John PhiferWere I an advocate of retributive justice, I would immediately propose that the German government kidnapped, rendered to a third country and savagely tortured 13 suspected CIA agents. Nothing would better encapsulate the hallowed ‘eye for an eye’ principle. Luckily for the suspected agents, however, the German authorities are not quite that ‘Old Testament,’ or perhaps they’re simply not as comfortable with flouting international law as are their American counterparts.
No, the German order is surprisingly mild; for kidnapping German citizen Khaled El-Masri, taking him to Afghanistan and intermittently torturing him for months, the administrative court in Munich has merely asked that the 13 responsible persons be extradited to Germany and arrested.
But, of course, even that is probably too much to ask of America. Understandably skeptical of extradition, El-Masri’s lawyer claimed that the arrest warrant is a victory in and of itself since it shows that the ‘German authorities have not accepted the criminal behaviour of CIA employees against a German citizen.’
And indeed it is. The determination of El-Masri and the Munich authorities is the main reason that his case has even made the international news. Imagine replacing ‘German’ in the lawyer’s statement with ‘Saudi,’ ‘Egyptian’ or ‘Pakistani’; it simply wouldn’t happen.
Yet El-Masri’s experience is hardly unique. Illegal abductions and ‘interrogations’ such as his have been hundreds in number, less often with German nationals than those of Middle Eastern countries. The practice has been so widespread that it sparked an investigation by the Council of Europe, concerned solely with illegal rendition, secret detention and torture taking place in Europe. The resulting report speaks of a ‘global spider’s web’ to describe the extralegal steps being consistently taken by the CIA on an international basis.
This ‘spider’s web’ gained additional spinnerets after 9/11 when a congressional resolution authorized the president to ‘use all necessary and appropriate force’ against persons ‘in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism.’ But, as catalogued in William Blum’s Rogue State, the CIA has a history of international kidnapping which predates the so-called ‘War on Terror,’ while America itself curiously refuses to extradite notorious terrorists, such as Luis Posada Carriles, who happen to be pro-American in their terrorism.
Nevertheless, it is certainly true that illegal renditions have, in the words of the Council of Europe’s report, ‘escalated in scale and changed in focus’ since 9/11.
The extraordinary euphemism, ‘extraordinary rendition,’ is an ‘extrajudicial’ (read: illegal) procedure where inauspicious persons, such as Khaled El-Masri, are kidnapped from their home soil and transported to a third country not to face a court of law but simply to be ‘interrogated’ (read: tortured). ‘Extraordinary renditions’ have become commonplace during the so-called ‘War on Terror’; El-Masri’s case is unique only in that his country of citizenship has actually attempted to hold the CIA accountable for its actions.
Though the best minds that Washington can bribe have attempted to develop ‘new legal concepts,’ according to the Council of Europe’s report which is accessible in its entirety online, extraordinary rendition remains ‘altogether contrary to the principles enshrined in all the international legal instruments dealing with respect for fundamental rights ‘hellip; and is clearly contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.’
While some-even some who aren’t being paid to do so!-may offer the exigencies of a crusade against ‘Terror’ as a justification for throwing their much touted human rights out the window, such an explanation fails to account for the highly selective invocation of these ‘extrajudicial’ procedures. Perhaps I’ve been remiss in keeping up with the news, but I don’t recall hearing of active terrorist groups such as the Cuban expatriates in Miami or the various Loyalist extremists in Northern Ireland complaining of abduction and torture by the CIA.
More seriously, the agency’s zeal for circumventing international law and human rights is conspicuously absent when it comes to friendly state-sponsored terror. William Blum notes that the henchmen of American state-sponsored terrorism in Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Chile, Argentina, Iran, Vietnam, Nicaragua and other countries have not only enjoyed freedom from abduction and torture but often enjoy political asylum in the United States. An odd strategy for a ‘global War on Terror,’ since the track record of these terrorists has a breadth far deadlier than anything that happened on 9/11.
With the sheer pomposity that America lectures the world about its leadership in ‘human rights,’ one would expect the principles of the UN’s Universal Declaration to be taken as more than mere rhetoric. Yet the life of Khaled El-Masri and others like him proves that this is unfortunately not the case. Despite his bravery and that of the Munich authorities, the CIA will undoubtedly continue its incessant global crusade above the law. But maybe, just maybe because of that bravery, more caution signs will shoot up the next time that ‘human rights’ are offered as a pretext for another campaign in the ‘global War on the Terror that we don’t sponsor.’