Navigating the Storm

Back to Guantanamo

Over the past week, the news has been filled with complex analysis of the accord reached by Republican Congressional leaders and the administration over the proposed detainee treatment bill. The political dance set in motion three weeks ago with President Bush’s news conference (conveniently attended by families of 9/11 victims) announcing the transfer of a handful of high-level al-Qaeda operatives came to a climax this week. With both sides declaring victory on a bill that severly limits detainee rights in trials and creates loopholes through which torture can continue, what happens now? Well, according to the Washington Post:

“The bill is complex partly because negotiations were rushed, following a timetable set by President Bush. The White House wants Congress to pass the legislation before adjourning at the end of next week, expecting Democrats to withhold challenges to its most controversial provisions in the pre-election period for fear of being portrayed as soft on terrorism.”

The next few weeks will be interesting to follow and will be telling as the Democratic leadership navigate their way toward mid-term elections.

And what of those Republican “dissidents?” The proposed legislation still extends executive power in the interpretation of certain instances of torture. Again, from The Washington Post:

“It (the bill) further states that President Bush has the authority to interpret the meaning of a Geneva Conventions provision barring detainee abuses that fall below the threshold of “grave breaches.”

Although the law states that Bush “shall issue” his interpretations in published executive orders, White House spokesman Tony Snow said yesterday that administration lawyers told him that such publication — which McCain and others have highlighted as a major White House concession — might not be necessary. “

Although midterm elections are at the forefront of most politico minds, McCain cannot ignore his prospects for 2008. Perhaps he believes that reaching such a compromise with the White House will ensure him those necessary conservative votes in two years.

Weeding through the coverage of all of the political posturing and legislative negotiations regarding Guantanamo presents a daunting task. As the issues of torture, habeas corpus, and unlawful imprisonment take a back seat to legislative-speak and political compromises, I think its important to remind the public the of the greater significance of this story and answer the question, what does this mean for us? In his chilling Op-Ed piece in today’s Washington Post, writer Ariel Dorfman tries to remind us.

“Can’t the United States see that when we allow someone to be tortured by our agents, it is not only the victim and the perpetrator who are corrupted, not only the “intelligence” that is contaminated, but also everyone who looked away and said they did not know, everyone who consented tacitly to that outrage so they could sleep a little safer at night, all the citizens who did not march in the streets by the millions to demand the resignation of whoever suggested, even whispered, that torture is inevitable in our day and age, that we must embrace its darkness?”

Obviously, contributing Op-Ed columnists enjoy a more flexible arena in which to write and analyze the news. But, in a story that inevitably encourages passionate views on human rights issues, the ethical problem of journalist as advocate will undoubtably be raised. Stayed tuned for more on that subject next week…