The controversy surrounding Sen. James Inhofe’s (R-Okla.) breathtakingly dumb comments last month about the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal continues to reverberate.
In case you’ve forgotten, Inhofe shocked a Senate Armed Services committee hearing three weeks ago by attacking human rights watchers, Democrats, Rumsfeld critics, and everyone else who believes the Abu Ghraib scandal is a stain on our country.
“I’m probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment,” the Oklahoma Republican said at a U.S. Senate hearing probing the scandal.
[…]
“I am also outraged that we have so many humanitarian do-gooders right now crawling all over these prisons looking for human rights violations, while our troops, our heroes are fighting and dying,” he said.
While Inhofe continued his incoherent tirade, several noticed Sen. John McCain quietly leave the room. Whether it was a sign of his displeasure with Inhofe was unclear.
McCain’s feelings are far more obvious today, however, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed headlined, “In Praise of Do-Gooders.” The Arizona Republican doesn’t mention Inhofe by name, but he didn’t have to. It’s a sweeping condemnation of Inhofe’s twisted ideology and approach to torture executed by Americans.
Since the abuses at Abu Ghraib have come to light, American leaders at all levels have rightly expressed outrage and contrition. Yet there also exists an undercurrent of sentiment that seeks to fault America’s strict adherence to international humanitarian law, and to blame the organizations that monitor its implementation.
In recent days, some have labeled Red Cross personnel as “humanitarian do-gooders” whose presence in coalition-run detention centers is inappropriate while American soldiers are fighting and dying. Others have warned that the ICRC is on the path toward becoming a left-wing advocacy group, and portrayed the Geneva Conventions as a hindrance to our ability to extract intelligence from prisoners that might save U.S. lives.
It is critical to realize that the Red Cross and the Geneva Conventions do not endanger American soldiers, they protect them. Our soldiers enter battle with the knowledge that should they be taken prisoner, there are laws intended to protect them and impartial international observers to inquire after them.
This is a terrific piece from a credible source. It does a tremendous job in highlighting a point that seems to escape most conservatives these days: the abuse scandal has made Americans less safe.
McCain also took a slap at White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, who last year described the protections guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions as “quaint” and “obsolete.”
Some also have argued that the Geneva Conventions have been rendered quaint by the new circumstances in which we find ourselves. We do face a new enemy in the global war on terror, and much of our ability to disrupt attacks and destroy terrorist cells depends on the quality of intelligence we gather from detainees. Yet nothing in the Conventions precludes directed interrogations. They do, however, prohibit torture and humiliation of detainees, whether or not they are deemed POWs. These are standards that are never obsolete — they cut to the heart of how moral people must treat other human beings. They also are the principles on which the liberation of Iraq is based. We are bringing to Iraq a new day, an era that is better in all ways than the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. This era replaces terror, humiliation and arbitrary rule with freedom, human rights and the rule of law.
The Red Cross and other “do-gooders” help us achieve this goal.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) publicly questioned McCain’s commitment to the Republican Party last week after McCain suggested fiscal prudence in paying for the war. I wonder who’ll attack his loyalty this week for standing up for international legal standards and the rights of prisoners of war.