America in the World

Cheney defends Guantanamo Bay and coercive interrogation of terrorism suspects

In an interview for Politico, former Vice President Dick Cheney has defended some of the most controversial anti-terror measures adopted by the Bush administration and has suggested that there is a “high probability” that terrorists will attempt a nuclear or biological attack in coming years.

Key quotes:

"If it hadn't been for what we did - with respect to the terrorist surveillance program, or enhanced interrogation techniques for high-value detainees, the Patriot Act, and so forth - then we would have been attacked again. Those policies we put in place, in my opinion, were absolutely crucial to getting us through the last seven-plus years without a major-casualty attack on the US."

The "ultimate threat to the country", was a "9/11-type event where the terrorists are armed with something much more dangerous than an airline ticket and a box cutter - a nuclear weapon or a biological agent of some kind" that is deployed in the middle of an American city that could kill perhaps hundreds of thousands of people.

"If you release the hard-core al-Qaeda terrorists that are held at Guantanamo, I think they go back into the business of trying to kill more Americans and mount further mass-casualty attacks. If you turn 'em loose and they go kill more Americans, who's responsible for that? When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an al-Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry".

Protecting the country is "a tough, mean, dirty, nasty business".  "These are evil people. And we're not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek."

Barack Obama's first executive order requires closure of Guantanamo

The new President has also ordered an end to aggressive interrogation techniques... or has he? Two leading articles in successive days in the Wall Street Journal warn that (1) there are loopholes that would allow US intelligence officers to press suspects harder in tough cases and (2) a version of Gitmo's military commissions may be simply re-created on US soil.

Obama promises end to torture and closure of Guantanomo Bay

In his first TV interview since being elected President, Barack Obama confirms that he'll end one of the most prominent recent sources of anti-Americanism; detention of terrorist suspects at Guantanomo Bay.  The President-Elect also vowed to end waterboarding and other techniques of aggressive interrogation.  He promised that principled opposition to all torture would be "part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world."  See video below:

The Daily Telegraph's Con Coughlin warns, however, that the closure of Guantanomo will not be uncomplicated:

"The Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba... holds about 250 die-hard al-Qaeda supporters... The reason that the hard-core al-Qaeda supporters - including Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks - continue to be held at Gitmo is that, as most of them were picked up on the battlefield in Afghanistan and other war zones, it is not possible to prosecute them the same way you would civilian criminals. The police are hardly likely to be able to scour the mountains of Tora Bora assembling evidence for the prosecution case... There have already been suggestions that former Gitmo detainees have carried out terror attacks against coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq after being released from Gitmo. What if one of those released by President Obama then masterminded a repeat of the 9/11 attacks? Let's not forget that al-Qaeda emerged as a global terror threat when Bill Clinton was president, and Obama should take care that the return of a Democrat to the White House does not result in the U.S. taking the soft options in fighting the war on terror."

Popularity can never be the primary objective of US foreign policy

President-Elect Barack Obama has always been confident of his ability to tackle anti-Americanism.  He said this in November 2007, campaigning in Iowa:

"The day I'm inaugurated, not only will the country look at itself differently, but the world will look at America differently."

Early reaction to his election has indeed been very positive. We noted some of the warm response last week.

But popularity shouldn't be the primary objective of US foreign policy as Jeff Jacoby noted in Sunday's Boston Globe:

"Great nations have great interests in the world - interests that cannot always be secured through patient negotiation or Security Council resolutions. As the foremost military power, the United States must at times be "the world's reluctant sheriff," using force to maintain order or defend liberty. President Obama may speak more softly than his predecessor, but he will still be carrying a very big stick. Like other presidents, he will be loudly condemned when he uses it."

Many thought anti-Americanism - a plague that has beset every recent US administration and, for that matter, every 'top dog nation' in history - had suffered a terminal setback on 9/11.  It hadn't, of course.  Anti-Americanism resumed because of America's assertive response to those attacks and also because that response was often pursued incompetently and ineffectively.

Barack Obama's foreign policy options divide into four broad categories. We list them below with some example policies:

RIGHT FOR THE WORLD, RIGHT FOR ANTI-AMERICANISM

• An and to aggressive interrogation techniques including waterboarding and the closure of Guantanamo Bay.
• The continuation of the Bush administration's Africa policies which have included large increases in aid spending - particularly against malaria and HIV/AIDS.

RIGHT FOR THE WORLD, WRONG FOR ANTI-AMERICANISM*

• Perseverance in Iraq until the benefits of the surge are safeguarded.  Many in Europe and the Middle East will be disappointed at a measured withdrawal of forces but a precipitate exit would not just endanger Iraq's transition to stability but, in the medium term, contribute to a lack of confidence in American power.
• A surge of troops into Afghanistan and greater commitment of European soldiers to the task of defeating the Taliban.

WRONG FOR THE WORLD, RIGHT FOR ANTI-AMERICANISM

• Submission to the UN. The world will initially appreciate multilateralism but many will come to resent the lack of action that results from prolonged summitry.

WRONG FOR THE WORLD, WRONG FOR ANTI-AMERICANISM*

• Anti-free trade policies as supported by many US Democrats and union leaders. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown is urging the President-Elect to resist protectionism.

* When we say "wrong for anti-Americanism" we only mean in the short-term. Policies that are "wrong for the world" - pursued for a long enough period - will progressively undermine confidence in US policy and power.

America's capacity for self-correction

All this week, AmericaInTheWorld is spotlighting six key arguments from Justin Webb's 'Have A Nice Day: Behind The Chiches, Giving America Another Chance'.  You can purchase your copy here.

Few things have done more damage to America's global standing than Guantanamo Bay.  America has been condemned across the world.  Leaving aside for the moment (1) that the condemnation has sometimes come from nations with much inferior human rights records and (2) from human rights organisations that go soft on more serious abusers, it is right that the United States does clean up its act in this area.  But, writes Justin Webb, it should not be forgotten that the decisive pressure for change has come from within the USA:

"Guantanamo was a disaster for the Bush administration because of home-grown protest.  Amnesty International they could have coped with. The Council of Europe they could safely have ignored. Foreign public opinion as well. It has been the relentless drip drip of American legal opinions, including those of the Supreme Court itself, that has undercut the ability of the Bush team to do what they wanted to do at Guantanamo.  Even the European attack, led by the Swiss MP Dick Marty, relied on US news reports for its evidence of US wrongdoing. It was the Washington Post - an American institution in every sense of the word - that reported the CIA was "hiding and interrogating some of its most important al-Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe".

Dainty lawyers and dainty reporters trumped a president in his pomp in the midst of a war. For all the power that the Bush White House accrued to itself, for all the intentions it had to fight the war with radical Islam in semi-legal shadows, the upshot has been row after row with Americans who will not stand for this behaviour in their name. And in 2008 they choose two presidential candidates, both of whom were genuinely implacably opposed to torture, both in name and in fact."

America has all of the institutions - a free press, an independent judiciary, a super-competitive democratic system, a good people - that make self-correction possible.  It is still a nation that makes mistakes.  Sometimes big mistakes but unlike alternative world powers - Russia, China, the EU and the UN - it is better at putting those abuses right. 

In the first part of the series, yesterday, we noted that America remains the last, best hope of people - even people it has let down.

"America is a dream. Even to those who it lets down."

All this week, AmericaInTheWorld is spotlighting six key arguments from Justin Webb's 'Have A Nice Day: Behind The Chiches, Giving America Another Chance'.  You can purchase your copy here.

Ayman Nour is an Egyptian democrat.  Mr Nour stood against Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak in the 2006 elections.  He won 7% of the vote but today sits in a Cairo jail on politically-motivated charges of electoral fraud.

He took America at its word and the suggestion by George W Bush that his administration would support democrats in every corner of the planet. This is what the President said in his second inaugural:

"All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you. Democratic reformers facing repression, prison, or exile can know: America sees you for who you are: the future leaders of your free country. The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.""

America has been criticised for doing little to speak up for Mr Nour.  Egypt is a massive beneficiary of US aid but Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice failed to mention Mr Nour's predicament in a meeting with the Egyptian President.

But finds Justin Webb, America remains the last, best hope for Mr Nour's wife and another Egyptian democrat, Hala Mustapha.  He writes this after meeting them:

"They aren't making plans to appeal for help from China or Russia or the European Commission.  They know where help should be located: they know where they think help might one day lie... Although both have been let down, both are sticking with America."

> Briefing: America and human rights