From the My Lai Massacre to Abu Ghraib Prison!

Seymour Hersh is one of the most renowned investigative journalists. He exposed the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The world was shocked by the report he published and the accompanying pictures, which showed naked prisoners being degraded and led around on a rope by a female American soldier. Did Washington learn a lesson from what happened? Did the world wake up and put a stop to this disgraceful phenomenon? Even though the international community decreed in 1948 in Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” the phenomenon is still occurring. Later, in 1984, the Convention Against Torture determined that perpetrators of the crime of torture can be prosecuted irrespective of the location or history of its occurrence.

On the tenth anniversary of Abu Ghraib, Seymour Hersh, who previously exposed the American army’s My Lai massacre in 1979 and who has won numerous notable prizes, said that “there were naked Iraqi prisoners being sexually degraded, tortured and led around one after another like dogs. Beside them were American soldiers delightedly taking pictures.”*

Those pictures spread around the world on a staggering level, provoking a vigorous debate first over the crime of launching a war against and occupying Iraq without so-called “international legitimacy,” and then over the war crimes perpetrated, including inhumane exterminations (especially of civilians), in contravention of the 1949 Geneva Convention and the protocols added to it in 1977.

The Abu Ghraib scandal, with its ethical, humanitarian and legal symbolism, was the beginning of the end for the American occupation of Iraq. Matters were made worse by the material losses and moral blow sustained by the United States and its reputation: The Pentagon recorded more than 4,800 dead and 26,000 wounded (figures that don’t include the personnel of contracted parties, security companies and mercenaries) and more than $2 trillion spent. These losses, along with the financial crisis in the United States and around the world, amplified and rendered more influential the push in public opinion for withdrawal from Iraq.

The scandal first came to light in the secret Taguba report, named after Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who courageously led the investigation and confirmed that the violations took place. Of course, what happened was not too dissimilar from what could already be read in reports by international NGOs like Amnesty International, the International Federation for Human Rights, the Arab Organization for Human Rights, and Human Rights Watch. All of these groups had previously spoken about harsh conditions inside Iraqi prisons after the occupation began, but more evidence and proof had been needed, especially because the media is not satisfied with just publishing news stories. It must also present documents, pictures and eyewitness testimonies; these things are news in and of themselves. In today’s world, in the wake of globalization, the revolution in communications and information technology, and the digital boom, pictures make better news than articles. They spread in mere moments via the Internet (for example, on Twitter and Facebook), mobile phones and TV stations, entering people’s homes and bedrooms without knocking and thereby forming and influencing public opinion.

That may be what happened in the case of Abu Ghraib prison and the reverberating scandal it provoked. At the same time, it directed the world’s attention to the Guantanamo Bay prison (which remains open even though Obama promised to close it after one year during his first term) and to the secret flying and floating mobile prisons.

According to Seymour Hersh, Maj. Gen. Taguba was an outstanding, honorable man. Taguba retired after exposing the truth of the torture that occurred in Abu Ghraib. His report became a trigger and common denominator for all of the powers resisting the occupation as it spread like wildfire around Iraq. The picture that shocked the world in 2004 – a man dressed entirely in black with a black bag over his head standing up high and opening his arms outward, wires attached to both hands – was one of the outrages of the occupation. It alone is a testimony to the occupation’s inhumane nature.

I subsequently met the man in that famous picture. His name is Ali Shalal Qaissi, and I interviewed him so that he could give his living testimony of the torture in Abu Ghraib.** This interview appeared in al-Mustaqbal al-Arabi magazine, which was published by the Center for Arab Unity Studies at the time. His picture entered international and human rights circles and appeared in the media and on television screens before he himself did.

Qaissi said, “I was arrested on Oct. 13, 2003, in Baghdad’s al-Amiriya district and transported to one of America’s military bases within which there was also a prison. There I stayed for two days before being transported to Abu Ghraib prison. The first question I was asked was ‘Are you Sunni or Shia?’”*

When Qaissi had tried to argue, the interrogator demanded, “Answer me!” Then the interrogator directed a series of accusations at Qaissi, including that he was anti-Semitic. After that, the interrogator asked why Qaissi had had surgery on his hand, suggesting that he must have been part of the anti-American resistance. “The interrogator wasn’t convinced,” Qaissi told me, “that the surgery on my hand had occurred before the occupation, even after I supplied him with the name and phone number of the doctor that performed it (Imad Samam).”*

Operation Iron Horse required co-opting as many influential figures in touch with the Iraqi people as possible, and having them help the American occupation pursue the elements posing a threat to it.

Qaissi found this request strange because the Americans did not face dangers during that period. But the officer accused Qaissi of having spoken out against them in the press and having tried to clean up a deserted square in Abu Ghraib city so that it could become a children’s playground. Thus, he was arrested and his interrogation went on for 10 days. One soldier interrogated him for an hour and a half and threatened to send him to Guantanamo Bay if he didn’t cooperate with them. His number was 151716. During the month of Ramadan, he went without eating for three days, water was poured over him and he was bombarded with noise. After that, they tied him up by the hands in his cell, brought in a speaker and forced him to listen to loud music.

When I asked him to compare his torture during the previous regime to his torture during the occupation, he said, “The old regime’s torture was blind; whereas the Americans’ torture was artistic. They used psychological torture, sleep deprivation, dogs and music.”* He, like Seymour Hersh, does not believe that the Americans learned their lesson from that scandal.

Despite Seymour Hersh’s report and the global condemnation that the Abu Ghraib scandal attracted, the CIA’s recent report, which exceeds 6,000 pages and — except for leaks from its summary — remains secret, says that the U.S. Army still uses illegal methods of interrogation and torture. Although the Iraqi government closed Abu Ghraib prison, torture still occurs and many mysteries and secrets still remain, including the unethical collusion of some doctors and the presence of advisers permitting and justifying such acts under the pretext of national security. These are justifications that we heard from Washington. Although the phenomenon of torture may be pervasive — almost routine — in a number of developing countries, including Arab and Islamic countries, Western countries are not innocent. They have been involved in similar acts during their foreign wars, military occupations, collective punishments and international blockades, and even inside their prisons. The situation escalated after the criminal, terrorist events of 9/11, but none of that justifies resorting to torture for fighting international terrorism.

*Editor’s note: This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified. It may be a brief paraphrasing of Hersh’s larger statements.

**Editor’s note: In March 2006,The New York Times rescinded and apologized for a story that represented Ali Shalal Qaissi, a former Baath Party member, Baghdad mayor and Abu Ghraib prisoner, as the person in the iconic picture. The man pictured was Abdou Hussain Saad Faleh.