http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1557842,00.html Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the former Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo By ADAM ZAGORIN SUBSCRIBE TO TIMEPRINTE-MAILMORE BY AUTHORCover: The Abu Ghraib Scandal Background: Behind Rumsfeld's Fall World: Impact of Rumsfeld's Departure in Iraq Posted Friday, Nov. 10, 2006 Just days after his resignation, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called "20th hijacker" and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a "special interrogation plan," personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques. Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: "It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld ." A spokesperson for the Pentagon told TIME there would be no comment since the case has not yet been filed. Along with Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Tenet, the other defendants in the case are Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone; former assistant attorney general Jay Bybee; former deputy assisant attorney general John Yoo; General Counsel for the Department of Defense William James Haynes II; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Senior military officers named in the filing are General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top Army official in Iraq; Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of Guantanamo; senior Iraq commander, Major General Walter Wojdakowski; and Col. Thomas Pappas, the one-time head of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib. Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides "universal jurisdiction" allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a "a big, big problem." U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint. In bringing the new case, however, the plaintiffs argue that circumstances have changed in two important ways. Rumsfeld's resignation, they say, means that the former Defense Secretary will lose the legal immunity usually accorded high government officials. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that the German prosecutor's reasoning for rejecting the previous case — that U.S. authorities were dealing with the issue — has been proven wrong. "The utter and complete failure of U.S. authorities to take any action to investigate high-level involvement in the torture program could not be clearer," says Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a U.S.-based non-profit helping to bring the legal action in Germany. He also notes that the Military Commissions Act, a law passed by Congress earlier this year, effectively blocks prosecution in the U.S. of those involved in detention and interrogation abuses of foreigners held abroad in American custody going to back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, Ratner contends, the legal arguments underlying the German prosecutor's previous inaction no longer hold up. Whatever the legal merits of the case, it is the latest example of efforts in Western Europe by critics of U.S. tactics in the war on terror to call those involved to account in court. In Germany, investigations are under way in parliament concerning cooperation between the CIA and German intelligence on rendition — the kidnapping of suspected terrorists and their removal to third countries for interrogation. Other legal inquiries involving rendition are under way in both Italy and Spain. U.S. officials have long feared that legal proceedings against "war criminals" could be used to settle political scores. In 1998, for example, former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet — whose military coup was supported by the Nixon administration — was arrested in the U.K. and held for 16 months in an extradition battle led by a Spanish magistrate seeking to charge him with war crimes. He was ultimately released and returned to Chile. More recently, a Belgian court tried to bring charges against then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for alleged crimes against Palestinians. For its part, the Bush Administration has rejected adherence to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on grounds that it could be used to unjustly prosecute U.S. officials. The ICC is the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity.
Because 9 out of 10 Germans agree... Rummy did these things all himself, and/or he ordered them specifically. How could this be provable? He is not exactly Saddam here.
Good. As much as I hate to say it, if we would have listened to our European allies, we would still be the country we were. As for proof, I think they probably have all they need... innocent citizens captured and tortured, secret prisons in European countrys, illegal overflights that take American captives to countries that torture... I doubt all those things happened just because of a few loose cannon type enlisted personnel.
Surely even the most liberal among us can see that the anti-war crowd attempting to file criminal charges ABROAD against high ranking leadership of our military is not in our nation's best interest. That's what's happening here. This action, if it goes forward, has the affect of destabilizing our military and undermining their freedom to act. What kind of patriot, during a time of war, goes to a foreign country to try to punish our own military leaders?! This is absolutely outrageous. Really, it is. This is openly treasonous. How can it NOT be? It is a total betrayal of one's country. It's nothing more than angry, vindictive liberals trying to 'get theirs' at the expense of our nation's reputation and stability. Incredibly selfish. Incredibly stupid.
I assume you are talking about former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski? If I were her and if her story is correct I would probably be just as bitter and do the same thing. I agree that it probably isn't the best thing to do, but lets try this as an extreme example; After Hitler invaded Poland if a scapegoated general had come to the United States and sued Hitler for violating the laws of war would that be treasonous or would it be Hitler's own damn fault and in Germany's best interest?
I think this is a good thing and it will give the US and the US military some legitimacy back, and it will provide a cleaner slate, at least, to move forward with. This is about accountability and restoring the honour of the US military. I think the whole world knows that the US military was under the control of a group of people who lied to the American public, probably systematically and over a long period of time, in order to justify the war, and they broke international law in order to carry it out. That’s very bad, but the test of America itself, to a significant extent, comes when the truth comes out. How will America react? Will it hold those responsible accountable? With this past election America held the politicians accountable and this general is holding the key individual who betrayed the principles of her country accountable. Bravo to her! There is a true patriot for you. I think this could be a very important sign and message to the world, and it could help the US regain quite a bit of respect and strength. Going forward it cleans the slate to a significant extent too. The corrupt old leader is out and facing charges, and the new leader now has a lot of leeway to take a different route. I think there is no other way to get to any kind of positive outcome other than to enter into discussions with the key stakeholders in the area, including Iran, and this will make that a lot easier. The problem is really the same one that existed before the war even started. If you don’t involve the key, powerful, stakeholders in the solution from the beginning they may well decide that it’s in their interest to sabotage your project, and Iran certainly has the power to do that. The way to keep Iran out of Iraq was to leave Saddam in control. Now, either Iran will end up controlling significant portions of Iraq by itself, or if a group of overseers from the surrounding countries can be put together, maybe, just maybe, they can help Iraq and at the same time police each other in a way that would allow Iraq to become a strong independent state. I’m not sure what odds I’d place on that happening but think that’s the only way out at this point. I don’t think an Iraqi government with an inexperienced, patchwork, army will be able to hold off civil war and a meddling Iran by itself.
germany is trying to do what we should be doing. rummy, bush, cheney, gonzales and all their little cronies need to be put on trial.
What political humbuggery by the Germans. Let's indict all the Germans who are selling nuclear supplies to Iran and North Korea. Then let all the nations of the world start indicting citizens of other countries willy nilly. That should play well in the United Nations.
Does it then follow that Germany should indict our President, Joint Chiefs, Nat'l Security Advisor and anybody else in the chain of command and/or counsel? Would appreciate to hear answers from both sides, particularly from anyone with a decent grasp of legal/political protocol.
Got another question. In what way, technically and symbolically, would this indictment affect our diplomatic standing with Germany?
