Rumsfeld’s
War And War Crimes
By Dr. Habib Siddiqui
22 November, 2006
Countercurrents.org
The 2006 election was a referendum
on America’s war in Iraq. The results displayed widespread mistrust
of the Bush administration. Some of the most pro-war Republican hawks
in the Senate and the Congress have been replaced by Democratic candidates
that appeared to be anti-war or less pro-war. As a face saving measure,
President Bush had to find the fall-guy, and so his ‘trusted’
Defense Secretary, the 74-year old neocon idealist, Donald Rumsfeld,
had to be replaced with a realist - Robert Gates, former CIA Director.
The decision to ask Rumsfeld
to resign was easy for the White House. After all, Rumsfeld’s
resignation had been sought, since America’s illegal invasion
and occupation of Iraq, by many groups, including military officers
within his own Pentagon, for not developing a ‘winning’
strategy. His policies have been dubbed variedly as being authoritarian,
failed, insane, unrealistic, stupid, criminal, businesslike, quagmire
and fiasco.
Always defensive and combative,
Rumsfeld was tunnel-visioned in his approach to the neocon-orchestrated
war against the Muslim world (which he liked to package as Islamofascism);
behaving more like an old dog that did not like to learn new tricks.
In spite of mounting pressure from the Congress to sack him, Bush had
kept him in his job, hoping for miracles in Iraq and thus, the 2006
election. But with the humiliating defeats in both the houses, the honeymoon
was over. So, the man who was the architect of the first war of the
21st century became its first big casualty.
As one of the primary architects
of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Rumsfeld will always be remembered
alongside Bush and Cheney for the scandals of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo
that epitomized inhumanity, savagery, bigotry, perversion and sadism.
He authorized the use of torture and brutal, evil and shameful treatment
that violated the Geneva Conventions, and thus constitute war crimes.
He refused to treat his Muslim prisoners as POWs. He put them in cage
and moved them around naked. He approved interrogation techniques that
included the use of dogs, removal of clothing, hooding, stress positions,
isolation for up to 30 days, 20-hour per day interrogations, forcing
to wear women's underwear on head, denying bathroom access and deprivation
of food, sleep and rest. He approved the use of physical coercion and
sexual humiliation to extract information from prisoners. He also authorized
water-boarding (which constitutes torture), where the interrogator induces
the sensation of imminent death by drowning.
In the Muslim world, Rumsfeld
(alongside Bush & Cheney) will long be remembered as another Hulagu
Khan that killed, plundered and looted Baghdad, destroying the very
city that was once the citadel of Muslim learning.
Like Robert McNamara of the
Vietnam era, Rumsfeld is equally remorseless for the deaths of 655,000
Iraqis. He describes the Iraq war as a "little-understood, unfamiliar
war".
As has been pointed out lately by Marjorie Cohn of Thomas Jefferson
School of Law, President of National Lawyers Guild, prosecuting a war
of aggression isn't Rumsfeld's only crime. He also participated in the
highest levels of decision-making that allowed the extrajudicial execution
of several people. [Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib
by Seymour Hersh] Willful killing is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions,
which constitutes a war crime. To elaborate further, Marjorie Cohn writes,
“Even though Rumsfeld didn't personally carry out the torture
and mistreatment of prisoners, he authorized it. Under the doctrine
of command responsibility, a commander can be liable for war crimes
committed by his inferiors if he knew or should have known they would
be committed and did nothing to stop of prevent them. The U.S. War Crimes
Act provides for prosecution of a person who commits war crimes and
prescribes life imprisonment, or even the death penalty if the victim
dies.” [Jurist – Forum: Donald Rumsfeld: The War Crimes
Case, Nov. ‘06]
War crime is a serious matter.
Many legal experts and human rights activists are of the opinion that
the warlords of our world need to be tried for their crimes against
humanity. A few years ago, therefore, there were cases filed in the
European courts against some war criminals, including Ariel Sharon of
Israel for the massacre of Palestinians in Sabra and Chatilla refugee
camps in Lebanon, and Jenine in the Occupied Palestine. Fearing their
imminent arrest if they had stepped onto European soil, some of the
Israeli generals did not disembark from their planes and returned to
Israel.
Last Tuesday (11/14/06),
emboldened by Rumsfeld’s resignation last week, German and American
lawyers asked a German prosecutor to investigate Rumsfeld on allegations
of war crimes, stemming from the treatment of prisoners held in military
jails in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The 220-page lawsuit, filed
with the German federal prosecutor in Karlsruhe, names 11 other current
and former American officials, including Attorney General Alberto Gonzales,
whom it claims either ordered the torture of prisoners or drafted laws
that legitimated its use. The suit, filed by civil-rights legal groups
on behalf of 12 detainees - 11 Iraqis and a Saudi - asserts that they
were subjected to beatings, sleep deprivation, withholding of food,
and sexual humiliation. [See: War Crimes Suit Prepared against Rumsfeld,
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?
sid=06/11/09/1444246;
and http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/
11/9/185830/840 for details.]
These legal experts who filed
the case believe that there is a fair chance of succeeding in bringing
Rumsfeld and other Pentagon brasses to justice. The problem, however,
is even if Rumsfeld and Co. are to be found guilty and condemned, the
USA may not allow their extradition for hearing and subsequent imprisonment.
Among western countries, interestingly, the USA is the only country
that has not accepted the full jurisdiction of the International Court
of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague to try its own war criminals, although,
rather hypocritically, she had no problem having other monsters like
the late Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia or Hutu leaders of Rwanda
tried under the auspices of the ICJ.
With U.S. laws protecting
its government officials that are at variance with international laws,
Rumsfeld’s war crimes case may eventually go to the UNSC. But
there, the USA will veto such resolutions further isolating herself
from the rest of the civilized world. Nonetheless, for billions of conscientious
people in our planet, the suit is a much welcome event. It should be
a matter of warning and deterrence for war criminals of today and tomorrow.
"Even if we never put Rumsfeld on trial in a German court, he will
be harassed and publicly stamped as a torturer," said Wolfgang
Kaleck, a Berlin attorney who filed the complaint against Rumsfeld,
together with the Center for Constitutional Rights, an American group,
and other legal organizations.
During the resignation event in the White House, President Bush said
in tribute: "Donald Rumsfeld has been a superb leader during a
time of change. Yet he also appreciates the value of bringing in a fresh
perspective during a critical period in this war." In his farewell
speech, Rumsfeld was equally gracious to his boss. Addressing the president,
he said: "It is not well-known, it was not well understood, it
is complex for people to comprehend and I know with certainty that over
time the contributions you've made will be recorded by history."
Only time will tell whether his euphoria is rightly placed!
Dr. Habib Siddiqui
can be reached at [email protected]
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights