On a recent whirlwind tour of Europe, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice addressed the hot button topic that has had the Europeans in an international tizzy; the transport and torture of U.S. captives on foreign soil. The U.S. response to the charges, which are growing in volume after news leaked of the secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe, tells us much about the mindset of the Bush regime as it marches onward in the so called War on Terror.
Putting aside for the moment the irony of U.S. intelligence agencies using secret prison cells on former territory of the former Soviet Union and its satellites, the U.S. has responded like lawyers trying to present a bad case, carefully. Dr. Rice, a long time marionette of the Bush dynasty, now sounds like the present president when she replies, when asked about the issue of rendition, “The United States does not engage in torture. The United States does not support torture. The United States does not render people to other countries for the purpose of being tortured.” Secretary Rice then announced that the U.S. abided by U.S. law and its international agreements.
Then, perhaps Dr. Rice is reading different laws than I’ve read. The U.S. is a signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, which defines torture under Article 1 as, “severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, which is intentionally inflicted on a person.” Article 2 of this convention specifically states, “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, even a state of war, may be used to justify torture.” And remember how Rice and other White House spokesmen have described rendition? They and their media friendlies make rendition sound like little more than a walk in the park.
How many of us know that this very practice is itself a violation of international law? Article 3, section 1 of the U.N. Convention states, “No state party shall expel, return, refouler [drive out], or extradite a person to another state where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.”
Now, a smart lawyer might try to haggle with the “substantial grounds” part of this article, but human rights people know that many of the countries where the U.S. renders people are, in fact, places where the U.S. State Department has issued stark reports of human rights violations, abuses and yes, torture. Does anyone really believe that the U.S. doesn’t believe that say, Saudi Arabia tortures? That Egypt tortures? That Syria tortures?
Why was Guantanamo, better known as occupied Cuba, chosen originally, if not because it was thought to be beyond U.S. jurisdiction? With Guantanamo held in a recent court case, to be under U.S. jurisdiction, new sites had to be found: secret prisons, torture, no matter what Dr. Condoleezza Rice says. From death row, this is Mumia Abu-Jamal, author of We Want Freedom: A Life in the Black Panther Party.
These commentaries are produced by Noelle Hanrahan for Prison Radio.
