|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : The
US War in Afghanistan
Afghan POWs at Guantanamo base: bound and gagged, drugged,
caged like animals
By Patrick Martin
14 January 2002
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
Hooded and shackled throughout a 27-hour flight from Afghanistan
to the Caribbean, the first Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners arrived
January 11 at the US Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where
they will be detained indefinitely in conditions which are clearly
subhuman and illegal.
Twenty prisoners were brought on board a C-17 transport jet
at Kandahar Airport January 10, at least one of them drugged into
submission, all of them bound hand and foot, wearing blacked-out
goggles and masks which covered their faces from view and prevented
them from seeing anything during the trip. Each prisoner was chained
into his seat, and they were accompanied by a large force of MPs,
who outnumbered the prisoners about two-to-one.
The flight went from Afghanistan to a US military base in Europe
where the prisoners transferred to an Air Force C-141 transport
headed for Cuba. They reached Guantanamo Bay on Friday afternoon.
Most of the prisoners were exhausted and visibly weak from the
long trip in which they were hardly able to move. Several had
to be carried off the plane, and six reportedly appeared to offer
some resistance.
Once deplaned, the 20 prisoners were loaded onto two buses,
driven to a Navy ferry, then transported across Guantanamo Bay
to the detention camp, dubbed Camp X-Ray by the military
authorities.
The whole operation was conducted as though the relative handful
of disarmed prisoners, some of them semi-comatose, represented
an imminent threat of insurrection. Humvees equipped with machineguns
and grenade launchers surrounded the transport plane after it
landed. Forty Marine MPs with rifles and riot gear stood by, while
a Navy helicopter hovered overhead.
Camp X-Ray itself recalls nothing so much as the notorious
tiger cages on Con Son Island during the Vietnam War,
where political prisoners of the US-backed dictatorship in South
Vietnam were held in barbaric conditions. At Guantanamo each prisoner
will be locked in an individual 6-foot by 8-foot cage made of
concrete and chain-link fencing. Each cage is just large enough
for a man to stand upright.
The prisoners will face frequent interrogation and possible
trial by military tribunal once a courthouse facility is completed
on the base. Nearly a thousand US military personnel were dispatched
to Guantanamo last month to begin construction of the makeshift
prison, which will eventually be replaced by a more permanent
structure able to house as many as 2,000 prisoners.
Surrounding the cages, which are chain link on all sides for
constant supervision of the prisoners, are several perimeters
of chain-link and razor-wire fences. Because the cages have no
walls, prisoners will be exposed to wind and rain during the storms
which are quite frequent in the Caribbean. There will be women
among the guards on duty, which is bound to provoke conflict with
Islamic fundamentalist prisoners compelled to relieve themselves
and dress in public view.
The naval base was chosen by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
as the most secure location outside of US territory for the imprisonment
and interrogation of prisoners captured in Afghanistan. Guantanamo
naval base sits on Cuban territory which was ceded indefinitely
for American use under an agreement signed by a US stooge regime
early in the twentieth century. The Castro government does not
recognize the legitimacy of this treaty, but it lacks the military
power to challenge US control and has made little objection to
the use of the base as a prison camp.
Prisoners or kidnap victims?
The Bush administration wants to avoid bringing the prisoners
to US soil in order to make sure that there will be no legal challenge
in the US courts to their treatment. Guantanamo is expected to
become the site for the military tribunals which President Bush
authorized in an executive order, under which three-member panels
of military officers could impose sentences as drastic as the
death penalty for alleged war crimes or terrorist actions.
The prisoners would be denied any outside counsel in such a
proceeding, in which not only the judges/jurors, but the prosecutors
and defense attorneys will all be serving US military officers.
The tribunals can be closed to the press at the discretion of
the presiding officers.
US officials claim that they are observing the provisions of
the Geneva Convention voluntarily, but that the jailed men are
not actually prisoners of war, a legal status which would, among
other things, bar their removal from the country in which they
were captured, and limit any interrogation to the familiar name,
rank and serial number.
Some of the prisoners are Afghan nationals, some citizens of
Arab Middle Eastern states, as well as many other countries, including
Great Britain and Russia. All have been branded illegal
combatants in Afghanistan by the US military, although there
is no real standard established under the Geneva Convention for
such a designation.
At one press briefing, Rumsfeld declared, Unlawful combatants
do not have any rights under the Geneva Convention. We have indicated
that we do plan to, for the most part, treat them in a manner
that is reasonably consistent with the Geneva Conventions, to
the extent they are appropriate.
According to one press account, the US government position
is that for captured soldiers to be considered combatants they
must be wearing a uniform with recognizable insignia, being
subject to a chain of command, and carrying arms openly.
By that standard, very few of the soldiers on any side in the
Afghan war, either Taliban or Northern Alliance, could be considered
entitled to POW status if captured. Both uniforms and command
structures were informal, to put it mildly.
The same is true of the American special forces who played
a key role in the Northern Alliance victory. They mainly wore
civilian clothes and kept their weapons out of sight. There is
no doubt, however, that had the roles been reversed, and a sizeable
number of these special forces personnel ended up as Taliban captives,
the US government would have stridently demanded they be accorded
POW status.
The truth is that the Taliban prisoners have been taken to
Guantanamo only because the US government had the physical power
to do so. From a strictly legal standpoint, rather than being
terrorists, these prisoners should be considered victims
of kidnapping at gunpoint by the government of the United States.
The US is involved in at least one other significant violation
of international law in its treatment of these prisonersfailing
to observe the Vienna Convention on Consular Access, to which
the US is a signatory, which provides that Washington must notify
consular officials of foreign countries when their citizens have
been detained by any branch of the US government. So far such
notification has only been delivered to the British Foreign Office
in the case of the one British national who is among the first
batch of prisoners at Guantanamo.
Most US states regularly flout the Vienna Convention when it
comes to notifying foreign countries that their citizens have
been arrested. Several states have executed foreign nationals
who went to their deaths without ever being allowed contact with
representatives of their native country, a practice that has been
upheld by the US Supreme Court. While Bush was governor of Texas,
the state flatly defied the jurisdiction of the Vienna Convention,
advancing the bizarre legal argument that this international treaty
applied only to the federal government, not to Texas, because
the state was not itself a signatory.
Human rights and the media
International human rights organizations have publicly criticized
the US policy toward the Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners, but their
protests have been muted and given little publicity by the American
media.
Amnesty International sent a letter to Rumsfeld condemning
the treatment of the prisoners at the Kandahar airport and during
the flight, declaring the hooding of suspects in detention
generally may constitute cruel treatment. The group also
noted that drugging of prisoners for other than medical purposesi.e.,
to sedate them so they would be more tractable in custodywas
a breach of international human rights standards.
Jamie Fellner of Human Rights Watch said that wire cages were
not considered humane treatment, which is required for all prisoners,
regardless of whether they are classified officially as POWs or
considered to have a lower status. The United States is
lumping all these captured people under the rubric of unlawful
combatants because it suits their political agenda,
she said.
The American media has quietly cooperated with unprecedented
restrictions on press coverage in both the transportation and
confinement of the Taliban/Al Qaeda prisoners. Ten members of
a Pentagon media pool were allowed to view the arrival of the
prisoners at Guantanamo from a hill about 400 yards from the airstrip
on which they landed. No cameras or videotape equipment were permitted.
In a fantastic distortion of the Geneva Convention, the Pentagon
ordered news organizations not to transmit any pictures of the
hooded detainees being loaded on the plane in Kandahar, claiming
that such images would constitute violations of the dignity of
prisoners under international law. All the US news organizations
involved agreed to comply.
Rumsfeld defended this blatant censorship, declaring, You
cant take pictures of them. Thats considered embarrassing
for them, and they cant be interviewed, according to the
Geneva Convention.
This is cynical beyond measure, since the Geneva Convention
restriction is intended to bar displaying prisoners before a hostile
public and thus subjecting them to abuse, not to allow the government
holding them prisoner to conduct its own abuse behind a wall of
censorship.
The American Society of Newspaper Editors asked Rumsfeld to
release the photos, saying in a letter to the Pentagon, Whatever
the reasoning for suppressing these photos, it should be clear
that any problem rests with the handling of prisoners and not
with the coverage.
There has been no US press criticism of the official rationale
given for the brutal treatment of the Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners:
the claim that previous uprisings at Mazar-i-Sharif and in Pakistan
show that these prisoners are fanatically determined to offer
violent resistance, even at the cost of mass suicide.
The uprising at Mazar-i-Sharif, on the contrary, was provoked
by the interrogation of the prisoners by American CIA and special
forces personnel, and by the prisoners reasonable fear that
they were about to be murdered by their American and Northern
Alliance captors. Beside the estimated 800 prisoners killed at
Mazar-i-Sharif, hundreds more have been shot or beaten to death
or left to die in airless truck-containers which are routinely
used as prisons in Afghanistan.
See Also:
Thousands of POWs held in appalling conditions
in Afghanistan
[8 January 2002]
More evidence of US
war crimes in Afghanistan: Taliban POWs suffocated inside cargo
containers
[13 December 2001]
The Geneva Convention
and the US massacre of POWs in Afghanistan
[7 December 2001]
After US massacre
of Taliban POWs: the stench of death and more media lies
[29 November 2001]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |