|
Interrogation methods violated geneva rules { May 13 2004 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/13/international/middleeast/13CND-MILI.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/13/international/middleeast/13CND-MILI.html
May 13, 2004
Interrogation Methods Violated Geneva Rules, General Says
By BRIAN KNOWLTON
International Herald Tribune
WASHINGTON, May 13 — A top general acknowledged today, in a long and often angry Senate hearing, that interrogation techniques used by American guards in an Iraq prison violated the Geneva Conventions, and he said he did not know who had approved them.
The remark by Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, appeared to place him in direct contradiction to a comment a day earlier by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who has insisted that approved procedures called for humane treatment under recognized international standards.
Congressional outrage over the prison abuse scandal continued to overtake other Washington business, complicating Bush administration efforts to obtain financing for the war in Iraq, now estimated at $50 billion or more for the coming fiscal year.
At a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, asked General Pace what he would think if he saw a marine in enemy custody, bound, naked and forced into a painful position with a hood over his head. Would it violate the Geneva standards?
"I would describe it as a violation, sir," General Pace replied.
Precisely that sort of treatment, Mr. Reed said, had been authorized by Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of the ground forces in Iraq.
General Pace said he was unaware of any military guidelines that would have allowed prisoners to be put in stressful positions, deprived of sleep for up to 72 hours, threatened with dogs or kept in isolation for more than 30 days.
In the hearing, Democratic senators clashed sharply with the Republican chairman, Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, who wanted to contain debate to the matter of a new administration request for $25 billion in military spending for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Mr. Warner finally gave way in face of withering opposition from senior Democrats, who said that the key witness, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, had opened the door to a broader debate by his defense of the administration's wider goals in Iraq.
Republicans also questioned Mr. Wolfowitz, an architect of the Iraq war, over what they said was far too vague a request for money.
Many legislators continued to express shock and disgust over hundreds of new photos they were allowed to view on Wednesday, some showing Iraqi corpses, Iraqi women forced to expose themselves and other abuses at American hands.
President Bush said today, in a speech in Parkersburg, W.Va., "I have been disgraced" by the brutal actions at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. "But," he added, "the actions of a few do not reflect on the fantastic character of the over 200,000 men and women who have served our nation" in Iraq.
Earlier, congressional anger poured forth at the Senate hearing. Mr. Wolfowitz said that in addition to the $25 billion formally requested on Wednesday, another supplemental request early next year would "surely be much larger than $25 billion."
Troop levels beyond the current 138,000 and more intensive fighting might be required, he told the committee, while adding that if things went well, fewer might be needed.
Members of both parties bridled at the latest request, which they said seemed crafted to grant the Pentagon maximum liberty on how money is spent.
The documents supporting the request, submitted Wednesday under President Bush's name, provided only a broad description of how the money would be used.
Senator Carl Levin of Michigan said the administration seemed to want "what amounts to a blank check for the supplemental costs."
He chastised the administration, which until a week ago had insisted it would make no supplemental spending request until next year, for not having acknowledged sooner that more money was vitally needed.
The need was transparent by mid-April, he said, when the Pentagon decided not to draw down its force levels in Iraq.
Outrage over the prison abuse has been near-universal, but in recent days Republicans have been quicker than Democrats to try to change the subject or insist on limiting release of the new prison photos.
They have cited a need to avoid further inflaming Arab and world opinion; to prevent any interference with the military trials of those charged with abuse; and also to protect the reputations of the great majority in the military uninvolved in the scandal.
"Some people are overreacting," the House Republican leader, Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, said. "The people who are against the war are using this to their political ends."
But when the committee chairman, Senator Warner, asked fellow members to limit their questioning to "what's specifically before the committee this morning" — the second time in two days that a Republican committee chairman had made such a request — Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts rebelled, politely at first but later with force.
"I've been in the Senate 42 years," he said sternly, "and I have never been denied the opportunity to question any person that's come before a committee, on what I wanted to ask for it. And I resent it and reject it on a matter of national importance."
When Kennedy continued defiantly that he would proceed unless the full committee voted to rule him out of order, Mr. Warner relented and several senators asked about the abuse scandal.
Congress ultimately is expected to provide the money the Pentagon seeks, but not without adding conditions on how the money is spent. Several legislators have criticized the administration for using earlier allocations meant for Afghanistan to help prepare for war in Iraq.
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, said he was prepared to support more spending for the two wars, but was troubled by the vagueness of the request.
"I think they're going to need more money," he said. "I think they need a lot more than $25 billion." But he added that "I have never seen a request exactly like this," and that if Congress accepted it, it would amount to giving up "all oversight responsibilities."
Mr. Wolfowitz insisted today that the Pentagon would fully account for its spending.
"We're not looking for a blank check," he said. "We are looking for the kind of flexibility that will make sure that when a need arises, we can allocate funds to where that need exists."
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
|
|
