almost unprecedented construction of a rights-based international order afterwards. The UN Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights might be remembered long after the USA becomes a minor entry in history books. Some unknowable part of our world leadership since comes from the moral capital gained then. Now we’ve squandered it. All of it.
Now people will laugh at our pretense of moral superiority, such as the State Department’s list of terrorist states (use of flying death machines doesn’t qualify?) and their endless reports about human rights violations by other nations. Laughter is poison to Empires. Fallen off our pulpit, we’ll have to find another way to relate to the world. Equally absurd has become our assumption that America’s actions must be regarded as inherently benign, unlike those of designated bad guys that get no benefit of the doubt (e.g., Russia, Iran).
.
There’s not much else to say, as the situation is quite obvious.
(2) Growls about accountability, foreign and domestic
Does anyone expect substantial results from this? “UN experts call for prosecution over US torture“, AP, 10 December 2014:
The U.N. high commissioner for human rights, Zeid Raad al-Hussein, said it is “crystal clear” under international law that the United States, which ratified the U.N. Convention Against Torture in 1994, now has an obligation to ensure accountability. … {US officials} cannot simply be granted impunity {sic} because of political expediency,” he said.
Ben Emmerson, the U.N.’s special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights, said the U.S. report showed “there was a clear policy orchestrated at a high level within the Bush administration, which allowed (it) to commit systematic crimes and gross violations of international human rights law.” He said international law prohibits granting immunity to public officials who allow the use of torture, and this applies not just to the actual perpetrators but also to those who plan and authorize it. “The fact that the policies revealed in this report were authorized at a high level within the U.S. government provides no excuse whatsoever. Indeed, it reinforces the need for criminal accountability,” Emmerson said.
Other examples of hand-waving:
- “To deter U.S. from torturing again, those involved should be prosecuted“, Kenneth Roth (Executive Director of Human Rights Watch), op-ed at Reuters, 9 December 2014
- “Prosecute the torturers: It’s the law“, Erwin Chemerinsky (dean of the UC Irvine School of Law), op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, 9 December 2014
- “Accountability for torture today is critical for stopping it tomorrow“, ACLU — “In our system, no one should be above the law or beyond its reach, no matter how senior the official. A”
(3) A rare note of realism
I think most of us know this: “CIA unlikely to lose power in wake of interrogation report“, Washington Post, 9 December 2014.
Accurate analysis, but draft framing: “Did the Senate just open the U.S. up to ICC prosecution?“, Mark Kersten (researcher at London School of Economics), Washington Post, 10 December 2014 — It’s the crime that opens us to prosecution (not the confession). Got to love this at the end: “Still, advocates of accountability should not get too far ahead of themselves.” That’s not likely.
(4) The experts counter-attack
Former CIA officials have flooded the media with defenses, many highly creative and fact-free (e.g., former CIA chief Michael Hayden). More interesting are the propaganda pieces by wise grave experts have become an art form since 9/11, defending government policy with slick reasoning and dubious “facts”. Conservatives believe these with a child-like credulous awe. These look wrong or delusional a few years later, when time has exposed the truth (too late). This is a gem of the genre: “CIA Torture: An Insider’s View“, XX Committee, 10 December 2014.
(5) The Right counter-attacks
The Republicans line up to defend the CIA and officials of the Bush Jr administration, preventing any accountability for their deeds (e.g, in the NYT and the LAT). Their wing-nut media are aflame with articles like this: “The Senate CIA Report and Democratic Treachery“, Arnold Ahlert, FrontPage Magazine, 10 December 2014. They’re our new leadership, leading America into the dark. With Christian evangelicals in the front ranks. singing hymns.
(6) The debate summarized on one sentence on Fox News
The witty scalawags in charge of Fox News hired a good-looking numbskull named Andrea Tantaros to be one of their hosts. (Her name, incidentally, is an anagram for tan Satan adorer.) When the Senate issued a report on the CIA’s use of torture, she offered a highly erudite response: “The United States of America is awesome, we are awesome …”
— From Joseph Cannon at Cannonfire
.
.
(7) Posts in this series about the Senate report describing CIA torture
- The protests start about CIA torture as the echoes die on protests about NSA surveillance. Expect the same result.
- Consequences of US torture. And a snapshot of a tottering Republic going through the motions of “debate”.
- Close this chapter of America’s use of torture (it’s over). Look ahead to the next chapter.
- Our leaders justify torture in ways that justify its future use on their foes (including Americans)
(8) A last note, about brothers in arms
.
.
