Abu Ghraib

Different Sets of Rules 

MUSA KEILANI / The Jordan Times 3may04

There is a paradox to the way the Arab media and commentators reacted to the scenes of Iraqi prisoners being abused and humiliated by American soldiers in Saddam Hussein-era Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad. We in the Arab world did know what was going on in Abu Ghraib when Saddam was in power: summary executions, dismemberment and torture of the worst kind we ever heard in modern times. It is true that few in the Arab world talked about it and scant attention was given to international organisations' criticism of the gross violations of human rights in Iraq while Saddam was in power.

The ready-made answer of many pro-Saddam advocates whenever the question of human rights in Iraq came was formulated to the effect that the nature of the Iraqi society, politically, ethnically and otherwise, was such that they needed such an approach if only because of the need to keep the country together. No one could hold the country of several distinct ethnic groups together except through an iron fist that tolerated no dissident.

The overriding feeling among the Arabs implied that the Arab world needed a leader like Saddam to challenge the West, particularly the US, and, of course, Israel. In the bargain, we all simply forgot that Saddam's continued survival in power in Iraq was at the expense of the basic human rights and well-being of the people of Iraq — or most of the people of Iraq. Therefore, few wanted to focus attention on what was going on in Abu Ghraib and other prisons in Iraq during the Saddam reign.

However, the situation changed dramatically with the US-led coalition occupying Iraq after toppling Saddam. There has been a steady buildup of charges that Abu Ghraib did not change much in terms of treatment of prisoners under the control of the US military. And it was the first time that anyone came up with irrefutable evidence of torture, abuse and humiliation of prisoners when the American CBS network produced scenes for public viewing. The scenes brought back memories of the Saddam era to many, and thus the basic question was immediately raised: Is this the way the US, the country which boasts of a great record of respect for human rights and dignity, treats its prisoners?

At a more mundane level, the Arab thinking goes: The US, having invaded Iraq in the name of non-existent weapons of mass destruction and connections with international terrorism and then having shifted the argument to “democracy” and human rights, is now kicking around the people of Iraq, whether in prison or otherwise. They have no respect for the people of Iraq and they consider every Iraqi as an enemy until proven otherwise.

How does that bode for American hopes of winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis?

The US behaviour since the ouster of Saddam in Iraq is as if the Americans had been nurturing a sense of revenge against the people of Iraq for decades and they are now doing what they had always wanted to do: suppress the people of Iraq no matter what, even it meant gross violation of human rights and defiance of every international convention and laws that govern foreign military occupation of a land captured through the use of force.

No doubt, Washington had foreseen situations similar to those of Iraq and hence its effort, from day one, to exclude American soldiers from the jurisdiction of the newly formed International Criminal Court and thus give them protection against trial on war crimes or crimes against humanity.

It has been reported that US commanders had authorised the use of torture and humiliation of prisoners in order to extract information on Iraqi resistance. Well, it is not exactly news, since it is clear that for most American soldiers and officers the war against Iraq and occupation of post-Saddam Iraq has turned personal, if only because of the daily killings of fellow Americans. For many, being put in charge of Iraqi prisoners is an opportunity to give vent to their anger, frustration and despair, particularly that the Americans want to be considered superior to the people under their occupation and to be treated as liberators of the people of Iraq. For them, the Iraqis have no rights and privileges except those granted by the American occupiers.

US President George W. Bush has expressed “deep disgust” at the treatment given to Iraqis under US detention in Iraq. His military has suspended a few officers reported to have been involved in the torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners. However, the US president could not escape from the moral responsibility for what his officers and soldiers did in Iraq, are doing in Iraq and will do in Iraq.

Indeed, as Bush said, the way the US military treated Iraqis is “not the way we do things in America”. Most definitely, we agree. But then, let us add, Iraqis are Iraqis and Americans are Americans and, notwithstanding the lofty founding principles of America and American respect for human rights, different sets of rules apply when Washington deals with Arab Palestinians or Arab Iraqis.

source: http://www.jordantimes.com/mon/opinion/opinion4.htm 3may04