Defining Images Of Conflict
By: GWYNNE DYERTHE defining image of the Vietnam war was the naked little girl running down the road crying, her clothes burned off by napalm.
The defining image of the Iraq war will probably be Private Lynndie
England in a corridor in Abu Ghraib prison, holding a leash
attached to a naked Iraqi man lying on the floor.
It is the picture that best conveys the contempt that ordinary
American soldiers (and the government that sent them) feel for
Arabs.
Maybe I'm wrong.
US Defence Secretary Don Rumsfeld told the Senate armed services
committee last week that "the worst is yet to come.
There are a lot more pictures and many investigations
underway.... I looked at them last night, and they're hard to
believe.... It's not a pretty picture."
But the symbolism of this one will be hard to beat.
Iraqis "must understand that what took place in that prison does
not represent the America that I know," said President Bush, and he
was right.
Americans do not generally do this to other Americans.
But it did happen in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and things very
like it have probably happened in American prisons in Afghanistan
and at Guantanamo, too.
Private England and her friends may have been enjoying it too
much, but the systematic humiliation of prisoners is probably
policy.
'R2I' is short for 'resistance to interrogation.' It's a course
that most military people whose jobs put them at risk of being
captured - pilots, special forces, etc. - have to take.
They are exposed to the full battery of techniques that enemy
interrogators might use against them (keeping them naked, sexual
humiliation, anything that will 'prolong the shock of capture' and
weaken their will), but only in small and manageable doses.
It's a kind of immunisation against 'torture lite' interrogation
techniques.
But US and British interrogators also know these techniques, and
so do the thousands of ex-special forces people who now work in
Iraq.
(One result of Rumsfeld's obsession with keeping US troop
numbers down in Iraq, in order to prove that the US can invade
countries like Iraq without incurring a big political cost at home,
is the 20 000 'contractors' doing paramilitary jobs in the
country.) Do they employ these techniques in Iraq and elsewhere?
Pierre Kraehenbuehl, director of operations for the International
Committee of the Red Cross, said in Switzerland: "We are dealing
here with a broad pattern, not individual acts.
There was a pattern and a system."
The ICRC has been warning the US of mistreatment of prisoners in
Iraq for over a year.
Amnesty International concurs.
"Our extensive research in Iraq suggests that this is not an
isolated incident ... (We have ) received frequent reports of
torture or other ill-treatment by coalition forces during the past
year.
Detainees have reported being routinely subjected to cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment during arrest or detention...
Virtually none of the allegations of torture or ill-treatment has
been adequately investigated by the authorities."
General Janis Karpinski, who commanded Abu Ghraib prison when
those pictures were taken, is being set up to take the fall for all
this.
She was a reservist, reluctant to challenge regulars, so she
didn't protest when military intelligence officers at Abu Ghraib
discouraged her from visiting the cell block where they
interrogated prisoners, or went to great lengths to keep the Red
Cross from visiting their wing of the prison.
When General Geoffrey Miller, then the commandant at Guantanamo,
flew into Iraq last September to offer "suggestions on how to make
interrogations more efficient and effective," she didn't ask
exactly what he meant - even when he talked of making the prison an
"enabler for interrogation" and said that the guards should "set
the conditions for successful exploitation of the internees."
Now she has been relieved of her command - and replaced by the
very same General Miller.
This is a system, not an individual's aberrant behaviour.
It was all for naught, though, because most of the people
detained at Abu Ghraib, at Bagram in Afghanistan, at Guantanamo and
in the rest of the gulag are just innocent bystanders.
"A unit goes out on a raid and... the target is not available;
they just grab anybody because that was their job," Torin Nelson, a
former military intelligence officer at Guantanamo who worked as a
contractor at Abu Ghraib, told the Guardian.
"They're not cultural experts.... I've read reports from
capturing units where the capturing unit wrote, 'the target was not
at home.
The neighbour came out to see what was going on and we grabbed
him."' And then somebody else tortured him.
The American troops in Iraq are not cultural, political or
historical experts.
They are frightened and far from home, and a hundred Hollywood
movies have taught them that Arabs are dirty, sly, cruel enemies of
all that is good.
The deliberately misleading propaganda of their own government
has persuaded most of them that they are in Iraq as part of a 'war
on terror.' (Even at home, according to a University of Maryland
study, 57 per cent of Americans "believe that before the war Iraq
was providing substantial support to al Qaeda," and 65 per cent
believe that "experts" found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.)
So many US soldiers see Iraqis as inferior and hostile, and all the
rest follows.
The pictures that have shocked the Arab and the wider Muslim
world are not just about isolated instances of abuse.
They are evidence of something bigger and uglier: a wilful
ignorance and patronising contempt that disfigures the entire US
intervention in the Middle East.
We will all be paying for this for many years.
* Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose
articles are published in 45 countries.
It is the picture that best conveys the contempt that ordinary
American soldiers (and the government that sent them) feel for
Arabs.Maybe I'm wrong.US Defence Secretary Don Rumsfeld told the
Senate armed services committee last week that "the worst is yet to
come.There are a lot more pictures and many investigations
underway.... I looked at them last night, and they're hard to
believe.... It's not a pretty picture."But the symbolism of this
one will be hard to beat.Iraqis "must understand that what took
place in that prison does not represent the America that I know,"
said President Bush, and he was right.Americans do not generally do
this to other Americans.But it did happen in Abu Ghraib prison in
Iraq, and things very like it have probably happened in American
prisons in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo, too.Private England and
her friends may have been enjoying it too much, but the systematic
humiliation of prisoners is probably policy.'R2I' is short for
'resistance to interrogation.' It's a course that most military
people whose jobs put them at risk of being captured - pilots,
special forces, etc. - have to take.They are exposed to the full
battery of techniques that enemy interrogators might use against
them (keeping them naked, sexual humiliation, anything that will
'prolong the shock of capture' and weaken their will), but only in
small and manageable doses.It's a kind of immunisation against
'torture lite' interrogation techniques.But US and British
interrogators also know these techniques, and so do the thousands
of ex-special forces people who now work in Iraq.(One result of
Rumsfeld's obsession with keeping US troop numbers down in Iraq, in
order to prove that the US can invade countries like Iraq without
incurring a big political cost at home, is the 20 000 'contractors'
doing paramilitary jobs in the country.) Do they employ these
techniques in Iraq and elsewhere? Pierre Kraehenbuehl, director of
operations for the International Committee of the Red Cross, said
in Switzerland: "We are dealing here with a broad pattern, not
individual acts.There was a pattern and a system."The ICRC has been
warning the US of mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq for over a
year.Amnesty International concurs."Our extensive research in Iraq
suggests that this is not an isolated incident ... (We have )
received frequent reports of torture or other ill-treatment by
coalition forces during the past year.Detainees have reported being
routinely subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during
arrest or detention... Virtually none of the allegations of torture
or ill-treatment has been adequately investigated by the
authorities."General Janis Karpinski, who commanded Abu Ghraib
prison when those pictures were taken, is being set up to take the
fall for all this.She was a reservist, reluctant to challenge
regulars, so she didn't protest when military intelligence officers
at Abu Ghraib discouraged her from visiting the cell block where
they interrogated prisoners, or went to great lengths to keep the
Red Cross from visiting their wing of the prison.When General
Geoffrey Miller, then the commandant at Guantanamo, flew into Iraq
last September to offer "suggestions on how to make interrogations
more efficient and effective," she didn't ask exactly what he meant
- even when he talked of making the prison an "enabler for
interrogation" and said that the guards should "set the conditions
for successful exploitation of the internees."Now she has been
relieved of her command - and replaced by the very same General
Miller.This is a system, not an individual's aberrant behaviour.It
was all for naught, though, because most of the people detained at
Abu Ghraib, at Bagram in Afghanistan, at Guantanamo and in the rest
of the gulag are just innocent bystanders."A unit goes out on a
raid and... the target is not available; they just grab anybody
because that was their job," Torin Nelson, a former military
intelligence officer at Guantanamo who worked as a contractor at
Abu Ghraib, told the Guardian."They're not cultural experts....
I've read reports from capturing units where the capturing unit
wrote, 'the target was not at home.The neighbour came out to see
what was going on and we grabbed him."' And then somebody else
tortured him.The American troops in Iraq are not cultural,
political or historical experts.They are frightened and far from
home, and a hundred Hollywood movies have taught them that Arabs
are dirty, sly, cruel enemies of all that is good.The deliberately
misleading propaganda of their own government has persuaded most of
them that they are in Iraq as part of a 'war on terror.' (Even at
home, according to a University of Maryland study, 57 per cent of
Americans "believe that before the war Iraq was providing
substantial support to al Qaeda," and 65 per cent believe that
"experts" found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.) So many US
soldiers see Iraqis as inferior and hostile, and all the rest
follows.The pictures that have shocked the Arab and the wider
Muslim world are not just about isolated instances of abuse.They
are evidence of something bigger and uglier: a wilful ignorance and
patronising contempt that disfigures the entire US intervention in
the Middle East.We will all be paying for this for many years.*
Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles
are published in 45 countries.