Posted by
Josh Todd on Friday, February 20, 2009 9:24:15 PM
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) has suggested that the US government form truth commissions to investigate Bush-era crimes. Christian Science Monitor columnist James Cavallaro seconds the motion.
Cavallaro says up front that Bush’s crimes pale in comparison to those of South and Central American thugs during the last half of the previous century before spending the remainder of his piece insinuating otherwise. That’s quite a moral equivalency—and one that is flawed.
After describing the abuses and crimes of Augusto Pinochet of Chile, Adolfo Scilingo of Argentina, and Alberto Fujimori in Preu, Cavallaro opines, “Sound familiar? It should. In the past eight years of the war on terror, the US government has compiled quite a record of torture, forced disappearances, extralegal killings, and lack of judicial independence.”
While James Cavallaro may have twenty-five years of investigating human rights abuses, he seems to have trouble differentiating between the actions of the Bush Administration in defense of the United States against terror and those of South American dictators tightening their grips over their respective peoples.
For starters, we must compare the aforementioned Pinochet, Scilingo, and Fujimori to former President George W. Bush. Pinochet, as the head of a junta, imprisoned thousands of political dissidents and tortured and murdered many of them. Scilingo was convicted of drugging and executing political prisoners during a civil conflict in Argentina. Fujimori, in his capacity as president of Peru, unleashed death squads against political foes, including domestic terror group Shining Path, the Peruvian communist party.
George W. Bush’s intelligence agents secretly imprisoned and, in rare cases, tortured terrorists who belonged to no particular country and who had been captured in battle or plotting to make war against the United States.
Note that the South American dictators all took action against internal political factions. If a moral equivalency existed here, then George W. Bush would be charged with, say, imprisoning Ted Kennedy and his supporters, and torturing, say, Patrick Leahy and Nancy Pelosi. (Also note that Cavallaro mentions only right-wing dictators, neglecting the great left-wing thugs Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, etc.)
Second, Cavallaro takes the liberty to ignore the nature of the war on terror (call it what you will). This campaign against terrorists is unparalleled. There is no historical precedent—nothing against which to base it. 2001-2008 marked uncharted territory. No international framework exists, still, in reality, for combatants not affiliated with any country who do not themselves recognize the rules of war. That is to say, the case isn’t settled yet as to what is acceptable. (Give President Obama a few years before assuming that Bush is all wrong and that Obama will ne’er be a Bush, Jr.)
Third, the Bush Administration’s actions sought not to protect only his political allies from al Qaeda and the political harm they caused; instead, his actions were designed to protect even his political opponents—that is, to protect all Americans against a foreign enemy.
Political opponents do not deserve to be imprisoned and tortured. Terrorists hell bent on killing Americans, on the other, hand…well, there is an argument to made for detaining and, in extreme cases, torturing them, as well. If James Cavallaro and Pat Leahy had any sense of moral clarity, they would know that and they would refrain from proposing what is, essentially, a political witch-hunt of their own.
Source(s): http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20090220/cm_csm/ycavallaro