Human rights implode in Iraq

This deterioration in the maintenance of security within Iraq ahead of the scheduled transfer of power on June 30, has however taken a back seat with recent revelations about serious human rights abuse of Iraqis in different prisons in Iraq.

CBS first blew the whistle on April 29 by broadcasting images of US troops mistreating Iraqi detainees. It also indicated that an army investigation initiated on January 16 this year had found "systemic" problems in the Occupying Authority's handling of captured Iraqis.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Photographs aired by the network on 60 Minutes, related mostly to the infamous, overcrowded Abu Ghraib Confinement Facility, where more four thousand prisoners are interned. Appalling pictures showed US armed guards maltreating those in their custody and assaulting them in contravention of all human rights rules in the book. Apparently, only about ten soldiers are being court martialled for these offences.

These CBS disclosures were followed very soon afterwards with additional reports of abuses in the Daily Mirror published from London. It printed front-page pictures showing British troops involved in similar abusive action. It also reported that the British military had launched an investigation into the photographs. British politicians promptly condemned these incidents as being "completely unacceptable".

The last few days have also seen the US administration attempting damage control through expressive statements from President Bush ("sorry for the humiliation and suffering inflicted on the Iraqi people"), Secretary of State Powell and Secretary Rumsfeld. Their reactions, according to analysts, appear to have been "too little, too late". It has been claimed consequently that Bush was more worried about looking good to Americans in an election year and not as interested in making "painful changes in US policy towards Iraq and Israel".

The US leadership have specifically made desperate attempts to pacify the Iraqis and regain some degree of trust among the Arab population in general. They have tried to portray the incident as being one of a kind for which only a few US soldiers are responsible.

However, what makes the whole situation that much more difficult to absolve, is this coordinated spin, aimed at papering over the whole issue. A spade is a spade whatever be its description.

Occupation is never a very encouraging prospect. By its very nature, it tends to unfold many unfortunate aspects in the character of individuals or groups, who are primarily responsible for monitoring or enforcing harsh codes on those whose liberty has been taken away. What we are witnessing today is a sad example of such behaviour.

The US military, according to Maj. Gen. G. Miller, US Commander of military-run prisons in Iraq (of which there are presently 12) has estimated that the occupying Authorities are presently responsible for over 8,000 detainees. Apparently, prisoners in such facilities can be held for up to 14 days before a decision is made to release them or transfer them to one of the three main prisons.

Human rights activists have alleged that most of the abuse takes place during these first two weeks of incarceration. They have also claimed that nearly 40 per cent of the detainees are essentially innocent and are subsequently discharged without any charges. Arrested whimsically on the basis of suspicion, a large number of such detainees spend a harrowing time having to fend off various kinds of abuse and pressures aimed at obtaining incriminating evidence. In this context, it appears that the prison authorities quite often forget that intimidation of any nature and harsh treatment constitutes clear and inadmissible violations of international conventions.

It was equally shocking to read published excerpts from US Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba's report that "between October and December 2003, at Abu Ghraib, numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses" were "intentionally inflicted" in a "systematic manner" by "several members of the military police guard force" (372nd Military Police Company, 320th Military Police Battalion and 800th MP Brigade). World sentiment has been best reflected by US Senate Majority Leader Bill First's comment that "the prisoner abuse is so disgusting, so degrading that .... humanity has been hurt broadly" and Senator Kerry's observation on May 6 in Los Angeles that "the President needs to offer the world an explanation and needs to take appropriate responsibility."

As it stands now, there appears to be a complete breakdown in discipline in some of the coalition military units in Iraq. The reason for this in all probability is the latent arrogance of knowing that US troops cannot be subjected to a trial in the International Criminal Court.

One has to recall here that even as early as last July, Amnesty International had reported that detainees in Iraq were being randomly subjected to beatings, prolonged sleep deprivation, or deafening noise while in US custody. Their report drew particular attention because it suggested that in many cases abuse also involved US women officials. It is difficult to understand why women were assigned such sensitive tasks where Iraqi men were made to parade naked in front of them. This not only smacks of indignity, but also of perversion. We are talking here of a Muslim culture where such punishments are not only offensive but symbolically unacceptable.

It is now being alleged that this pattern of abuse goes beyond Iraq. Newsweek has mentioned of a recent report by Human Rights Watch which has described similar treatment of prisoners at Baghram and other US run detention centers in Afghanistan. Deaths of at least two persons in American custody in Afghanistan have also been officially declared as homicides by the US military doctors who performed autopsies on the victims. Are we then to understand that US troops are being sent abroad without sufficient training as to how to treat prisoners who might fall into their custody? Many of them also appear to be functioning under the wrong belief that the only language an Iraqi civilian understands, be it on the street or inside the jail, is force. This is a psychological aspect which needs to be corrected.

Statements are being made by certain US officials that such abusive treatment have been more of an "aberration" than the general rule, and that they have been committed by "a very small minority" of the prison guards. Some have also claimed that such forms of behaviour have been comparatively soft given the earlier sadistic abuses that were perpetrated during Saddam time in Iraq. I have a simple response to such suggestions. Saddam was no angel and that is why he was removed. 'Newsweek' also puts it appropriately "being more humane than Saddam isn't much to brag about."

It is good that the US President has acknowledged the gravity of the situation and promised an open investigation after which, those responsible, will be brought to justice. It is important that this is done. The political scenario is evolving at a fast pace in Iraq. There are deadlines which have to be met by the Coalition Authorities. There cannot be any distraction. None of these targets should be affected because of dereliction of duty by some soldiers from the Coalition Command.

The moral high ground, so necessary for political governance is already week on the part of the Occupying Forces and eroding continuously. More US troops have been killed in action in Iraq in April than during the six weeks of "major combat" in the US-led invasion. President Bush's approval rating is at an all-time low and more than half of the Americans now believe invading Iraq was not the right thing to do. In a reversal of the earlier position, more than 61 per cent of respondents in a CBS/New York Times poll have indicated that the US administration did not try hard enough to reach a diplomatic solution before going to war in Iraq. These are significant developments.

The USA has a scandal on its hands. Allegations of human rights abuse among Guantanamo Bay detainees (described as irregular combatants) have now moved on also to Iraq and Afghanistan. It makes US allegations of human rights abuse in other parts of the world that much more insignificant.

The USA went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan with their own agenda. It was not only to ensure their own security but also to implement a strategic re-definition of their vital interests in the Middle East. In this regard, if fighting terror or terrorists have to be successful, then, there has to be more dignity and greater sense of justice.

Unless care is exercised, we might end up witnessing dramatic long-term consequences which will thwart US efforts to establish a stable, democratic, civilian structure in Iraq. The US has to understand that harming civilians will further increase the ranks of resistance in Iraq.

It is not enough for the US Administration to say that some US soldiers have been reprimanded and that a few others will face court-martial. The perpetrators, who have tarnished the image of USA, need to be punished in a way which will act as a deterrent for other soldiers in the future.

Nevertheless, I cannot conclude this piece without expressing my deepest admiration for the freedom of the press in the USA (despite the Patriot Act) and the UK. This allowed the facts to be revealed. Such disclosure might not have been possible in some of the countries where these abuses are being so strongly condemned.

Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador.