Condoned Torture

Last Tuesday, on the eve of World Human Rights Day, a report was published in the United States concerning the interrogation methods employed by the CIA after the September 2001 attacks.

The findings on how torture was systematically used on prisoners accused of belonging to al-Qaida are scandalous: they were brutally, ineffectively and illegally tortured. Nonetheless, nothing indicates that those responsible for the abuses will be punished.

The report's findings are a snapshot of the dirty war that was coordinated by the highest powers in Washington, with carte blanche given to the Central Intelligence Agency under the premise of finding the parties responsible for past attacks and preventing futures ones.

The agency is accused of having hidden information from senior officials, including Bush, and from Congress about the manner in which they carried out their "enhanced interrogation techniques," which were used on some 39 prisoners and justified by the results they supposedly obtained. Those techniques included "waterboarding" (or simulated drowning), sleep deprivation, sexual violence, death threats to the prisoners or their families and other niceties, employed to break prisoners down. The report also mentions that, at certain moments, CIA officials asked to stop the interrogations, but senior officers ordered them to continue.

Now we understand why there was a two-year tug-of-war between the Democratic promotion of and Republican opposition to the report´s publication.

The thorny issue casts a large shadow on George W. Bush's government, which, praised by the extreme right, skillfully exploited the fear that took control of the nation after Sept. 11 by approving restrictive laws regarding individual liberties, which are so precious in the U.S.

The majority of the public and the media, with the honorable exception of certain intellectuals and NGOs, closed ranks with Bush. When they discovered the lies that had been fabricated by the government, the damage was already done.

Hence the importance of this report, which is not the only one of its kind. That same day, a report was published by the Republican minority, justifying its behavior during that moment in history and emphasizing its success in preventing other attacks.

The second report came from the CIA itself. In fact, its ex-director, Michael Hayden, went to the media and denied having deceived anyone. He stated that President George W. Bush personally authorized said practices on a high official of al-Qaida. Additionally, within the agency, they say that the Justice Department gave the green light for the application of these practices.

President Barack Obama has spoken, without euphemism, of torture. He has also said that "no nation is perfect" but that he trusts in the "willingness to openly confront our past, face our imperfections, make changes and do better." This is a commendable proposal, and it should not restrict itself to making the facts known but should also focus on establishing who was responsible and bringing them to trial.

However, former Vice President Dick Cheney, a known hawk in the Bush era, said without hesitation that he does not feel betrayed by anyone in the CIA and that the people involved "deserve a lot of praise." According to Cheney, "they ought to be decorated, not criticized." We'll see.

The moral authority of the United States on this issue is in serious doubt. Henceforth, it will be a curious paradox for the U.S. to demand high standards in the defense of human rights around the world, while neglecting to practice at home what it preaches so loudly.

What is certain is that, in light of the Republican opposition to the report and the control it will have of the two houses of Congress starting in January, everything seems to suggest that the responsible parties will receive absolute impunity.

And if the future brings forth another situation like that of 2001, what would happen then? That, unfortunately, is something that remains to be seen.