The Horror of Abu Ghraib

The Horror of Abu Ghraib

“Abu Ghraib prison was used for torture in Saddam’s time.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

“Abu Ghraib prison was used for torture in Saddam’s time. People will ask now: ‘What’s the difference between Saddam and Bush?’ Nothing!” So declared Saudi commentator Dawud al-Shiryan on the English-language website of Al Jazeera, a sign of how the now-infamous photographs of Iraqi prisoners being tortured and sexually humiliated by American soldiers are reverberating in the Arab world. The appalling images–seven naked Iraqis piled on top of one another as two grinning GIs look on; a kneeling detainee posing as if he is performing oral sex on another naked, hooded male inmate; the battered body of a dead prisoner packed in ice–have led to criminal charges against six US soldiers and administrative penalties for seven officers.

But the abuses are an indictment of more than just a “handful of people” who strayed from protocol, as Air Force Gen. Richard Myers tried to suggest on Face the Nation. As Seymour Hersh observes in the May 10 New Yorker, the sadistic behavior detailed in Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba’s fifty-three-page classified report, including the sodomizing of a detainee with a chemical light, offers “an unsparing study of collective wrongdoing and the failure of Army leadership at the highest levels.” Those implicated, among them employees of a private military contractor who apparently had no training in the handling of prisoners, claim they were following orders from their superiors, who urged that prisoners be “softened up” in order to extract information.

Ultimate responsibility lies in Washington. Despite George W. Bush’s expression of “disgust”–“that’s not the way we do things,” he insisted–there is reason to believe abusive interrogation methods have become an integral part of the Administration’s “war on terrorism.” It was two years ago that the Washington Post detailed a pattern of mistreatment at overseas CIA interrogation centers like the Bagram airbase in Afghanistan, where three detainees died; US military doctors termed it “homicide.” Amnesty International has received scores of reports over the past year of detainees in Iraq “being routinely subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.” The US Army is conducting investigations into thirty cases of misconduct in both countries, at least ten of which involve suspicious deaths. Amnesty and Human Rights Watch are calling for a public investigation into allegations of torture by coalition forces, a demand that some in Congress have echoed. Representative Jan Schakowsky, meanwhile, has called on Bush to suspend all contracts with private firms for “security, supervision and interrogation of prisoners.” It is hardly reassuring that the man charged with overseeing reforms in interrogation practices at US-run prisons in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, was imported from Guantánamo Bay, the site of numerous human rights abuses and violations of international law.

Given that the war in Iraq is, in part, a war of images, the Abu Ghraib scandal represents a profound and perhaps irreversible defeat for the United States. Can any Iraqi now be expected to believe US intentions are good? A more insulting, inflammatory message to the world’s Muslims and Arabs–and a more effective recruiting tool for groups like Al Qaeda–can scarcely be imagined. “The release of these pictures may be the point at which the United States lost Iraq,” Juan Cole, a Middle East specialist at the University of Michigan, observed in the Washington Post. With this in mind, we offer a forum on page 11 on how the United States can extricate itself from Iraq as responsibly and expeditiously as possible–both for its own sake and that of the Iraqi people.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x