Eccentric Star: A Public Diplomacy Weblog

Hughes Defends Guantanamo in Al-Jazeera Interview (Added: US 7/7 Claim Disputed)

"US Envoy Defends Guantanamo Conditions," by Mariam Fam - AP (Cairo), 20 Feb 2006

In an interview with the Arabic-language Al-Jazeera satellite channel, Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes said the about 490 prisoners held in Guantanamo were arrested for waging a war against the United States or for helping al-Qaida or the Taliban in their wars.

The interview aired with an Arabic voiceover and Hughes' direct quotes in English were not immediately available.

On Thursday, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the United States should close the Guantanamo prison as soon as possible, backing a key conclusion of a U.N.-appointed independent panel. The panel's report said the detention facility is effectively a torture camp where prisoners have no access to justice.

Hughes said the U.N. report was written by people who did not visit Guantanamo.

Detainees in Guantanamo are served three daily meals that are in line with their local customs, their native languages are used, they have the right to pray five times a day in keeping with Islamic teachings, play sports and read, she said.

Hughes said the detainees were people who have made public their intention to kill as many Americans as possible and that the U.S. government had a right to defend its citizens. She added that some of those released from Guantanamo have immediately gone back to fighting and killing Americans.

U.N. investigator for torture Manfred Nowak has said that the detainees at Guantanamo "should be released or brought before an independent court." He added that the United States should give the United Nations access to other detention centers, including secret ones, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

Asked about "secret detention centers in different part of the world," Hughes said fighting the war on terror required capturing and questioning terrorists to obtain information to protect not just Americans, but people elsewhere too.

Without specifically referring to secret prisons, she said the United States believes that the information it has obtained from some captured terrorists has helped stop terror operations in different parts of the world.

She added that operations by the Unites States were in line with its commitment to international agreements and respected the sovereignty of other countries.

Allegations surfaced last November that U.S. agents interrogated key al-Qaida suspects at clandestine prisons in Eastern Europe and passed through Europe while transporting some suspects elsewhere.

I'm not a lawyer, but I have to wonder whether the characterization of Guantanamo detainees as 'warriors' by a senior USG official doesn't lend force to the argument that the US must observe the Geneva Convention at Guantanomo.

A couple of other problems with Hughes' argument are that people following this story must be well aware that the reason UN investigators did not visit Guantanamo is that US officials would not allow them to have private conversations with prisoners, and that a number of people held at Guantanamo have turned out to be neither 'warriors' nor enemies of the United States nor a threat to world security.

For background, see other posts in the Guantanamo/Detention Centers thread.

Added 21 Feb 2006 (p.m.) - also see:

"Guantanamo 7/7 Link 'Nonsense,'" by James Kirkup - the Scotsman (UK), 22 Feb 2006 (available as of 9:00 pm. EST on 21 Feb)

British officials investigating July's London suicide bombings have received no useful intelligence from detainees held at the United States military camp at Guantanamo Bay.

Whitehall officials yesterday disputed suggestions from the US military that interrogation of detainees at the Cuban camp showed some were in contact with the bombers before the attacks.

The insistence fuelled suspicions the US authorities are over-playing the role of Camp Delta in the fight against terrorism, trying to assuage British unease about the Guantanamo base.

Major-General Jay Hood, the US Army officer in charge of the camp, has told visiting British reporters that he had passed to UK intelligence agencies "information [detainees] have provided about the London bombings".

But one well-placed UK source described that suggestion as "nonsense."

This seems to be one of the reports being contradicted:

"Camp Delta Detainees 'Knew London Bombers'" - the Telegraph (UK), 20 Feb 2006

Inmates at Guantanamo Bay who are campaigning for their release at the High Court in London had contact with the terrorist cell responsible for carrying out last July's London bombings, interrogation officials at the detention camp have disclosed.

American officials responsible for running the camp say that "dozens" of the 500 detainees currently being held at Camp Delta had previously lived or worked in Britain prior to their capture in Afghanistan in 2001, but are not British citizens.

US officials responsible for interrogating the suspects say that the detainees had knowledge of the cell responsible for carrying out the bomb attacks on three Tube trains and a London bus that killed 52 people and wounded more than 700 others.

"After the London bombings we got a request from British intelligence to check whether these people had any knowledge of those responsible for carrying out the attacks," said a senior US official.

"We interviewed them and they were able to provide a great deal of information about the bombings which we passed back to London."

American officials refused to give specific details of the intelligence provided by the detainees, but said it related to the "training and organisational structure" of the terrorist cells responsible for carrying out the July 7 attack.

Major-General Jay Hood, the American officer responsible for running Guantanamo, confirmed that MI6 had made repeated requests for information about the terrorist attacks from inmates held at the detention facility....

Although human rights groups claim that detainees are not in a position to provide current intelligence four years after capture, General Hood insists they are still providing high quality intelligence....

American officials are insistent that no torture methods have been used to persuade the al-Qa'eda fanatics to co-operate.

"The most common method used to interrogate detainees is to sit down with them, watch a movie and eat pizza," said the official. "You build up a relationship with them and eventually they co-operate."

Annan, Tutu, UK Gov't Minister Back Call to Close Guantanamo (Added: Rumsfeld Response)

"Annan Says US Should Close Gitmo Prison," by Edith M. Lederer - AP (United Nations), 17 Feb 2006, as posted to ABCNews.go.com

Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Thursday said the United States should close the prison at Guantanamo Bay for terror suspects as soon as possible, backing a key conclusion of a U.N.-appointed independent panel....

Annan told reporters he didn't necessarily agree with everything in the report, but "the basic premise, that we need to be careful to have a balance between effective action against terrorism and individual liberties and civil rights, I think is valid."

He said he supported the panel's opposition to people being held "in perpetuity" without being prosecuted in a public court. This is "something that is common under every legal system," he said.

"I think sooner or later there will be a need to close the Guantanamo (camp), and I think it will be up to the government to decide, and hopefully to do it as soon as is possible," the secretary-general told reporters....

"Tutu Calls for Guantanamo Closure" - BBC News, 17 Feb 2006

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has joined in the growing chorus of condemnation of America's Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

He said the detention camp was a stain on the character of the United States as a superpower and a democracy....

Speaking on the BBC's Today programme, Archbishop Tutu said he was alarmed that arguments used by the South African apartheid regime are now being used to justify anti-terror measures.

"It is disgraceful and one cannot find strong enough words to condemn what Britain and the United States and some of their allies have accepted," he said.

The respected clergyman said the rule of law had been "subverted horrendously" and he described the muted public outcry - particularly in America - as "saddening."...

"Hain Calls for Closure of Guantanamo" - the Telegraph (UK), 17 Feb 2006

Peter Hain, the Northern Ireland Secretary, has increased pressure on the United States to shut down the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay by backing its closure.

Mr Hain, the first Government minister to call explicitly for the camp to be closed, said he believed Tony Blair shared his view....

Mr Hain told BBC1's Question Time: "I would prefer that it wasn't there. I would prefer it was closed, yes."

Asked if it was Government policy that Guantanamo should be shut down, and challenged over whether the Prime Minister agreed with him, he said: "I think so, yes."

Mr Hain said that the Government accepted that useful information had been obtained from detainees at Guantanamo, but had always been uncomfortable with its existence.

"What we've said all along is, we don't agree with that," he said.

"[The Prime Minister] has said that, as a matter of fact, some of the information that came from there was of importance, but that doesn't mean to say that he thinks the place should have been set up in the first place. There's a distinction there.

"We've made clear our position. We've made it absolutely clear. Jack Straw's made it clear, so has the Prime Minister.

"We've always said that Guantanamo Bay was something that shouldn't have happened."

Mr Blair told MPs last November that Guantanamo Bay was "an anomaly that sooner or later has to be dealt with."...

"Rumsfeld Says US Will Not Close Gitmo," by Amy Westfeldt - AP (New York), 17 Feb 2006

The Pentagon will not close its Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorist suspects, despite U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's call to shut it down, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Friday.

He's just flat wrong," Rumsfeld said in response to a question about the controversial prison during an appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations. "We shouldn't close Guantanamo. We have several hundred terrorists — bad people, people that if let back out on the field would try to kill Americans. That's just a fact."

He said closing it would amount to pretending there is no problem with a terrorist threat to U.S. interests.

Rumsfeld also took a swipe at Annan, saying, "He's never been to Guantanamo Bay," whereas representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross "stayed there, lived there 24 hours a day" to observe conditions.

"That place is being run as well as any detention facility can be run," he added, his voice rising. "It's absolutely beyond comprehension," he said, that calls for closing Guantanamo Bay can be based on allegations of mistreatment and torture by the prisoners, whom Rumsfeld said are trained to lie.

A U.N. report issued earlier this week said some of the treatment of prisoners amounted to torture.

There are about 500 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Many have been held for nearly four years. Most were captured on the battlefields of Afghanistan in late 2001 after U.S. forces invaded in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001....

Also see:

"Senior Anglican Links US to Orwell Over Guantanamo" - AFP (London), 17 Feb 2006

The second most senior cleric in the Church of England has lashed out at the United States, saying its Guantanamo Bay detention centre reflected "a society that is heading towards George Orwell's 'Animal Farm'."

John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, urged the UN Human Rights Commission to seek a writ of habeas corpus -- either through US courts or the International Court of Justice in     The Hague -- compelling Washington to either put Guantanamo detainees on trial or free them.

"The American government is breaking international law," Sentamu told The Independent newspaper in a front-page interview.

"The main building block of a democratic society is that everyone is equal before the law, innocent until proved otherwise, and has the right to legal representation," he said.

"The US should try all 500 detainees at Guantanamo, who still include eight British residents, or free them without further delay. To hold someone for up to four years without charge clearly indicates a society that is heading towards George Orwell's 'Animal Farm'."...

Draft UN Report Says Guantanamo Undermines HR Law (2/16: Report Released)

"UN Report Criticizes US for Guantanamo," by Nick Wadhams - AP (United Nations), 13 Feb 2006

A U.N. investigation has found that the United States committed acts amounting to torture at Guantanamo Bay, including force-feeding detainees and subjecting them to prolonged solitary confinement, according to a draft report obtained Monday.

U.S. officials rejected the draft report, saying the experts who wrote it made many errors and treated statements from detainees' lawyers as fact. The United States had invited the experts to Guantanamo but would not let them interview detainees, so they refused to go.

The report recommended the United States close Guantanamo Bay and revoke all special interrogation techniques authorized by the Defense Department. Its experts accused the United States of violating the detainees' rights to a fair trial, freedom of religion and health.

"In their view, the legal regime applied to these detainees seriously undermines the rule of law and a number of fundamental universally recognized human rights, which are the essence of democratic societies," the report said.

The report's findings were based on interviews with former detainees, public documents, media reports, lawyers, and a questionnaire filled out by the U.S. government.

Many of the allegations have been made before, but the document is the first such accounting from an inquiry launched by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights.

The draft was delivered to the United States on Jan. 16, and was first disclosed Sunday by the Los Angeles Times. A final version, which is expected to incorporate U.S. comments, was expected to be released later in the week.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the United States would not address many of the claims until the final report is released, but defended the U.S. practices generally. He focused on the experts' refusal to go to Guantanamo.

"When people hear these press reports about these outcomes and when they actually view the final report, I would urge them to look at it in the context of the fact that nobody who wrote this report actually went to Guantanamo," McCormack said.

The five experts had sought invitations from the United States to visit Guantanamo Bay since 2002 and three were offered a visit last year. But they refused in November when they were told they would not be allowed to interview detainees.

The United States believes that the International Committee of the Red Cross is the body that should handle that duty. However, ICRC reports are generally confidential, while the U.N. experts usually make their findings public.

"Fact-finding on the spot has to include interviews with detainees," said Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special investigator on torture and one of the experts. "What's the sense of going to a detention facility and doing fact-finding when you can't speak to the detainees? It's just nonsense."...

For background on the UN officials' decision not to go through with a Guantanamo visit, see UN Team Cancels Guantanamo Visit.

Added 16 Feb 2006:

"Human Rights Experts Issue Joint Report on Situation of Detainees in Guantanamo Bay" - press release, UNHCHR (UN Headquarters, New York), 16 Feb 2006

The following statement was issued today by the Chairman Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention...:

Five independent investigators of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights are calling on the United States to close immediately the detention centre in Guantánamo Bay and bring all detainees before an independent and competent tribunal or release them.

The call comes in a report published today following an 18-month joint study by the experts into the situation of detainees at that United States Naval Base. The report's findings are based on information from the United States Government, interviews conducted by the experts with former Guantánamo Bay detainees currently residing or detained in France, Spain and the United Kingdom and responses from lawyers acting on behalf of some current detainees. It also relies on information available in the public domain, including reports prepared by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), information contained in declassified official United States documents and media reports. The experts expressed regret that the Government did not allow them the opportunity to have free access to detainees in Guantanamo Bay and carry out private interviews, as provided by the terms of reference accepted by all countries they visit.

The five experts – specializing in issues related to arbitrary detention, freedom of religion, the right to health, torture and the independence of judges and lawyers – conclude that the persons held at Guantánamo Bay are entitled to challenge the legality of their detention before a judicial body and to obtain release if detention is found to lack a proper legal basis. The continuing detention of all persons held at Guantánamo Bay amounts to arbitrary detention, they state, adding that – where criminal proceedings are initiated against a detainee – the executive branch of the United States Government operates as judge, prosecutor and defence counsel in violation of various guarantees of the right to a fair trial

According to the experts, attempts by the United States Administration to redefine "torture" in the framework of the struggle against terrorism in order to allow certain interrogation techniques that would not be permitted under the internationally accepted definition of torture are of utmost concern. The confusion with regard to authorized and unauthorized interrogation techniques over the last years is particularly alarming. The interrogation techniques authorized by the Department of Defense, particularly if used simultaneously, amount to degrading treatment. If in individual cases, which were described in interviews, the victim experienced severe pain or suffering, these acts amounted to torture as defined in article 1 of the Convention against Torture. Furthermore, the general conditions of detention, in particular the uncertainty about the length of detention and prolonged solitary confinement, amount to inhuman treatment and to a violation of the right to health as well as a violation of the right of detainees to be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. They add that force-feeding of competent detainees violates the right to health as well as the ethical duties of any health professionals who may be involved.

Among their recommendations, the experts say terrorism suspects should be detained in accordance with criminal procedure that respects the safeguards enshrined in relevant international law. Accordingly, the United States Government should either expeditiously bring all Guantánamo Bay detainees to trial or release them without further delay. They also call on the Government to close down the Guantánamo Bay detention centre and to refrain from any practice amounting to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, discrimination on the basis of religion, and violations of the rights to health and freedom of religion. The investigators also request full and unrestricted access to the Guantánamo Bay facilities, including private interviews with detainees. Consideration should also be given to trying suspected terrorists before a competent international tribunal....

HRW: US Torture Denials "Ring Hollow"

"Human Rights Watch Says US Uses Abuse Strategy" - AP (Washington), as carried by USA Today, 18 Jan 2006

The Bush administration has a deliberate strategy of abusing terror suspects during interrogations, Human Rights Watch said Wednesday in its annual report on the treatment of people in more than 70 countries.

The human rights group based its conclusions mostly on statements by senior administration officials in the past year, and said President Bush's reassurances that the United States does not torture suspects were deceptive and rang hollow.

"In 2005 it became disturbingly clear that the abuse of detainees had become a deliberate, central part of the Bush administration's strategy of interrogating terrorist suspects," the report said.

On a trip to Europe last month, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told foreign leaders that cruel and degrading interrogation methods were forbidden for all U.S. personnel at home and abroad. She provided little detail, however, about which practices were banned and other specifics.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Wednesday he had only seen news accounts of the report, but he rejected its conclusions.

"It appears to be based more on a political agenda than facts," he said. "The United States does more than any country in the world to advance freedom and promote human rights. ...The focus should be more on those who are violating human rights and denying people their human rights."

In a separate report, the organization strongly criticized three insurgent groups in Iraq — al-Qaeda, Ansar al-Sunna and the Islamic Army — for targeting civilians with car bombs and suicide bombers in mosques, markets, bus stations....

The report is available from HRW's Web site:

"Human Rights Watch World Report 2006: US Policy of Abuse Undermines Rights Worldwide" (press release) - Human Rights Watch, Washington, DC, 18 Jan 2006

New evidence demonstrated in 2005 that torture and mistreatment have been a deliberate part of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism strategy, undermining the global defense of human rights, Human Rights Watch said today in releasing its World Report 2006     .

The evidence showed that abusive interrogation cannot be reduced to the misdeeds of a few low-ranking soldiers, but was a conscious policy choice by senior U.S. government officials. The policy has hampered Washington’s ability to cajole or pressure other states into respecting international law, said the 532-page volume’s introductory essay. 

“Fighting terrorism is central to the human rights cause,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “But using illegal tactics against alleged terrorists is both wrong and counterproductive.” 

Roth said the illegal tactics were fueling terrorist recruitment, discouraging public assistance of counterterrorism efforts and creating a pool of unprosecutable detainees. 

U.S. partners such as Britain and Canada compounded the lack of human rights leadership by trying to undermine critical international protections. Britain sought to send suspects to governments likely to torture them based on meaningless assurances of good treatment. Canada sought to dilute a new treaty outlawing enforced disappearances. The European Union continued to subordinate human rights in its relationships with others deemed useful in fighting terrorism, such as Russia, China and Saudi Arabia. 

Many countries – Uzbekistan, Russia and China among them – used the “war on terrorism” to attack their political opponents, branding them as “Islamic terrorists.”...

Marty: US Violated HR Laws, European Gov'ts Complicit (Added 1/18: EU Committee)

"US Terror Strategy Illegal - Expert," the Scotsman (UK), 14 Jan 2006 (from Press Association reports)

US policies in the war on terror are contravening international laws on human rights, a top European investigator says.

"The strategy in place today respects neither human rights nor the Geneva Conventions," said Dick Marty, the head of a European investigation into alleged CIA prisons in Europe.

"The current administration in Washington is trying to combat terrorism outside legal means, the rule of law."

Marty, a Swiss politician leading the probe on behalf of the Council of Europe, said there was no question that the CIA was undertaking illegal activities in Europe in its transportation and detention of prisoners.

"The question is: Was the CIA really working in Europe?" Marty said. "I believe we can say today, without a doubt, yes."...

Marty said that European countries had "a fairly shocking attitude" toward US policies, and that attention should not be focused solely on Romania and Poland.

"All the indications are that this 'extraordinary rendition' was already known about," Marty told a news conference in the Swiss town of Burgdorf, referring to the CIA programme of transferring terrorism suspects to third countries where some allegedly were subjected to torture.

"Europe 'Complicit over CIA Jails'" - BBC News, 14 Jan 2006

A Swiss senator carrying out an inquiry into claims the CIA has run illegal secret detention centres in Europe has said he has no doubt they exist.

Dick Marty accused the US of violating human rights and attacked European nations for their "shocking" passivity in the face of such violations.

He is due to give a preliminary report to the Council of Europe on 23 January.

The US has refused to confirm or deny the allegations over secret prisons. It has denied using or condoning torture....

Speaking to journalists in Switzerland, he said he was personally convinced the US had undertaken illegal activities in Europe in transporting and detaining prisoners.

However, he acknowledged he had yet to produce concrete proof and said he expected his inquiry to last another 12 months.

"The question is: was the CIA really working in Europe?" he said. "I believe we can say today, without a doubt, yes."

Washington's policy "respects neither human rights nor the Geneva Conventions", he said.

He cited as evidence the case of Egyptian cleric and terror suspect Osama Mustafa Hassan, also known as Abu Omar, who was allegedly kidnapped by CIA agents from Milan in 2003 and flown to Egypt for interrogation.

Mr Marty also criticised European governments for failing to act when it seemed clear they knew about the US policy.

"It's not possible to transport people from one place to another in such a manner without the secret services knowing about it," he said.

"What was shocking was the passivity with which we all, in Europe, have welcomed these things.

"Europeans should be less hypocritical and not turn a blind eye. There are those who do the dirty work abroad but there are also those who know when they should close their eyes when that dirty work is being done."...

Governments across Europe had been "willingly silent", he said, and it was now time for Europeans to decide whether they would continue to tolerate the illegal actions of the CIA....

For background, see Swiss Report Revives 'Secret Prison' Issue in Europe and EU Investigates Secret Prison Allegations; Congress Wants to Investigate Leak.

Added 18 Jan 2006:

"EU Lawmakers to Check 'No Guantanamo' in Europe," by Ingrid Melander - Reuters (Brussels), 18 Jan 2006

The credibility of the European Union is at stake over accusations the CIA ran secret prisons in the bloc, a top European lawmaker said on Wednesday as the European Parliament formally launched a probe into the scandal.

"There must be no Guantanamo on European soil," foreign affairs committee chair Elmar Brok told Reuters, referring to the controversial U.S. detention center in Cuba.

"We want to be clear to our people and to the rest of the world that we do not violate human rights."

The decision to create a European Parliament committee to look into media and rights group allegations of CIA detention centers in EU member and candidate countries was taken last week by political leaders in the assembly.

The panel was launched on Wednesday in Strasbourg and has no investigative powers and its mandate is to collect and analyze information on the allegations....

The Council of Europe, a human rights body comprising EU member states and other countries, has launched its own investigation and its preliminary results will be announced on January 23 by lead investigator Dick Marty a Swiss senator....

Swiss Report Revives 'Secret Prisons' Issue in Europe (Added 1/11: Marty Response)

"Leaked Fax 'Shows Romania Helped CIA Interrogators," by David Rennie (in Brussels) - the Telegraph (UK), 10 Jan 2006

An Egyptian government fax intercepted by Swiss intelligence offers the first "real evidence" that the US interrogated suspected terrorists at secret prisons in Eastern Europe, European politicians said yesterday.

The highly-classified fax, purportedly sent late last year by Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, to its embassy in London, was leaked to a Swiss newspaper on Sunday.

In it, Mr Gheit discussed the fate of 23 detainees from Iraq and Afghanistan who were apparently interrogated at the Mihail Kogalniceanu air base in Romania on the Black Sea coast.

Egyptian diplomats had confirmed this information "from their own sources", the minister wrote, according to a Swiss intelligence summary leaked to the Sonntagsblick newspaper.

Egypt has not confirmed the authenticity of the fax. But MEPs described it as "a hugely significant step" when angry Swiss authorities confirmed the leak was based on a communication intercepted by a top secret surveillance system, known as Onyx....

The Romanian defence ministry "categorically" denied the content of the latest leaked Egyptian fax. According to Swiss media, the fax went on: "There are similar interrogation centres in Ukraine, Kosovo, Macedonia and in Bulgaria."

All European governments accused of hosting CIA "black sites" - where detainees have allegedly been tortured to avoid domestic restrictions on interrogation methods - have repeatedly denied the charges.

In the fax, Mr Gheit concluded: "Romanian authorities continue to deny the presence of secret prisons used by US intelligence to interrogate members of al-Qa'eda."

The commander of the Kogalniceanu air base, Dan Buciuman, told news agencies he had worked at the site since 1995 and had never seen any such activities. He said that the base was open to inspections.

But even without proof, the leak was further bad news for Romania, due to enter the EU as early as 2007 but facing growing opposition from existing members.

If proof emerges that Washington successfully persuaded poor, ex-Communist nations to breach European human rights conventions and laws, the backlash will be severe.

The Liberal Democrat peer and London MEP, Lady Ludford, said: "This is a piece of real evidence to back up the gut instinct many of us have that the denials of complicity we are hearing from EU member and candidate states cannot be relied upon."

Her Labour colleague, Claude Moraes MEP, said Romania, as a candidate nation with serious existing problems of corruption and poverty, was far more vulnerable to EU anger than nations which are already part of the EU, such as Poland.

Mr Moraes, the social affairs spokesman for British Labour MEPs, said: "There is a strong lobby in the parliament who feel that Romania has not met the entry criteria already, in fields like corruption, human rights abuses, and the behaviour of their justice system."

"Romania will never confess," he said. "But if they are caught red handed, they would risk at a minimum a delay to their entry to 2009, and at worst, they could see their entry suspended indefinitely."

Added 11 Jan 2006:

"CIA Prison Investigator Mulls New Document," by Jan Sliva - AP (Brussels), 10 Jan 2006

The head of a European investigation into alleged CIA prisons in Europe said Tuesday the purported Egyptian government document naming countries where such prisons existed is a new lead which must be followed up.

But Dick Marty, a Swiss senator leading the probe on behalf of the Council of Europe, said it was still not clear that the document — a fax reportedly sent by satellite transmission from Egypt's Foreign Ministry to its embassy in London — was genuine....

Marty also said he wondered how Swiss intelligence intercepted a fax allegedly sent from Egypt to London. "It's the first time these allegations come directly from an Arab country," he said.

The Strasbourg, France-based Council of Europe began its investigation after allegations surfaced in November that U.S. agents interrogated key al-Qaida suspects at clandestine prisons in Eastern Europe and transported some suspects to other countries via Europe....

Merkel: US Should Close Guantanamo (Added 1/10: US Response)

"Germany's Merkel Says Guantanamo Should Be Shut," by Kristin Strohecker - Reuters (Berlin), 7 Jan 2006

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in an interview published days before her first visit to the United States, said Washington should close its Guantanamo Bay prison camp and find other ways of dealing with terror suspects.

"An institution like Guantanamo can and should not exist in the longer term," Merkel said in an interview with the weekly magazine Der Spiegel published on Saturday. "Different ways and means must be found for dealing with these prisoners."

Merkel has vowed to repair ties with the United States, severely strained over the U.S.-led     Iraq invasion, which her predecessor Gerhard Schroeder strongly opposed.

But there was no sign she would hesitate to speak out on issues where disagreement exists. Asked about her comments at a news conference later in the day, she said: "That's my opinion and my view and I'll say it elsewhere just as I have expressed it here."

She said she would not demand the immediate closure of the detention center when she meets U.S. President George W. Bush on Friday. "My talks with leaders of other countries don't consist of my expressing demands but of exchanging views," she said.

There is widespread skepticism in Germany about the way the United States is fighting its "war on terror," compounded by the recent scandal over the CIA's abduction and detention of German citizen Khaled el-Masri -- later acknowledged to be a mistake.

Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. detention center in Cuba denounced by human rights activists and many governments, is deeply unpopular in Germany....

The Merkel interview hasn't been posted to Der Speigel's English-language Web site yet. Here's a link to (I assume, anyway - I don't know German) the original, German-language interview:

"Beifall für Merkels Guantanamo-Kritik" - Der Speigel Online, 7 Jan 2006

[Updated 9 January 2006: The interview is now available in English (thanks, Atlantic Review! for the link):] "Merkel: Guantanamo Mustn't Exist in the Long Term" - Der Speigel Online (English site), 9 Jan 2006

SPIEGEL: You are traveling to the United States this week. Will you address the issue of torture with (US President) George W. Bush?

Merkel: Partners like the United States and Germany must always discuss all issues, including these questions. I welcome the fact that a discussion over legitimate methods of questioning and interrogation is taking place in both Germany and the United States. And I'm even more pleased that the President and the US Congress have agreed on a common
position. It represents a change in the public debate in the US, which I very much welcome.

SPIEGEL: The US government feels it is legitimate to hold prisoners under water until they believe they are drowning. Is this acceptable to you?

Merkel: There was a similar debate in Germany over the 2002
kidnapping of Jakob von Metzler, the banker's son. The issue then was whether it is legitimate to threaten or use torture to save the life of a child. The public debate showed that the overwhelming majority of citizens believed that even in such a case, the end does not justify the means. That is also my position....

SPIEGEL: In the interest of threat prevention, can German officials be sent to the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay to interrogate detainees?

Merkel: An institution like Guantanamo in its present form cannot and must not exist in the long term. We must find different ways of dealing with prisoners. As far as I'm concerned there's no question about that.

SPIEGEL: Will you address Guantanamo with President Bush?

Merkel: We will certainly talk about the whole issue of combating terrorism. But it's also important to me, and I'll make this clear during my visit, that our relationship with the United States is not reduced to questions of fighting terrorism and the Iraq war. German-American relations were so good for so many years because they extended deeply into the normal lives of people.

Der Speigel's English language site did, however, have this recent article on German perceptions of the US:

"Berlin's Concern about America's Image," by David Crossland (in Berlin) - Der Speigel Online, Jan 4 2006

German Chancellor Angela Merkel can look forward to the red-carpet treatment in Washington next week as US President George Bush -- who never got on with her predecessor Gerhard Schröder -- hopes to signal a fresh start. But a top German official warns that despite improving trans-Atlantic ties, America's reputation among the European public is waning.

America's war on terror has dented its image in the world as a guardian of personal freedom, according to a German official speaking on Wednesday ahead of Chancellor Angela Merkel's inaugural visit to Washington next week.

"I'm concerned that the image of America as a haven of state legality where the state protects the personal freedom of individuals has suffered," said Karsten Voigt, the German Foreign Ministry's co-ordinator for German-American cooperation, who will be traveling in Merkel's delegation during her visit on Jan. 13. "I hope people in the US are aware of the problem."

Voigt said that while relations between Berlin and Washington had improved steadily since their bitter disagreement over the Iraq war in 2003, public opinion in Germany and other European countries remained highly critical of US government policy....

Crossland's report links to this December 2005 article how German views of US extraordinary renditions complicated Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's recent European visit:

"Losing European Hearts and Minds," by Marc Young - Der Speigel Online, 6 Dec 2005

...That the [US] secretary of state is even forced repeatedly [while traveling in Europe] to assure the United States' friends and allies that the country does not violate the most basic human rights is the surest sign that Washington has long since lost the battle for hearts and minds of many Europeans. In Germany and elsewhere, America is simply no longer given the benefit of the doubt.

Of course, it would be naïve to think that intelligence agencies were not operating on the borders of western laws and norms. But the question worrying many on both sides of the Atlantic right now is just how far governments are willing to let covert operations go?

Merkel is hoping to deflect unwanted scrutiny about Berlin's silence on the Masri abduction by having her foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, testify to a closed parliamentary committee about why Germany simply accepted the kidnapping of one of its own citizens [Khaled el-Masri]. Steinmeier, who was chief of staff in Schröder's [Merkel's predecessor's] chancellery, was almost certainly informed about the rendition gone wrong.

Will it be enough? Many Germans are sure to be upset that there was less distance between Schröder's government and the Bush Administration than they had thought. And they may now begin to ask whether Merkel's compass is pointed in the right direction.

For more on the German portion of Rice's European trip, see Contradictory Accounts Mar Rice's Berlin Visit.

For other recent news on Guantanamo, see:

"Some in Guantanamo to Go to Afghan Jail" - AP (Kabul), 6 Jan 2006

A prison near Kabul is being refurbished to house about 100 Afghans who are expected to be sent back here from U.S. military custody at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, officials said.

Workers have started reconstructing a block of Policharki Prison, Afghanistan's main jail, to improve the living standards of detainees and the level of security, Gen. Mohammed Zahir Azimi said Thursday. Azimi, a spokesman for Afghanistan's Defense Ministry, gave no other details.

Deputy Justice Minister Mohammed Qasim Hashimzai, who is responsible for the prison, said the work was being paid for by the United States.

He said it wasn't clear when the refurbishment would be complete or when the prisoners at Guantanamo would be transferred back here.

The United States and the Afghan government announced in August that Afghans held in U.S. military custody at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere would be sent back to Afghanistan, but didn't say when. The     Pentagon at the time said about 110 Afghans were being held at the prison on the U.S. naval base in eastern Cuba....

Added 9 January 2005:

"Guantanamo Inmate Pins Hope on Merkel's US Trip" - Reuters (Berlin), 9 January 2006

A German lawyer urged Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday to press for the release of his client from the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay when she visits Washington this week.

Bernhard Docke, whose Turkish client Murat Kurnaz was born and raised in Germany, said he was encouraged by an interview published at the weekend in which Merkel criticized the Guantanamo camp and said it could not continue indefinitely.

"I'm very pleasantly surprised that it's a conservative chancellor who's now finally speaking clearly and ending this period of pussyfooting and false diplomatic restraint, and speaking openly about Guantanamo," Docke told Reuters.

Kurnaz, who was born in Germany in 1982 to Turkish parents and is a Turkish national, was in the process of becoming a German citizen when he was arrested in Pakistan in late 2001.

He was taken from there to Guantanamo, Cuba, where the United States is holding hundreds of men it suspects of backing     Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda or     Afghanistan's radical Islamist Taliban.

Docke said he hoped Merkel would raise the case directly when she meets     President George W. Bush on Friday on her first U.S. visit since taking office in November.

"Experience with the release of other European prisoners from Guantanamo shows that pressure from the home government was decisive, and that has been missing in the Kurnaz case," he said. "The Kurnaz case belongs on the agenda too."

Docke said Merkel's office had written to him last month saying it would raise the case with the Americans "on humanitarian grounds." The foreign ministry had told him in late December its ambassador in Turkey would try to get Ankara to support a joint German-Turkish initiative on Kurnaz's behalf.

Docke has said Kurnaz may have wanted to join the Taliban but was at most a "wannabe" militant, who had not taken part in armed conflict....

For more on Merkel's call to close Guantanamo, see the Atlantic Review, a blog written by Fulbright alumni from Germany.

Added 10 January 2006:

"US Rejects Guantanamo Criticism" - BBC News (World Edition), 10 Jan 2006

The US has rejected a call by the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, for the closure of its detention camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

State department spokesman Sean McCormack said the camp kept society safe from very dangerous people who would fight the US if released....

Mr McCormack said everybody hoped there would come a point where Guantanamo would not be needed, but that point had not come yet.

"Guantanamo serves a purpose and it's there for a reason," he said.

"It keeps people who are very dangerous away from civilised society. Make no mistake about it; if these people were released, they would be right back in the fight."

Mrs Merkel's comments come as Germany hopes to improve relations with the US, which were strained after former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder opposed the Iraq war.

At a news conference on Saturday, Mrs Merkel defended her comments, but said she would not demand the immediate closure of the camp when she held talks with US President George Bush next week....

Torture Ban Gains House Support (Updated 12/15: WH Agrees to Ban)

"House Backs Senate-Passed Mistreatment Ban" - AP (Washington), 14 Dec 2005

In a symbolic move, the House endorsed a Senate-passed ban on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of foreign terrorism suspects Wednesday as negotiations between the White House and Sen. John McCain over the provision appeared at an impasse.

Approved 308-122, the procedural vote puts political pressure on House negotiators — but does not require them — to include the ban and another provision standardizing interrogation techniques used by U.S. troops in a final wartime military spending bill.

Both provisions are sponsored by McCain (R-Ariz). With both chambers of Congress controlled by Republicans, the House endorsement of the provisions further embarrasses the Bush administration, which months ago threatened to veto legislation containing either one.

The vote in the House followed a morning meeting between McCain and President Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, in which the two sides failed to reach a compromise on the Arizona senator's provisions....

progress on any compromise was thrown into question just hours later when the House GOP took up the nonbinding effort by Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), that put the House on record supporting McCain's provisions. Endorsing the provisions were 200 Democrats, 107 Republicans and one independent.

"We cannot torture and still retain the moral high ground," Murtha, the senior Democrat on the House appropriations defense panel, said. "There can be no waiver to the use for torture. No torture and no exceptions."

Rep. Bill Young (R-Fla.), the chairman of that panel, said the United States does not torture but that it's "important that we make it very clear that we are opposed to torture — period." However, he said he was offended because the provisions would give terrorists too many protections.

For months, House Republican leaders had delayed appointing negotiators for the defense spending bill in part to avoid a House vote on the McCain provisions. Leaders had been waiting for the result of negotiations between the White House and McCain.

Congressional aides cautioned that a vote did not signal a deal between the administration and the senator, and several said negotiations were continuing....

Karen Hughes, undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs, expressed confidence that McCain and Hadley would "reach consensus."

"The goal is the same here," Hughes said on CBS' "The Early Show." "The goal is to make it very clear that the United States is a nation of laws and that we operate our detainee policy within our laws, within our international obligations and without torture."...

Added 15 Dec 2005:

"Bush Accepts McCain's Ban on Torture," by Liz Sidoti - AP (Washington), 15 Dec 2005

President Bush embraced Sen. John McCain's proposal to ban cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of terrorism suspects on Thursday, reversing months of opposition that included White House veto threats.

Bowing to pressure from the Republican-run Congress and abroad, the White House signed off on the proposal after a fight that pitted the president against members of his own party and threatened to further tarnish a U.S. image already soiled by the abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

Bush said the ban and accompanying interrogation standards will "make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention of torture, whether it be here at home or abroad."

After months of fierce negotiations, McCain declared "a done deal" that he said shows that the United States "upholds values and standards of behavior and treatment of all people, no matter how evil or bad they are."

"We've sent a message to the world that the United States is not like the terrorists," the Arizona Republican said while appearing alongside the president in the Oval Office to announce the agreement.

The agreement still needs to be approved by Congress, whose GOP leaders hope to adjourn for the year in a few days.

The deal keeps McCain's original proposal, which was overwhelmingly approved by the Senate and endorsed by the House. One of the final stumbling blocks in negotiations was removed when language was added allowing CIA interrogators the same legal protections as those afforded to military interrogators.

Those rules say the accused can defend themselves by arguing it was reasonable for them to believe they were obeying a legal order. The government also would provide counsel for accused interrogators.

That language was McCain's own counterproposal to the White House's early calls, pushed by Vice President Dick Cheney, for an exemption for CIA interrogators. The administration had also sought some protection from prosecution for such agents accused of violating the standards.

Also added, officials said, was a statement explicitly rejecting immunity from civil or criminal lawsuits for those who violate the standards....

The ban defines "cruel, inhuman and degrading" as treatment prohibited by the U.S. Constitution as defined in the U.N. convention against torture.

"Analysis: US Torture Ban Law," by Matthew Davis (in Washington) - BBC News, 15 Dec 2005

US President George W Bush's decision to support a new law banning cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of terrorist suspects marks a remarkable retreat under fire.

The White House, and particularly Vice-President Dick Cheney, had fought hard to have the Central Intelligence Agency exempted from the legislation, arguing that the agency needed to be allowed special powers in the fight against terrorism.

Mr Cheney had telephoned every Republican senator to try to get the measure derailed.

But when Congress came out overwhelmingly in favour of the law - proposed by Republican Senator John McCain - Mr Bush was backed into a corner.

Sitting next to Mr McCain at a White House news conference, the president attempted to make the best of what is something of a blow to his authority.

"We've been happy to work with [Senator McCain] to achieve a common objective," he said. "And that is to make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention on torture, whether it be here at home, or abroad."...

The McCain amendment comes at a time when the issue of the US treatment of prisoners during its war on terror is under scrutiny on a number of fronts.

Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signalled an apparent softening of US policy when she said the United Nations treaty on torture applied to American interrogators in the US and overseas. The administration had previously said the convention did not apply to US personnel abroad.

The secretary of state has also admitted that terror suspects are flown abroad for interrogation under a process called "rendition".

Yet Ms Rice has refused to address international uproar at reports that the CIA has so-called "black sites" in eastern Europe and Asia where suspected terrorists are held far from public scrutiny.

And it is not only the treatment of prisoners in custody that has angered opponents.

Human rights groups have complained that prisoners of the US are sometimes detained arbitrarily, and kept for months on end without facing charges or trial.

But also see:

"Torture or Coercion?," by Michael Hirsh - Newsweek (a Web exclusive), 15 Dec 2005

...Bush may not be giving up entirely. NEWSWEEK has obtained a draft of a less-known companion bill sponsored by two Republican senators, Lindsey Graham and Jon Kyl, and Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, in which the administration has won tougher language giving it the right to use information obtained from harsh interrogations overseas....

According to an amended draft of the measure being circulated Thursday among the sponsors, Graham has agreed to language that loosens the restrictions on terror evidence that’s obtained through “coercive” interrogations that may occur in other countries. Whereas Graham’s previous draft had forbidden the use of such evidence—in accordance with standard rules of military justice—the new draft says that it should be barred only “to the extent practicable.” The latest bill language also now says that the “probative value” of evidence should be considered—in other words, whether the information is persuasive.

In theory, this would permit U.S. military tribunals to use evidence obtained through torture or abuse in the prisons of other countries. The new Graham draft also adds more restrictions on the rights of terror detainees to sue or launch an action against the U.S. government outside of a narrow appeals process.

Wes Hickman, a spokesman for Graham, said he had no immediate comment on the negotiations. However, a Republican Senate aide who spoke on condition that he would not be named conceded that new language had toughened the bill. "There was a clause in the original bill that said the [tribunals] had to exclude any statements that were the result of torture or coercion. Now that's been changed to a 'consideration' clause that says the tribunal board must take into account the source of the information." He contended the change had been requested by military judge advocates general.

Tara Andringa, a spokeswoman for Levin, said she could not comment while the bill was in conference, and a Kyl spokesman referred all inquiries to Graham's office.

Torture Concerns Persist, Despite Rice Statement

For some background, see Reports: Rice Announces Shift in US Stand on Interrogations and Rice Speaks on Rendition Before Leaving for Europe.

"Europe Still Worried about Torture Reports," by Beth Gardiner - AP (London), 9 Dec 2005

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice eased European ministers' worries with reassuring denials of allegations of torture by American forces, but many across the continent remained unconvinced as she wound up a European visit Friday.

Questions about the reports of secret CIA prisons for terrorist suspects in Eastern Europe and alleged flights to nations where torture is common dominated Rice's tour. Many of the officials she met declared themselves satisfied by her assertion that the U.S. does not allow torture and respects principles of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war.

But beyond the corridors of power, questions about U.S. practices were not so easily dispelled.

"Europe's foreign ministers rolled over, stuck their paws in the air and allowed Ms. Rice to tickle their stomachs," columnist Mary Dejevsky wrote in The Independent newspaper.

She noted NATO Secretary-General Jaap De Hoop Scheffer's assertion that "It is my impression that Secretary Rice ... cleared the air. You will not see this discussion continuing."

"To which the only reasonable response should be: Why on earth not?" Dejevsky asked.

In Spain, though, the right-of-center ABC newspaper said Rice "overcame ... the tough challenge of leaving her European partners satisfied with her explanations over the CIA flights."

Sergio Romano, a former Italian ambassador and leading commentator on international affairs, said European governments had appreciated a softening of Rice's comments in the second half of her visit.

"Governments cannot but take note of the change of tone, if not of policy," Romano said.

But he said the deep divide between America and Europe over interrogation methods "is a problem that is destined to re-emerge. It's a fundamental problem."

In Austria, opposition politicians slammed Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel as "extremely naive" for his acceptance of President Bush's insistence during a White House meeting Thursday that American forces do not torture detainees.

"The facts and not the promises really matter, and the facts show something different," said Hannes Swoboda, a Socialist legislator in the European Parliament.

Another opposition politician, Johannes Voggenhuber of the Green Party, said Schuessel's statements after meeting with Bush gave a false impression of "Europe's soapiness, appeasement and defenselessness."...

In Germany, the Munich-based daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung was skeptical of what it called Rice's "conciliatory tones."

"Since the U.S. grasped at half-truths and untruths to explain the war in Iraq, it now lacks the necessary trust in the EU and NATO to be able to end the CIA affair through promises alone," the newspaper said in an editorial.

"Polish PM Orders Probe into CIA Prison Allegations," by Nathaniel Espino - Reuters (Warsaw), 10 Dec 2005

Polish Prime Minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz said on Saturday he would order an investigation into allegations that the CIA detained suspected terrorists at secret prisons in Poland.

Officials in Marcinkiewicz's government and its predecessor have denied the allegations by Human Rights Watch and in U.S. media but Marcinkiewicz said an investigation was needed since the reports could threaten Poland's security.

"I will order an investigation at all possible locations, to determine whether there is any evidence at all that such events took place on our territory," Marcinkiewicz said on the private television channel TVN 24.

"This matter must finally be closed, because it could prove dangerous for Poland," added Marcinkiewicz, whose cabinet was sworn in on October 31.

On Friday, the newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza quoted Marc Garlasco, an analyst with watchdog group Human Rights Watch, as saying that, until recently, Poland was the main location for CIA interrogations in Europe....

Garlasco was quoted on Friday as saying the CIA had set up two detention centers in Poland, which were closed shortly after the Washington Post published an article about secret prisons last month.

The Polish centers held a quarter of the 100 detainees estimated to be held in such camps worldwide, he said.

Separately, on Saturday Gazeta Wyborcza quoted staff at an airport in Szymany, northeast Poland, as saying planes belonging to the CIA had landed there at least five times since 2002....

"Minister Denies Germany Had Role in CIA Abduction" - Reuters (Berlin), 10 Dec 2005

Germany's new foreign minister on Saturday described as outrageous a suggestion that German authorities may have played a role in the abduction of a German citizen by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

In an interview published the newspaper Bild, Frank Walter Steinmeier said he learned only afterwards of the abduction of Khaled el-Masri, who was flown to Afghanistan for interrogation as a suspected terrorist.

He was responding to remarks attributed to an unnamed security source by a German newspaper on Friday that German authorities pointed the CIA in Masri's direction.

"The anonymous allegation that German authorities were involved in the abduction of el-Masri is outrageous and irresponsible," Steinmeier said.

Steinmeier was chief of staff to former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder at the time of the abduction in December 2003 and as such had close contacts with German security services.

He is due to be questioned about the affair in parliament on Wednesday....

"Prewar Claims 'Sourced from Rendition Detainee,'" by Simon Jeffery, Rosalind Ryan, and agencies - the Guardian (UK), 9 Dec 2005

The practice of "extraordinary rendition" was today again in the spotlight with claims that the detainee who supplied the Bush administration's pre-war claims linking al-Qaida to Iraq did so in Egyptian custody.

Unnamed US government officials, quoted in the New York Times, said Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a Libyan, made his most specific claims after the US handed him over to interrogators from a third country.

Claims from the officials that Al-Libi later admitted to inventing the allegations in order to avoid harsh treatment backed up earlier suggestions from Colin Powell's chief of staff at the time of the war that al-Libi was possibly tortured.

Lawrence Wilkerson, Mr Powell's senior aide, last month told the BBC that new information had suggested al-Libi's statements "were obtained through interrogation techniques other than those authorised by the Geneva [conventions]."...Before the Iraq war, George Bush, Dick Cheney and Mr Powell frequently cited Mr Libi's statement as "credible evidence" that Iraq was training al-Qaida.

If correct, the claims would suggest that rendition and the reliance on third country interrogations had played a role in the unreliability of intelligence before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq by US-led coalition.

The law lords yesterday ruled that evidence obtained by torture was not admissible in a British court. The government will now have to demonstrate in cases against terror suspects that intelligence from overseas agencies meets international standards.

The ruling makes clear that evidence extracted by torture may be used as evidence only against torturers. It bars evidence obtained from the "extraordinary rendition" of suspects from British courts.

Keir Starmer QC, who led a team representing 14 human rights organisations which presented arguments to the court, hailed it as "the leading judgment in the world on torture".

Condoleezza Rice, Mr Powell's successor as US secretary of state, appeared to bow to international pressure this week when she said on a visit to Ukraine that the US's obligations under the UN convention on torture extended to "US personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the US or outside the US."

Ms Rice has consistently said the US neither condones nor practises torture, but she has refused to confirm or deny the existence of CIA-run secret interrogation centres in eastern Europe that may be used to hold prisoners of the US.

Today, the US admitted for the first time that the Red Cross had not been given access to all its detainees.

The state department's top lawyer, John Bellinger, said the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had access to "absolutely everybody" at the US camp in Guantanamo Bay.

But when asked if the ICRC had access to all detainees held elsewhere in similar circumstances, he said "No" but declined to give further details....

For more on the news reports cited in the Guardian article, see:

"Qaeda-Iraq Link US Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim," by Douglas Jehl - the New York Times, 9 Dec 2005 (registration required)

WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 - The Bush administration based a crucial prewar assertion about ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda on detailed statements made by a prisoner while in Egyptian custody who later said he had fabricated them to escape harsh treatment, according to current and former government officials....

"Red Cross Seeks Access to Some Detainees," by Alexander G. Higgins - AP (Geneva), 9 Dec 2005

The international Red Cross renewed its demand Friday that it be allowed to visit all detainees in "undisclosed locations" after a senior State Department official confirmed the United States has yet to grant the agency access to all its terror suspect.

ICRC President Jakob Kellenberger was commenting on a remark Thursday by State Department legal adviser John B. Bellinger III, who was asked by reporters during a visit to Geneva whether the ICRC has access to all such prisoners held by the United States overseas. Bellinger replied, "No," and declined to say any more....

"Britain's Top Court Bans 'Torture Evidence'" - Reuters (London), 8 Dec 2005

Britain's highest court ruled on Thursday that information obtained using torture anywhere in the world was unacceptable as evidence in the British judicial system.

Human rights groups said the ruling sent a clear signal to governments around the globe, who are wrestling with accusations they have benefited from information obtained by torture.

The decision by the House of Lords comes a day after the United States explicitly banned its interrogators from treating detainees inhumanely....

For other news about international perceptions of US torture policy and rhetoric, see:

"Annan Defends UN Official Who Chided US," by Warren Hoge - the New York Times, 9 Dec 2005

UNITED NATIONS, Dec. 8 - Secretary General Kofi Annan on Thursday vigorously defended Louise Arbour, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, after comments she made about detention and torture came under criticism from John R. Bolton, the United States ambassador.

"The secretary general has absolutely no disagreement with the statement she made yesterday, and he sees no reason to object to any of it," said Mr. Annan's spokesman, Stepháne Dujarric. In an unusual instance of a secretary general's singling out an individual envoy for critical comment, Mr. Annan said he was seeking a meeting with Mr. Bolton to make his point in person.

The dispute arose Wednesday when Ms. Arbour made a statement and gave a briefing in which she said that secret detention of terror suspects and sending suspects to foreign countries without guaranteed safeguards meant that the international ban on torture "is becoming a casualty of the so-called war on terror." She said it was "particularly insidious" that "governments are watering down the definition of torture, claiming that terrorism means established rules do not apply anymore." In comments that appeared directed at the current American effort led by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to justify American treatment of prisoners, Ms. Arbour said, "An illegal interrogation technique remains illegal whatever new description a government might wish to give it."

Mr. Bolton told reporters it was "disappointing" that instead of focusing on "human rights problems that exist in the world today," Ms. Arbour had chosen to "talk about press commentary about alleged American conduct." He said that conduct had been "fully and completely addressed" by Ms. Rice.

He said he thought it "inappropriate and illegitimate for an international civil servant to second-guess the conduct that we're engaged in in the war on terror, with nothing more as evidence than what she reads in the newspapers."

Ms. Arbour is a criminal lawyer from Montreal who served for five years on Canada's Supreme Court and, as a war crimes prosecutor in 1999, indicted the former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic. She has held her United Nations post since July 2004. Mr. Annan said he was "confident that she will carry on her work without being impressed or intimidated by what happened yesterday."

He said that as high commissioner, Ms. Arbour had unrestricted right to "speak on human rights on a global scale." Mr. Dujarric said the meeting with Mr. Bolton would take place on Monday.

Reports: Rice Announces Shift in US Stand on Interrogations (Added 12/8: NATO Reaction; McCain Bill Impact)

"US Bound by Torture Treaty - Rice" - BBC News, 7 Dec 2005

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says the UN Convention against Torture applies to American interrogators working both in the US and overseas.

Her comments follow confusion about the US stance on a treaty which bans cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.

The Bush administration has previously said the convention does not apply to US personnel working overseas....

The UN Convention against Torture (CAT) "extends to US personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the US or outside the US," Ms Rice said in Ukraine.

Her comments appear to contrast with the US Attorney-General, Alberto Gonzales, who said last year the convention did not apply to US interrogations of foreigners overseas.

US officials travelling with Ms Rice were quoted by Reuters news agency as saying it represented a marked shift in US policy....

"Rice Clarifies US Detention Policy," by Anne Gearan (in Kiev) - AP, 7 Dec 2005

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sought Wednesday to clarify U.S. policy on harsh interrogation methods, saying no U.S. personnel may use cruel or degrading practices at home or abroad.

Rice's remarks followed confusion in the United States over whether     CIA employees could use means otherwise off limits for U.S. personnel.

It also follows strong and sustained criticism in Europe over techniques such as waterboarding, in which prisoners are strapped to a plank and dunked in water.

"As a matter of U.S. policy," Rice said the United Nations Convention against Torture "extends to U.S. personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the U.S. or outside the U.S."...

The Bush administration has previously said the ban on cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment did not apply to Americans working overseas. In practice, that meant CIA employees could use methods in overseas prisons that would not be allowed in the United States....

"US Shifts to Ban Cruelty to Detainees Abroad," by Saul Hudson (in Kiev) - Reuters, 7 Dec 2005

The United States, seeking to defuse European criticism over reports of abuse of prisoners, said on Wednesday it had changed its policy on interrogating detainees.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, on a trip to Ukraine, said U.S. personnel would be banned worldwide from subjecting prisoners to cruelty.

But Amnesty International immediately played down the significance of Rice's remark saying: "It is not a major concession."

It said it still wanted serious action by Washington over what it called cases of torture in U.S. bases.

"As a matter of U.S. policy, the United States' obligations under the CAT (Convention against Torture), which prohibits cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment -- those obligations extend to U.S. personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the United States or outside of the United States," Rice said.

U.S. officials said her comments marked a policy shift toward the international convention on torture. Previously, the Bush administration had interpreted the convention as only applying to U.S. territory....

Added 8 Dec 2005:

"Allies Welcome Rice's Comments on Torture," by Robert Wielaard - AP (Brussels), 8 Dec 2005

European foreign ministers said Thursday that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had assured the NATO allies that the United States does not allow torture of terrorist suspects and respects principles of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war.

Shifting away from a confrontation with Washington, some NATO allies welcomed Rice's explanation of U.S. views on secret prisons and treatment of terrorist suspects at a private dinner Wednesday with her NATO and European Union counterparts.

"It is my impression that Secretary Rice ... cleared the air. You will not see this discussion continuing" at the NATO headquarters, NATO Secretary General Jaap De Hoop Scheffer told a news conference.

Rice "addressed the principles that guide United States policy with regards to respect for international law," Belgian Foreign Minister Karel de Gucht said.

Rice assured the U.S. allies "that at no time did the United States agree to inhumane acts or torture, that they have always respected the sovereignty of the states concerned and even if terrorists are not covered by the Geneva Conventions, they have still applied the principles governing those Geneva Conventions," de Gucht told Belgian RTBf radio network.

"I have the impression all ministers generally welcomed that," de Gucht said....

"Rice Says Abuse May Occur Despite US Torture Rules" - AP (Brussels), 8 Dec 2005, as carried by the New York Times Web site (nytimes.com)

BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she can give no guarantee that terrorism detainees won't be abused again despite what she called the United States' clear rules against torture.

''Will there be abuses of policy? That's entirely possible,'' Rice said at a NATO press conference. ''Just because you're a democracy it doesn't mean that you're perfect.''

She offered assurances, however, that any abuses would be investigated and violators punished.

''That is the only promise we can make,'' Rice said. She spoke a day after trying to clarify to European foreign ministers the U.S. policy on secret prisons and treatment of terrorism suspects....

Also see:

"Rice Seeks to Clarify Policy on Prisoners," by Glenn Kessler and Josh White - the Washington Post, 8 Dec 2005

...In Washington, supporters of an anti-torture bill sponsored by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a former prisoner of war, greeted her statement as a sign that the White House was abandoning claims that the measure could complicate the fight against international terrorism.

Rice's remarks are "an important and very welcome change from their previous position, which I believe has cost us dearly in the world and does not reflect our nation's laws or our values," Sen. Carl M. Levin of Michigan, ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement. "I also believe that the administration's position on this matter up to now has endangered our troops, because others might point to our practices to justify their own."

Even after Rice made her remarks, administration aides turned aside suggestions that she was breaking new ground. In Washington, Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, told reporters that Rice was only expressing existing policy.

McClellan's comment appears to be based on a written answer that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales gave in late October to a question posed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. In answer to Question 158, Gonzales wrote that the administration's policy is to abide by provisions barring cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment "even if such compliance is not legally required, regardless of whether the detainee in question is held in the United States or overseas."

Those words, buried in the document, passed largely unnoticed and the new policy was never publicly articulated until Rice spoke in Kiev on Wednesday.

The McCain bill, passed by the Senate, would put into law a ban on torture and lesser forms of abuse. Congressional aides said Wednesday that conferees were poised to accept the McCain language on detainees and that they expected the measure to pass easily in the House of Representatives....