[News] Washington Breaks Out the “Just Following Orders” Nazi Defense for CIA Director-Designate Gina Haspel
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Thu Mar 15 11:23:03 EDT 2018
https://theintercept.com/2018/03/15/washington-breaks-out-the-just-following-orders-nazi-defense-for-cia-director-designate-gina-haspel/
Washington Breaks Out the “Just Following Orders” Nazi Defense for CIA
Director-Designate Gina Haspel
Jon Schwarz - March 15, 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_During the Nuremberg Trials_ after World War II, several Nazis,
including top German generals Alfred Jodl and Wilhelm Keitel, claimed
they were not guilty of the tribunal’s charges because they had been
acting at the directive of their superiors.
Ever since, this justification has been popularly known as the
“Nuremberg defense,” in which the accused states they were “only
following orders.”
The Nuremberg judges rejected the Nuremberg defense, and both Jodl and
Keitel were hanged. The United Nations International Law Commission
later codified the underlying principle
<https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/52d68d14de6160e0c12563da005fdb1b/3a0ef64882993569c125641e004ab014?OpenDocument>
from Nuremberg as “the fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his
Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility
under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to
him.”
This is likely the most famous declaration in the history of
international law and is as settled as anything possibly can be.
However, many members of the Washington, D.C. elite are now stating that
it, in fact, /is/ a legitimate defense for American officials who
violate international law to claim they were just following orders.
Specifically, they say Gina Haspel, a top CIA officer whom President
Donald Trump has designated to be the agency’s next director, bears no
responsibility for the torture she supervised during George W. Bush’s
administration.
Haspel oversaw
<https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture>
a secret “black site” in Thailand, at which prisoners were waterboarded
and subjected to other severe forms of abuse. Haspel later participated
in the destruction of the CIA’s videotapes of some of its torture
sessions. There is informed
<https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-husseini/what-both-sides-are-ignor_b_6315678.html>
speculation
<https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/blog/gina-haspel-lied-us-iraq-war-ii/>
that part of the CIA’s motivation for destroying these records may have
been that they showed operatives employing torture to generate false
“intelligence” used to justify the invasion of Iraq.
John Kiriakou, a former CIA operative who helped capture many Al Qaeda
prisoners, recently said
<https://www.democracynow.org/2018/3/14/she_tortured_just_for_the_sake>
that Haspel was known to some at the agency as “Bloody Gina” and that
“Gina and people like Gina did it, I think, because they enjoyed doing
it. They tortured just for the sake of torture, not for the sake of
gathering information.” (In 2012, in a convoluted case
<https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/01/john-kiriakou-cia-leak-investigation/>,
Kiriakou pleaded guilty
<http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/22/14626249-ex-cia-agent-pleads-guilty-to-leaking-identity-of-covert-operative?lite&ocid=msnhp>
to leaking the identity of a covert CIA officer to the press and spent a
year in prison.)
Some of Haspel’s champions have used the exact language of the popular
version of the Nuremberg defense, while others have paraphrased it.
One who paraphrased it is Michael Hayden, former director of both the
CIA and the National Security Agency. In a Wednesday op-ed
<http://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/378378-we-need-gina-haspel-at-the-cia>,
Hayden endorsed Haspel as head of the CIA, writing that “Haspel did
nothing more and nothing less than what the nation and the agency asked
her to do, and she did it well.”
Hayden later said on Twitter
<https://twitter.com/GenMhayden/status/973994954522595329> that Haspel’s
actions were “consistent with U.S. law as interpreted by the department
of justice.” This is true: In 2002, the Office of Legal Counsel at the
Justice Department declared in a series of notorious memos
<https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/documents/torture-docs.html>
that it was legal for the U.S. to engage in “enhanced interrogation
techniques” that were obviously torture. Of course, the actions of the
Nuremberg defendants had also been “legal” under German law.
John Brennan, who ran the CIA under President Barack Obama, made similar
remarks on Tuesday when asked about Haspel. The Bush administration had
decided that its torture program was legal, said Brennan
<https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/03/13/gina-haspel-trump-nominee-first-woman-leader-cia/419547002/>,
and Haspel “tried to carry out her duties at CIA to the best of her
ability, even when the CIA was asked to do some very difficult things.”
Texas Republican Rep. Will Hurd used the precise language of the
Nuremberg defense during a Tuesday appearance on CNN when Wolf Blitzer
asked him to respond to a statement from Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.: “The
Senate must do its job in scrutinizing the record and involvement
of Gina Haspel in this disgraceful program.”
Hurd, a member of the House Intelligence Committee and a former CIA
operative as well, told Blitzer that “this wasn’t Gina’s idea. She was
following orders. … She implemented orders and was doing her job.”
Hurd also told Blitzer, “You have to remember where we were at that
moment, thinking that another attack was going to happen.”
This is another defense that is explicitly illegitimate under
international law. The U.N. Convention Against Torture, which was
transmitted <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=35858> to the Senate
by Ronald Reagan in 1988, states
<http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx> that “no
exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat
or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,
may be invoked as a justification of torture.”
Notably, Blitzer did not have any follow-up questions for Hurd about his
jarring comments.
Samantha Winograd, who served on President Obama’s National Security
Council and now is an analyst for CNN, likewise used Nuremberg defense
language in an appearance on the network. Haspel, she said
<http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1803/13/cnr.06.html>, “was implementing
the lawful orders of the president. … You could argue she should have
quit because the program was so abhorrent. But she was following orders.”
Last but not least there’s Rich Lowry, editor of National Review, who
issued a ringing defense of Haspel in Politico, claiming
<https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/03/14/gina-haspel-bork-rich-lowry-217639>
she was merely acting “in response to what she was told were lawful orders.”
Remarkably, this perspective has even seeped into the viewpoint of
regular journalists. At a recent press conference at which Kentucky
Republican Sen. Rand Paul criticized Haspel, a reporter asked him
<https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1ZkKzVvDdEZKv> to respond to “the
counterargument” that “these policies were signed off by the Bush
administration. … They were considered lawful at the time.”
It fell to Paul to make the obvious observation that appears to have
eluded almost everyone else in official Washington: “This has been
historically a question we’ve asked in every war: Is there a point at
which soldiers say ‘no’? … Horrendous things happened in World War II,
and people said, well, the German soldiers were just obeying orders. … I
think there’s a point at which, even suffering repercussions, that if
someone asks you to torture someone that you should say no.”
(Thank you to @jeanbilly545
<https://twitter.com/jeanbilly545/status/973979444930105344> and Scott
Horton <https://scotthorton.org/> for telling me about Hurd and Paul’s
remarks, respectively.)
--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415
863.9977 https://freedomarchives.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20180315/0b7a9ad9/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list