Eccentric Star: A Public Diplomacy Weblog

UK Att'y Gen'l: Guantanamo Still Undermines War Against Terror

"Guantanamo 'Changes Too Little, Too Late,'" by Jane Sutton - Reuters (Miami), 12 February 2007

MIAMI (Reuters) - New U.S. rules for war crimes tribunals at Guantanamo fail to correct fundamental flaws that are undermining Western efforts to defeat global terrorism, the government's top lawyer said on Monday.

"The changes made are too little and too late," Lord Goldsmith, attorney general and a longtime critic of the Guantanamo detention operation, told a meeting of the American Bar Association in Miami.

The U.S. Congress revised the tribunal system to try foreign suspected terrorists at Guantanamo last year after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the original system created by U.S. President George W. Bush.

Goldsmith said he welcomed some of the changes, such as the decision not to use secret evidence that would not be shown to the accused, but that they did not go far enough to ensure fair trials.

Guantanamo remains a powerful symbol of injustice that not only hurts the United States' image but undermines international efforts to win the ideological war against global extremism, Goldsmith said....

The Miami Herald has printed a transcript of Lord Goldsmith's remarks:

"Transcript: Lord Goldsmith to ABA" - the Miami Herald, 12 February 2007

...my view of the original Military Commissions for those detained at Guantánamo Bay are well known. Charged with my Prime Minister with considering whether they provided appropriate and sufficient guarantees of a fair trial I considered the rules and regulations in detail over a period of months in the summer and fall of 2003. My clear conclusion was that the Military Commissions did not provide such guarantees. I advised that we should not allow our citizens to stand trial in such circumstances and insisted that they be returned to the UK -- which ultimately they were.

I am aware of the changes that have now been made, following the Military Commissions Act signed into law late last year. I welcome some of the changes made -- such as the removal of the possibility that detainees would be convicted on the basis of evidence heard in secret and that they had not seen or had a chance to contradict; and the amendments made in Senate to exclude evidence obtained by torture -- though there remain some definitional questions of importance. But I am aware of criticisms that remain: of a law which treats aliens in a different way from American citizens; that still allows coerced evidence to be used in certain cases; that excludes the application of habeas corpus. And others. Some -- perhaps all of these -- will be the subject of further courtchallenges.

But, it would be misleading if I did not tell you my own view. I have previously stated my view that Guantánamo Bay is unacceptable and should close; it is a symbol of injustice that the long tradition of American justice and liberty ought to see removed at the earliest moment. I have not changed my view. The changes made are too little and too late. There remain fundamental problems with this system of detention. And the symbol remains.

In saying this, I am conscious that some will say that this is not for an outsider to say. That this is America's decision. I have increasingly been of the view that this is not so. I should explain why.

The struggle against global extremism and terrorism is one that ultimately we will not win by conventional means alone. We increasingly recognize in the United Kingdom that we will only win in the end if we can win the battle for ideas and values. We need to win this struggle at the level of values as much as force. In a major speech given in Los Angeles at last summer, Prime Minister Tony Blair said that to win the war of values we must show that ''our values are stronger, better and more just, more fair than the alternative'' and that ``we are even handed, fair and just in our application of those values to the world.''

We have to show, against an al Qaeda narrative that all that the West does is designed to oppress Muslims, our values are actually those of justice, tough and fearless but fair, and of equality; of the democratic way of life; of the rule of law and of freedom. The presence of Guantánamo makes it so much more difficult to do this. For all of us....

Gates: Prisoner Abuse Scandals Have Hurt US Standing

For the context of the Gates speech described here, see Putin: US Making the World More Dangerous; US Responds.

"Gates: Prisoner Abuse Scandals Hurt US," by Lolita C. Baldor - AP (Munich, Germany), 11 February 2007

MUNICH, Germany - Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that prisoner abuse scandals in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay and other mistakes have damaged America's reputation, and work must be done to prove the U.S. is still a force for good in the world.

While he did not mention the war in Iraq, he told a conference of top security officials from around the world that the U.S. has to do a better job of explaining its policies and actions.

For the last century most people believed that "while we might from time to time do something stupid, that we were a force for good in the world," Gates said.

And while he said a lot of people still believe that, he added, "I think we also have made some mistakes and have not presented our case as well as we might in many instances. I think we have to work on that."...

"US Does Not Want New Cold War: Defence Chief," by Jim Mannion - AFP (Munich, Germany), 11 February 2007

MUNICH, Germany (AFP) - US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has deflected a stinging broadside against the United States by Russian President Vladimir Putin, declaring: "One Cold War was quite enough."

The new US defence chief used wry humour in his debut speech Sunday to an international security conference to deflate Putin's portrayal of the United States before the same audience as a dangerous, destabilising world power.

Gates also sought to mend fences with Europeans alienated by his predecessor Donald Rumsfeld. He acknowledged past US mistakes and said Washington needed to do a better job of explaining its policies....

He said that scandals at the Guantanamo US "war on terror" prison and at US-run jails in Iraq have damaged the reputation of the United States, but he defended trials of terrorist suspects by special military commissions as legitimate.

"While I don't have any doubt that in certain quarters there may be anti-American propaganda. But I think we also have made some mistakes, and not presented our case as well as we'd like in many instances."

"I think we have more work to do in terms of restrengthening American soft power around the world."...

Added 12 February:

DOD now has the text of Gates' speech to the Munich Conference on Security Policy and a report on the Q-and-A session that followed it posted to its website. Gates made the remarks about Guantanamo and the need for the US to explain itself better in the Q-and-A session.

"Gates Fields Broad-Ranging Questions from International Security Experts," by Linda D. Kozaryn (in Munich, Germany) - American Forces Press Service (US DOD), 11 February 2007

...In answer to a question on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Gates said some activities there, as well as abuses that have taken place in Iraq, have negatively impacted the reputation of the United States. “There’s no question that most of us would like to close the detainee facility at Guantanamo,” he said.

The secretary admitted he doesn’t know if there are more people there who should be released, but U.S. officials are going through the process of trying to find out.“If we can get people to take those who can and should be released, that would be a good thing,” he said. “(But) we have had some difficulty in that respect.”

“It is also true, though, that there are real terrorists at Guantanamo,” Gates stressed....

Gates agreed with one participant that anti-Americanism is evident in certain quarters. The United States has made some mistakes, he said, “and not presented our case as well as we might in many instances. I think we have to work on that.”

Although the United States’ reputation as a force for law and order, human rights and human advancement has been sullied, it can be restored, he said. “For the last century, one of the great assets the United States has had is that most people around the world felt that (even though) from time to time we might do something stupid, we were a force for good in the world,” Gates said. “I believe a lot of people still believe that.

“What we have to focus on as we look to the future,” he concluded, “is strengthening that reputation we have had for a century, and perhaps doing a better job of explaining what we’re trying to do in the world.”

Guantanamo Continues to Damage US Int'l Standing, Poll Suggests

"U.S. Image Around World Sharply Worsens: BBC Poll" - Reuters (London), 22 January 2007

LONDON (Reuters) - The image of the United States has deteriorated around the world in the past year because of issues such as Iraq and prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, according to a poll by the BBC World Service released on Tuesday.

The proportion of people believing the United States has a mainly positive influence in world affairs dropped seven points from a year ago -- to 29 percent from 36, the results from 18 countries that were also polled the previous year showed.

Fifty-two percent thought U.S. influence was mainly negative, up from 47 percent a year ago, the poll found....

In all, 26,381 people were questioned in 25 countries. Almost three in four people disapproved of U.S. policy on Iraq, while two-thirds disapproved of U.S. handling of terrorism suspects held at the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba....

Sixty-five percent disapproved of U.S. policy on last year's war between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas, 60 percent of its handling of Iran's nuclear program, 56 percent of its stance on global warming and 54 percent of its policy on North Korea's nuclear program.

More than two-thirds believed the U.S. military presence in the Middle East provoked more conflict than it prevented and only 17 percent thought U.S. troops there were a stabilizing force....

White House Reverses Stand, Says GWOT Detainees Entitled to Geneva Protections

I don't know what's more surprising here - the complete policy reversal the Pentagon memo suggests, or the fact that the White House let the Financial Times break the story rather than take the lead on announcing it.

"Pentagon to Give Rights to Detainees," by Demetri Sevastopulo and Holly Yeager (in Washington) - the Financial Times (UK), 12 July 2006 (published to website 11 July) 

Prisoners held in US military custody around the world will receive some protection under the Geneva convention, the Pentagon has ruled, in a move that could affect prisoners held in secret Central Intelligence Agency prisons.

Responding to news broken on FT.com, the White House on Tuesday confirmed that Gordon England, deputy defence secretary, sent a memorandum to senior defence officials and military officers last week, telling them that Common article III of the Geneva Convention – which prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners and requires certain basic legal rights at trial – would apply to all detainees held in US military custody.

The White House insisted that the move did not represent a change in policy. But the July 7 Pentagon memo stood in stark contrast to a February 2002 memo in which President George W. Bush said: “Common article III of Geneva does not apply to either al-Qaeda or Taliban detainees.”

The policy U-turn comes on the heels of the Supreme Court ruling last month that the military commissions Mr Bush created to try prisoners at Guantánamo Bay contravened both US law and the Geneva convention.

The International Committee of the Red Cross on Tuesday welcomed the “significant decision as a step towards bringing all US detentions into compliance with international law."...

I didn't find the transcript of today's press briefing posted to the White House website as of this evening.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack gave this response to a reporter's question about the Pentagon memo in the daily State press briefing:

Daily Press Briefing - Sean McCormack, Spokesman. US Department of State, Washington, DC,
July 11, 2006

QUESTION: On the Defense Department memo that Tony Snow talked about today, how involved was Secretary Rice in drafting that memo which now gives Geneva Convention protections to detainees?

MR. MCCORMACK: She certainly didn't type it up. Look, on issues, I mean --

QUESTION: Well, I --

MR. MCCORMACK: It's a Department of Defense memo. Look, she along with other members of the national security team have been involved in formulating policy on questions related to detainees since 2001 when she was in her role as National Security Advisor. It's an important issue. And she along with everybody else that was present in government at that time in leadership positions said that they were going to do everything that they could to make sure the American people weren't subject to another terrorist attack like they were on September 11th, 2001.

And the actions of Secretary Rice and the Administration since that time have been guided by that principle, but also guided by -- they've also been guided by the principle that they're not going to lose sight of who we are as Americans in our values and defending those values. And the actions that we have taken have resulted in people who have sought to do harm to the American people, as well as others -- friends and allies, get those people off the street. You see those people in Guantanamo Bay now. They are there for a reason. And the Administration has set up various processes to deal with those people. Part of that -- an important part of that in which the State Department is involved, is sending these people back to their home countries with the assurances that they're not going to -- they are not going to be mistreated, tortured and they're not going to go -- not going to be allowed to go in the front door of the jail and out the back door. So -- that they would be allowed to do harm to others at some point in the future.

The other part of that process has been subject to review by the Supreme Court and President Bush has said that the Administration is going to abide by the findings of the Supreme Court, in terms of Common Article 3, as well as how prisoners, enemy combatants are treated. As for the specifics of the memo, I would refer you over to my friends at the Department of Defense. I understand that they're also hearings that are going to be ongoing this week. You're going to have expert testimony. So there'll be ample opportunity for people to question representatives at the Department of Justice as well as the Department of Defense about the specifics of the memo and Administration policy on detainees.

QUESTION: She's had to take the brunt of the criticism that the U.S. has received when she's gone abroad. For instances, last December in Europe, there was a lot of controversy over detainee policy. So is it fair to say that she was pushing for this, the way this moved or is this just in reaction to the Supreme Court?

MR. MCCORMACK: I would say that Secretary Rice provides her best advice to the President and other members of the national security team and that advice is for the President and other members of the national security team to hear, and not talk about in public....

So much for policy coordination, I guess.

As for how other people are interpreting the memo:

"Bush Concedes That Geneva Conventions Apply in Guantanamo Prisons," by Rupert Cornwell (in Washington) - the Independent (UK), 12 July 2006 (published to website 11 July)

In a major climbdown, the Bush administration formally conceded yesterday that detainees at Guantanamo Bay and other US military prisons around the world are entitled to protection under the Geneva Conventions.

The new policy, contained in a Pentagon memo from the Deputy Defence Secretary Gordon England, follows last month's 5-3 ruling by the Supreme Court declaring that the military tribunals set up to try detainees were in breach of the conventions. In doing so, the court rejected the White House claim to virtually unlimited executive power in a time of war, making clear the tribunals should have been authorised by Congress.

Ever since Guantanamo Bay opened in early 2002, the administration has contended that as "unlawful combatants", inmates did not fall within the purlieu of the conventions - even though, it claims, the detainees have always been treated as if they did apply.

Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, repeated that line yesterday. Detainees, he said, had been treated humanely. Nonetheless, "we want to get it right," he hold reporters. The memo "is not really a reversal of policy," merely a response to a "complex" decision by the court....

"Bush Extends Geneva Protections to Guantanamo Prisoners," by Beth Gorham - the Canadian Press (Washington), as carried by the Globe and Mail (Toronto, Canada), 11 July 2006

WASHINGTON — In an abrupt reversal, prompted by a recent tongue-lashing from the Supreme Court, U.S. officials said Tuesday all detainess in the war on terror held at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere will be protected under the Geneva Conventions....

The move came as the president faced the start of a long, rough ride on Capitol Hill, where legislators opened hearings Tuesday on how detainees should be tried.

There's a lineup of military lawyers ready to testify the system is ad hoc and abusive.

Legislators are warning either the “kangaroo court” tribunals have to be substantially revamped or Bush needs to move prisoners to traditional military courts, not his preferred option.

Some human rights groups weren't persuaded the policy change would have any practical impact on about 450 Guantanamo detainees, including Canadian teenager Omar Khadr.

“I'll believe it when I see it, in terms of striking changes in practices,” said Shayana Kadidal, a staff lawyer at the Centre for Constitutional Rights in New York City....

In fact, this story is at least as confusing as it is big. Not everyone seems to interpret the DOD memo the same way. (There's another reason why it's surprising that the White House hasn't been more proactive in trying to steer the way the news was released.) The Washington Post has published a .pdf file of the memo to its website; take a look at it and see what you think it means.

For background, see this story from today's print edition of the Post, which appeared before the news about the DOD memo broke;

"Rethinking Embattled Tactics in Terror War," by Dana Priest - the Washington Post, 11 July 2006, p. A01 (registration required)

Five years after the attacks on the United States, the Bush administration faces the prospect of reworking key elements of its anti-terrorism effort in light of challenges from the courts, Congress and European allies crucial to counterterrorism operations.

The Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee and other members of Congress have complained about not being briefed on classified surveillance programs and huge unprecedented databases used to monitor domestic and international phone calls, faxes, e-mails and bank transfers.

European governments and three international bodies are investigating secret prisons run by the CIA, and some countries have pledged not to allow the transport of terrorism suspects through their airports.

Six European allies have demanded that President Bush shut down the prison for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, citing violations of international law and mistreatment of detainees.

And the Supreme Court recently issued a rebuke of the military commissions created by the administration to try detainees, declaring that they violated the Geneva Conventions and were never properly authorized by Congress....

Europeans Welcome Supreme Court Guantanamo Ruling, Say Europe Must Help Close Facility

"Europeans Cheer Ruling on Guantanamo Trials," by Craig Whitlock (in Berlin) - the Washington Post, 30 June 2006

BERLIN, June 29 -- In Europe, where the Bush administration has taken a diplomatic beating over its prison at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling Thursday was received with cheers and fueled hopes that the detention center's days are numbered.

At the same time, European leaders acknowledged that the court's decision would also increase pressure on their own governments to help their U.S. ally find a solution to an increasingly thorny problem: what to do with the prisoners who are no longer considered a threat but effectively have nowhere to go.

Although a long list of European lawmakers and human rights groups have demanded that the U.S. government shut down the Guantanamo prison as soon as possible, three European countries -- Britain, Bosnia and Germany -- have balked at requests to accept citizens or former residents who are stuck in Cuba, even though there is evidence they do not pose a security risk....

Calls in Europe to shutter Guantanamo have become louder in recent months, particularly since U.S. officials announced that three detainees had committed suicide at the camp on June 10. Last week, during a summit with European Union leaders in Vienna, President Bush preempted what was expected to be a public squabble over Guantanamo by saying he, too, wanted to close the detention center but was waiting for guidance from the Supreme Court on how to proceed.

At least 19 detainees from Europe have been released and sent to their home countries, where some have been arrested. A dozen others who have citizenship or residency status in Europe remain at Guantanamo, in part because their governments don't want them or have declined to intervene on their behalf.

Manfred Nowak, an Austrian law professor and the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, predicted that the Supreme Court decision would clear the way for Guantanamo to close by the end of the year.

"Europe should help empty it," said Nowak, who issued a strongly critical report on conditions at Guantanamo for the United Nations in February. "No country is eager to accept people who are accused of having al-Qaeda links. But there should be burden-sharing."

"I would agree with President Bush on this: Criticism is fine, but it should be constructive criticism and that means Europe should help the U.S. develop a plan of action," he said.

The difficulty of sending some detainees back to their native countries was underscored Thursday when Nowak declared on a fact-finding mission to Amman, Jordan, that "torture is systematically practiced" by the Jordanian intelligence and security agencies. Four Jordanian citizens remain at Guantanamo, and human rights groups have warned that they could be abused if returned home.

Anne-Marie Lizin, president of the Belgian Senate and leader of a European inspection team that visited Guantanamo in March, said it would be possible to "dismantle" the detention center by the end of the year. But she said Europe would have to help.

"It's easy to put all the blame on the U.S.," said Lizin, who is scheduled to present findings of her trip Friday in Washington on behalf of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. "Europe is also responsible. In the first year of the Afghan war, everyone was in favor of being strong. The problem came in 2004, when it became clear that the question of what would happen to Guantanamo would not be so easy to answer."...

"Guantanamo Rebuke" (editorial) - the Financial Times (UK), 30 June 2006

The US Supreme Court yesterday gave the world a reminder that America remains a nation of laws. By ruling in favour of Osama bin Laden's driver and against America's secretary for defence (Hamdan versus Rumsfeld), it gave a resounding display of America's independent system of justice. The 5-3 ruling was also a stinging rebuke to president George W. Bush's expansive view of presidential authority.

The symbolism of yesterday's ruling should not be underestimated at a time when the US is losing ground in the battle for hearts and minds in the Muslim world and elsewhere. Whether it is in the revelations over the "rendition" of suspects to countries that practice torture, the ghastly pictures of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, or the indefinite detention of suspects at Guantánamo, the Bush administration has consistently damaged America's moral authority in its prosecution of the war on terror. That, in turn, has undermined its ability to defeat an enemy that has drawn sustenance from America's perceived lack of legitimacy in the eyes of much of the Muslim world....

So what happens now? The Bush administration has argued that the detainees are a danger to society. But it lacks evidence to convict them in civil courts. It created the tribunals precisely to avoid the burden of proof required in normal courts (and in courts martial). One solution would be to declare them prisoners of war, which would enable their indefinite incarceration. But this would be a monumental symbolic climb-down in the administration's war on terror. Another would be to pass the baton to the detainees' home countries, such as Afghanistan. But transferring prisoners to places that lack fair process would undermine the spirit of yesterday's judgment. In short, the US administration is caught in a dilemma of its own making. In resolving this, it should pay belated attention to common sense ideas of justice. Locking people up indefinitely without trial does not qualify.

US Supreme Court Ruling on Guantnamo Expected Soon

"Court Ruling Could Halt Guantanamo Trials," by Ben Fox - AP (San Juan, Puerto Rico), 25 June 2006

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - A former driver for Osama bin Laden may help decide the fate of dozens of Guantanamo Bay detainees, and perhaps all of them, as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on his legal challenge to the first U.S. war crimes trials since World War II.

The court, which is expected to rule as early as Monday, is considering a range of issues in Salim Ahmed Hamdan's case, including whether President Bush had the authority to order military trials for men captured in the war on terror and sent to the Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Bush recently suggested the ruling will help him determine what should be done with all the prisoners at Guantanamo, where the U.S. holds about 450 men on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban.

Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union said Friday that Bush doesn't need a court decision to close the prison, which has drawn intense international criticism. The case has nothing to do with the prison itself, they said.

"Bush can close Guantanamo, but this (court) decision can't," said Ben Wizner, an ACLU attorney who monitors Guantanamo. "That's not a question before this court."

The ruling, however, could determine whether the government can proceed with military trials for Hamdan and nine other detainees who have been charged with crimes.

Air Force Col. Morris Davis, the chief Guantanamo prosecutor, said about 65 more detainees being held at the U.S. base are likely to be charged with crimes if the Supreme Court upholds the process....

[Hamdan's] military-appointed attorney, Navy Lt. Cmdr Charles Swift, said the lawsuit is aimed at moving the case to the civilian court system or to a traditional military court-martial. Lawyers for several defendants contend the tribunals lack guidelines and favor the prosecution.

"This is about a fair trial, not a free pass," Swift said.

The Supreme Court was also asked to consider whether fair trial provisions of the Geneva Conventions apply to the military tribunals.

Another issue is whether the Supreme Court even has a say in the matter. The administration argues the Detainee Treatment Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by Bush on Dec. 30, strips the federal courts of much of their jurisdiction over Guantanamo detainees.

On Saturday, 14 Saudi Arabians were released from Guantanamo and transferred to their home country, leaving about 450 detainees at the prison, the Pentagon said.

One Saudi was released because U.S. officials determined the detainee was no longer an enemy combatant. The other Saudis were released after a review process determined they could be transferred....

"US Warns Against Expecting Swift Guantanamo Closing," AFP (Washington, DC), 23 June 2006

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The White House warned against "false optimism" that the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay will close soon after the US Supreme Court rules on the fate of those held there. "The process is going to take some time. But the president does want it shut down," spokesman Tony Snow told reporters.

But the US government was already looking at logistical issues ahead of the court's ruling on the legality of military tribunals for some of the roughly 460 detainees still inside the US Navy-run prison in Cuba, the spokesman said.

Snow said that the United States was "in a bit of a holding pattern" until the justices rule on the case brought by Salim Ahmed Hamdan -- probably "within the next week" -- and cautioned that things will go slowly even afterwards.

But Snow said he wanted to warn against "false optimism" once the Hamdan case is resolved, because there are still many other cases to deal with.

Snow said that the United States was "in a bit of a holding pattern" until the justices rule on the case brought by Salim Ahmed Hamdan -- probably "within the next week" -- and cautioned that things will go slowly even afterwards.

But Snow said he wanted to warn against "false optimism" once the Hamdan case is resolved, because there are still many other cases to deal with.

Snow said that those now held at Guantanamo were mostly from Saudi Arabia,        Afghanistan, and Yemen, and warned of a likely outcry from human rights groups it they are repatriated....

UNHC for Human Rights Says States Must Respect Law in Battling Terror

"UN Denounces Secret Detention Centers," by Alexander G. Higgins - AP (Geneva), 23 June 2006

GENEVA - The top U.N. human rights official on Friday denounced the use of secret detention centers in the war on terrorism, and said governments must treat prisoners according to the law, avoiding torture and providing fair trials.

Louise Arbour, in a speech to the new U.N. Human Rights Council, was clearly referring to repeated allegations of U.S. abuses.

"It is vital that at all times governments anchor in law their response to terrorism," said Arbour, U.N. high commissioner for human rights.

The U.S. delegation responded that it was U.S. policy to treat captured combatants humanely.

Ambassador Warren W. Tichenor, who heads the U.S. delegation to the 47-nation council, said the United States adhered to its "absolute commitment to uphold our national and international obligations to eradicate torture and to prevent cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment worldwide."

Arbour said that "the reported existence of secret detention centers where suspects are held incommunicado is ... of grave concern."

"Such practices also have a corrosive effect on the rule of law and human rights, and create an environment ripe for other abusive conduct," she said.

While the magnitude of terrorist threats had raised questions about whether the existing legal framework should yield to a new reality, Arbour said, governments must continue to abide by international law, which includes an absolute ban on torture and the right to a fair trial....

Governments are also bound by the international prohibition against sending individuals back to a country where they face the risk of torture, Arbour said, referring to another allegation lodged against the U.S.

"In addition to not engaging in acts of torture themselves, states have a positive obligation to protect individuals from exposure to torture," she said.

There should be no exceptions, even to fight terrorism, she said. "Torture delegitimizes state action to the point where the state can no longer assert its moral authority."...

"To disregard the law or to carve out improper exceptions, as has been attempted by many governments, would lead to a steady erosion of fundamental rights and, ultimately, undermine the legitimacy of government action itself," she said.

Will Bush Make Pledge on Human Rights in Vienna? (Updated 6/22: Text of Declaration; Bush Rebuts Criticism)

I'm not sure how much weight to give these reports. This news seems to be coming from European and not US sources (and being reported only by certain European media). It may be that the draft language means one thing to the Europeans and another thing to the Americans who are putting it together -- and, after all, the draft language described here might not be the final version that everyone agrees to.

"US Vows to Respect Human Rights in Terrorism Fight" - AFP (Vienna), 21 June 2006

VIENNA (AFP) - US President George W. Bush sits down with the 25-nation European Union at a summit expected to show the two sides closing ranks over respecting human rights while fighting terror.

Unprecedented security measures were in place for Bush's 24-hour visit to Vienna, with police lining key roads in the Austrian capital.

Bush is set to pledge that the United States will respect human rights in his war on terror, according to the draft of a final statement for the EU-US summit Wednesday that comes with Europeans complaining about US treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Bush was greeted upon arriving in Vienna Tuesday by Austrian Chancellor and current European Union President Wolfgang Schuessel, who had earlier in the day said: "We can't have an area where law does not apply," referring to the US camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where hundreds of terror suspects have been held without charge.

European governments and rights groups have called on the United States to shut down Guantanamo for detaining inmates in legal limbo.

The draft of the joint statement by Bush and European Union leaders says: "Consistent with our common values, we will ensure that measures taken to combat terrorism comply fully with our international obligations, including human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law.

"We attach great importance to our ongoing in-depth dialogue and our common fight against terrorism and our respected domestic and international legal obligations," according to extracts of the text read to AFP.

The text does not specifically mention Guantanamo, which the United States insists is needed in the war against terror.

But it appears to show that the EU and the United States will be seeking in Vienna to paper over their differences, in a movement of reconciliation that has continued since the two sides bickered deeply over the US invasion of Iraq in 2003....

"Bush 'Will Respect Human Rights' in War on Terror," by Nicholas Watts - the Guardian (UK), 21 June 2006

George Bush is on Wednesday expected to agree at an EU-US summit in Vienna to a joint declaration to respect human rights in the fight against terrorism.

The declaration will say that all countries must observe international law as they fight terrorism.

European diplomats welcomed the declaration as a sign that Washington is heeding EU concerns about what are perceived as heavy-handed tactics by America as it tackles al-Qaida across the world and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

But there is no mention by name of the Guantánamo Bay detention facility and rendition flights in which the CIA has flown al-Qaida suspects across Europe. The White House believes the flights are legal and it is making clear that it will decide what to do with Guantánamo Bay on its own terms.

A draft copy of the statement, seen by the Guardian, says: "Consistent with our common values, we will ensure that measures taken to combat terrorism comply fully with our international obligations, including human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We attach great importance to our ongoing in-depth dialogue on our common fight against terrorism and our respective domestic and international legal obligations."...

Added 22 June:

"Bush Tells Europeans He Wants to Shut Guantanamo," by Tabassum Zakaria (in Vienna) - the Washington Post, 21 June 2006

VIENNA (Reuters) - President George W. Bush, seeking to reassure Europeans over the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, said on Wednesday that he wanted eventually to shut the prison and send inmates back to their home countries.

Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel said Europeans were calling for the closure of Guantanamo Bay, but they had also received a commitment "no torture, no extraordinary or extraterritorial positions to deal with the terrorists."...

"I'd like to end Guantanamo. I'd like it to be over with," Bush said at a news conference after talks with European Union leaders. "One of the things we will do is we'll send people back to their home countries." He gave no time frame....

Pres. Bush made a similar statement in an interview with ARD German television in May. See Bush Tells German Audience, 'I Would Very Much Like to End Guantanamo.'

Also see:

"Guantanamo Must Close, Bush Tells EU," by Stephen Castle (in Brussels) - the Independent (UK), 22 June 2006

George Bush is seeking to overcome European hostility to US foreign policy by acknowledging the divisions caused by invading Iraq, and saying he wants to close Guantanamo Bay. But the US president rejected as "absurd" opinion poll findings which show that the European public sees the US as a danger to world peace.

At an EU summit in Vienna yesterday, Mr Bush also accused Iran of dragging its feet on a Western incentive package aimed at getting Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment activity. Asked about an Iranian promise to respond to the offer in mid-August, he replied: "It shouldn't take the Iranians that long to analyse what's a reasonable deal."

Mr Bush sought to highlight transatlantic co-operation on issues such as Iran. But he also acknowledged the depth of European concerns about the 460 detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, and gave the clearest indication yet how the camp could be emptied.

He said: "I'd like to end Guantanamo, I'd like it to be over with." But he added that "there are some who need to be tried in US courts. They're cold-blooded killers. They will murder somebody if they're let out on the street."...

Mr Bush, whose arrival in Vienna was greeted by 6,000 protesters, reacted angrily when asked about European perceptions of the US. In a Harris poll, 36 per cent of 5,000 people interviewed in five EU countries described the US as a greater threat than Iran or China. "Absurd ­ that's my statement ", said the President when asked about the findings, "we will defend ourselves but, at the same time, we are working with our partners to spread peace and democracy".

Mr Schüssel supported Mr Bush, describing the poll results as " grotesque", and adding that Europeans "should be fair from the other side of the Atlantic. We should understand what 11 September meant to the American people"....

"Bush Replies Angrily to European Criticism," by Jim Gerstenzang and Alissa J. Rubin (in Vienna) - the Los Angles Times, 22 June 2006

VIENNA — President Bush responded angrily Wednesday to Europe's differing views over the war in Iraq and the U.S. treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, even as he won renewed expressions of unity from the European Union on nuclear nonproliferation.

European leaders at a U.S.-EU summit here reaffirmed the need to halt Iran's uranium enrichment program and to contain North Korea's arms program.

With surveys showing a growing animosity in Europe toward the United States amid fears that its anti-terrorism policies and the Iraq war are endangering global stability, the president lashed out during a news conference, raising his voice and several times using the word "absurd" to describe the criticism....

One reporter told the president that despite the behavior of Iran and North Korea, "most consider the United States the biggest threat to global stability." Bush responded: "That's absurd…. We'll defend ourselves, but at the same time, we're actively working with our partners to spread peace and democracy. So whoever says that is — it's an absurd statement."

Moments later, when asked whether the United States was promoting or hindering world peace, Bush said: "I thought it was absurd for people to think that we're more dangerous than Iran. We're a transparent democracy. People know exactly what's on our mind. We debate things in the open. We've got a legislative process that's active."...

Bush and Schuessel offered differing accounts of their private Guantanamo discussion: The president said Schuessel raised it; the chancellor said Bush did.

The chancellor said of Bush: "He came up and said, 'Look, this is my problem, this is where we are. And I think we should be fair from the other side of the Atlantic. We should understand … what Sept. 11 meant to the American people. It was a shock.' "

Bush's willingness to confront the criticism on this trip could end up winning him points among Europeans if he follows through, experts said. Already political pundits are taking a more open view toward his administration, largely because the U.S. has recently been working with Europe on Iran rather than going it largely alone, as it did on Iraq.

"There's a very popular anti-Americanism from the left to the right which doesn't look at the facts," said Armin Turnher, editor in chief of Falter, a respected weekly political and cultural magazine.

"But now most of the opinion leaders are saying, 'Let's look at the reality,' and the reality is that American foreign policy has changed from what it was a couple of years ago. The Americans are not talking about war with Iran, they are working on diplomacy," Turnher said.

Still, the U.S. will be able to begin to regain credibility only if Bush follows through on a previously stated intention to eventually close Guantanamo.

"If he follows it with actions, then it could begin to make a difference. The broader population doesn't change its mind with one visit, but it could be a step," said Christoph Hofinger of Vienna-based Sora Institute, which surveys European attitudes....

This seems to be the final, published text of the agreement whose draft language was discussed in the news items at the top of this post. I'm not sure it amounts to a newsworthy change in US policy. US officials have repeatedly argued that we're not doing anything counter to international law as we interpret it.

"US-EU Summit Declaration: Promoting Peace, Human Rights and Democracy Worldwide" - press release, the White House, 21 June 2006

...Since no single nation can efficiently and effectively deal with global challenges such as climate change, counter-terrorism, non-proliferation, pandemics and natural disasters on its own, we commit ourselves to strengthening our cooperation to address these challenges.

Consistent with our common values, we will ensure that measures taken to combat terrorism comply fully with our international obligations, including human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We attach great importance to our ongoing in-depth dialogue on our common fight against terrorism and our respective domestic and international legal obligations....

US Marine Apologizes for Haditha Song

Obviously, it would have been better for US standing if the video clip of Belile performing the Haditha song had never been posted to the Internet -- and better still if the song had never been written. But the real public diplomacy problem here isn't one individual's tasteless joke. It's that this country has conducted foreign policy in such a way that it's all too easy for foreign publics to assume that the tasteless joke is representative of American values and views.

To Belile's credit, he's offered a prompt and sincere apology for the offense his song gave. That's more than can be said for the way that US officials have handled the fallout from Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, 'secret prison' allegations, and many other events of recent years.

"Marine Sorry for Iraq Deaths Song" - BBC News, 15 June 2006

A US marine has apologised after a video spread on the internet of him singing a song about the killing of Iraqi civilians.

Cpl Joshua Belile, 23, said the song had been written as a joke and was never intended to cause offence.

The Marine Corps has described the song as "inappropriate" and is investigating the incident.

Cpl Belile denied the song had any connection with the deaths of Iraqi civilians at Haditha last year.

"It's a song that I made up and it was nothing more than something supposed to be funny, based off a catchy line of a movie," he said.

The chorus of the song, called Hadji Girl, reprises a popular line from the popular puppet movie Team America, a satire based on the US war on terror.

Both the film and Cpl Belile's song mock the language barrier between English-speaking troops and the Arabic-speaking world, using the phrase "durka durka Muhammad jihad" to represent Arabic speech.

Cpl Belile's song told the story of a US marine who meets an Iraqi girl while under attack in Iraq.

Instantly falling in love - despite the language barrier - he follows her home to meet her parents, only to find himself ambushed by her father and brother.

In the closing lines of the song, the focus of most attention, Cpl Belile's marine grabs the girl's little sister as he comes under attack.

"As the bullets began to fly, the blood sprayed from between her eyes, and then I laughed maniacally," he sang.

The song, cheered on by its audience throughout, ends with the marine returning fire on the Iraqis....

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which highlighted the song, welcomed his apology.

It added that the "inappropriate actions of a few individuals should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of all American military personnel."

"Humor Attempt Falls Flat," by Chris Mazzolini - the Daily News (Jacksonville, NC), 14 June 2006

Cpl. Joshua Belile thought up the words to “Hadji Girl” in September while drinking coffee with buddies in Iraq.

It was just a joke, Belile says, a play on lines from a movie. His fellow Marines seemed to enjoy the song, so they got Belile up on a stage with his guitar.

Someone taped his performance, and now Belile stands in the center of a growing controversy, one that threatens to drag the New River Air Station Marine and his blackly humorous song into the debate about the alleged incident at Haditha and the war in Iraq....

Belile, a 23-year-old who lives in Jacksonville and serves with Marine Light/Attack Helicopter Squadron 167, said the song was meant only as a joke, based on lines from “Team America: World Police” and that he apologizes to people who may have been offended by the lyrics.

“It’s a song that I made up and it was nothing more than something supposed to be funny, based off a catchy line of a movie,” Belile said. “I apologize for any feelings that may have been hurt in the Muslim community. This song was written in good humor and not aimed at any party, foreign or domestic.”...

Belile said the song is entirely fictional and has no ties to any of the ongoing investigations about Haditha and other incidents of alleged troop misconduct.

“This is in no way, shape or form related to the events that happened at Haditha,” he said. “The song was written long before the events happened. The song reflects nobody’s viewpoint. It’s completely made up, it’s completely fictional.

“I think it was a joke that is trying to be taken seriously,” he said. “I think it’s a joke, and anybody who tries to take it seriously knows it’s a joke. People can’t just laugh at it and let it go.”...

"Marine Glorifies Child Killings" - Arab News (Saudi Arabia), 14 June 2006

WASHINGTON, 14 June 2006 — An Internet video showing a Marine singing a song glorifying the killing of Iraqi children was condemned yesterday by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as “clearly inappropriate”.

CAIR called for an investigation after drawing attention to the video, which it says was posted in March on a website called YouTube.com and drew 50,000 hits....

The clip has now been removed from the Internet site that originally posted it. In recent weeks the US Marine Corps has been beset with controversy over the deliberate killings of civilians in Iraq, including the death of 24 people in the town of Haditha in November....

"Marine Apologizes to [sic] 'Haji Girl' Song," by Khalid Hasan - the Daily Times (Pakistan), 15 June 2006

...Here are the lyrics of the song which enraged many Muslims, in Iraq and elsewhere: I was out in the sands of Iraq/and we were under attack/and I didn’t know where to go/Then the first thing that I see is everybody spray painting Burger King so I threw open the door and I hit the floor/And suddenly to my surprise/I looked up and I saw her eyes/and I knew it was love at first sight/And she said/Dirka dirka Muhammed jihad/shurpa shurpa bakala/Haji girl I can’t understand what you say/And she said/Dirka dirka Muhammed jihad/shurpa shurpa bakala/Haji girl I love you anyway/And she said she wanted me to see/She wanted my to go meet her family/And I, I couldn’t figure out how to say/No, ‘cause I don’t speak Arabic,’ so/She took me down an old dirt trail/And we pulled up at the side shanty/And she threw open the door/And I hit the floor cuz her brother and her father shot her/Dirka dirka Muhammed jihad/shurpa shurpa bakala/they pulled out their AKs so I could see and they said Dirka dirka Muhammed jihad/shurpa shurpa bakala/so I grabbed her little sister/and put her in front of me/As the bullets began to fly/the blood sprayed from between her eyes, and then I laughed maniacally/I blew those little f**kers to eternity/They should have known they were f**king with the Marines.

Saudis' Reaction to Guantanamo Deaths

"Saudis Allege Torture in Guantanamo Deaths," by Abdullah Shihri - AP (Riyadh), 13 June 2006

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - The reported suicides of two Saudi detainees at Guantanamo Bay intensified Saudi anger at the camp, drawing questions Sunday about whether the men really killed themselves or were driven to it by torture.

The detention of more than 130 Saudis at the U.S. jail has long grated on people in the kingdom, and there was marked skepticism that the prisoners committed suicide.

"The families don't believe it, and of course I don't believe it either," said Kateb al Shimri, a lawyer who represents relatives of Saudis held at Guantanamo.

"A crime was committed here and the U.S. authorities are responsible," al Shimri said, echoing the general sentiment heard in the Saudi capital, Riyadh.

Al Shimri said he planned to sue the U.S. government for compensation on behalf of the relatives of the deceased.

The kingdom's semiofficial human rights organization called for an independent investigation into the deaths of the two Saudis, who were identified Sunday by Saudi officials as Mani bin Shaman bin Turki al Habradi and Yasser Talal Abdullah Yahya al Zahrani....

Many Saudis denounced the suicide claim as a fabrication, and some accused U.S. authorities of complicity in the inmates' deaths.

"There are no independent monitors at the detention camp so it is easy to pin the crime on the prisoners, given that it's possible they were tortured," said Mufleh al-Qahtani, deputy director of the state-sponosred Saudi Human Rights Group.

Saleh al-Khathlan, director of monitoring at the rights group, explicitly accused Guantanamo officials of torturing detainees.

"Even if the suicide story is true, I have no doubts that they were pushed to it by torture and the lack of attention paid to the health of the detainees," he said.

The families of other Saudi detainees also questioned the U.S. version.

"They were killed; they were murdered. This was no suicide," said Lulua al Dakheel, whose son, 22-year-old Fahed al Fouzan, has been at Guantanamo for more than four years.

Speaking through tears, she added: "There are no guarantees that my son won't be next. These people (U.S. officials) can't be trusted. They treat their dogs better than they treat our sons."

Some people in the conservative Islamic kingdom questioned whether Muslim men would kill themselves since suicide is a grave sin in Islam. But defense lawyers and some former detainees said many prisoners at Guantanamo are wasting away in deep despair at their long captivity....