Three years ago, I began making inquiries into the
US practice of detaining and interrogating noncombatant children in intelligence and combat operations overseas. My repeated calls and letters to my senators accidentally triggered a Joint Staff report--on
the wrong topic.
However, serendipity made the mistake relevant. Now we're seeing further indication that the Bush administration made a deliberate decision to disregard the Geneva Conventions.
Here is the text of a Joint Staff report on the detention of civilians in Iraq, initiated by my request for information on the detention of civilian children in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The date of this report -- January 22, 2004 -- comes after allegations of the abuse of detainees in Abu Ghraib set off a full US military investigation but before the media caught wind of it.
SUBJECT: Detention of Civilians in Iraq
PURPOSE. To respond to a Joint Staff request for information regarding the detention and treatment of Iraqi civilians. This information is required in order to respond to a Congressional Inquiry by Senator [Elizabeth] Dole.
DISCUSSION. All questioning of detainees is conducted in a professional manner, by trained interrogators, under regular supervision. US/Coalition regulations, as well as international law/treaties, prohibit the use of torture.
a. The Geneva Conventions (GC) permit us, as an occupying power, to detain civilians who pose a threat to the security of Coalition Forces or the Iraqi State.
b. Approximately 6,900 civilians are currently being detained in Iraq as security internees. These are individuals who attempted, planned, or physically committed crimes against Coalition forces, or are believed to harbor information regarding future planned attacks.
c. In accordance with the GC, the Coalition maintains the right to detain civilians for questioning regarding criminal acts. These detainees are immediately processed for release when they are no longer required for questioning.
d. The Coalition implemented a detainee review process that provides broader procedural discretions than the GC.
(1) A military attorney reviews all detainee case files when the detainee is inducted into a detention facility.
(2) All detainees are then served with a copy of their internment order, which states the basis for the detention. Detainees are further provided an opportunity to appeal, in writing, the decision to intern them.
(3) In accordance with the GC, each detainee case file is reviewed no later than six months from the date of detention, in order to determine whether continued detention is warranted.
(4) Finally, every civilian detained for questioning is processed for release at the conclusion of the interview process. Only those individuals who continue to pose a threat to Coalition forces, or the Iraqi State, remain in custody.
e. The number of Iraqi cilivians detained by Coalition forces is decreasing.
f. There are fewer than 200 pre-trial criminal detainees in Coalition-operated facilities.
3. RECOMMENDATION. None. Information provided in response to Joint Staff query.
APPROVED BY: J.F. Sattler, Major General, USMC, Director of Operations
PREPARED BY: Julio L. Alvarez, Jr., LTC, USA, Chief, Ground Operations
22 JAN 04
As we know now, much of the information in this report are lies or are just plain wrong. The lies seem almost laughable now. After the media outing of the Abu Ghraib torture and abuse scandal, most of the prisoners indicated in this report were released because they hadn't done anything. We also know that detainees were not treated "professionally" and were not immediately released after being cleared, and that the numbers of Iraqis detained was increasing, not decreasing. We also know that although international laws forbid the use of torture, the US government did not.
But in the midst of those untruths is an unwitting revelation: that although the US military considered itself an occupying force as defined by the Geneva Conventions, there were processes in place that afforded "broader procedurals discretions" than the Geneva Conventions in terms of detaining and questioning civilians.
We know that those "procedural discretions" were exported from Gitmo to Iraq, are in place at several other locations around the world, and have remained in place despite myriad scandals involving detainee abuse, torture, and even murder. There's no indication that those processes have been abandoned -- but plenty of indication that the Geneva Convention has been abandoned.
Hamdan isn't going to change the way the Bush administration does business. The Supreme Court didn't even take into consideration how the Bush administration does business beyond what was outlined in one specific case. Hamdan doesn't address the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq, nor detainees who have been renditioned to other locations. It doesn't review the administration's take on "broader procedural discretions" that render the Geneva Conventions obsolete insofar as the US's military and intelligence actions worldwide.
The decision was made early on in the so-called "war on terror" for the US to detain and mistreat men, women, and children with deliberate disregard for any international standards or transparency.
Somewhere there's documentation about these deliberations and the "broader procedural discretions" processes developed to replace US adherence to the Geneva Conventions. Let's find it.