Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
were legal.
It goes back to the one basic thing: Whether they did right or
they did wrong, they were told to do something, they did it,
and they feel like they had the rug pulled out from underneath
them.
If they dont see some measure of support for them, theyre
going to find it very disappointing, said another former senior
intelligence official who is familiar with the contents of the
Senate report and thinks it unfairly portrays the agency as
going rogue and trying to mislead Congress about how it
illegally tortured detainees.
The standoff is as critical to national security operations as it is bathed
in controversy, as both sides have valid concerns crying to be
addressed, although those justifying the controversial interrogation
programs seem confused about the fact that the very act of torture,
causing as it does much foreign dismay, is what puts at risk U.S. women
and men in and out of uniform, not just press coverage of it.
A possible solution to this ethical and national security conundrum
facing the worlds oldest and arguably most over-extended democracy
comes from the recent example of Argentina, where Nunca Ms (Never
again! as Feinstein said) was the famous path-breaking official report
on state terrorismthe disappearance, torture and clandestine murder
of some 24,000in a so-called dirty war that wracked that country in
the late 1970s and early 1980s.
After the Argentine military was humiliated by the British in a real
shooting war in the Falkland/Malvinas islands and had retreated to their
barracks, an authentic human rights heroRaul Alfonsinassumed the
presidency. The year after Nunca Ms was published, Argentinas civilian
courts tried the former neo-Nazi military junta members for mass
criminality in the most important public trial since the Argentine
generals military heroes were tried at Nuremberg.
It was Alfonsins dictum issued during the mini-Nuremberg experience
that those at the top should be the ones held accountable rather than
those that strictly followed ordersthat seems most relevant here.
Despite often bitter criticism from fellow human rights professionals,
Alfonsin's "due obedience" doctrine distinguished three levels of
responsibility for human rights violations: those who gave the orders,
3
those who followed them, and those who exceeded the orders,
committing aberrant and atrocious acts or benefiting for personal gain.
While the Argentine presidents use of due obedience was roundly
criticized by more militant human rights groups at the time, their
attempts to do an end run around it by flooding the courts with criminal
cases against lower ranking military and police who had just followed
orders ended up provoking the first of three military putsch attempts. It
was Emilio Mignone, the saintly dean of the rights community, who later
admitted to me that the path fellow anti-dictatorship hero Alfonsin tried
to enforce was both tactically and strategically the best. Alfonsins miniNuremberg examplefocusing on those who gave the orders and those
who aberrantly carried them outbecame a model for truth and
reconciliation around the world.
The parallels to todays situation, where a pro-torture Republican is
about to head the Senate Intelligence Committee, and ISIS and other
terrorist organizations are a clear threat to U.S. security, are obvious.
Rather than argue over the jots and tittles of the classified information
contained in report on the clandestine service and how disclosure may
affect future national security, President Obama could likely bring this
controversy to successful closure if he would only issue an official
"pardon" of Cheney, et al. Using the leader of the free worlds bully
pulpit to enshrine current official policy against torture by pointing to
who were really the guilty parties would go a long way to end the
Senate-CIA impasse in the most safest and most professional way
possible.
Going after Cheney while seeking to restore confidence inside the CIA
by keeping the report summary classified is the right thing to do for a
commander-in-chief who came to power blasting the Bush
Administrations rampant human rights violations. Publicly and officially
blaming Cheney, even while pardoning him, does what the Senate
committee summary does notit clearly spells out that it was the
former Vice President and his unethical aides who created the so-called
rendition, detention, and interrogation program.
There is a critical precedent that both underscores the importance of
due obediencelegal and moral responsibilityduring a time of crisis
and scandal, while ensuring most importantly that in the future those
seeking to captain such schemes face real penalty.
4