No Comment — September 1, 2007, 12:09 pm

The Unfinished Story of Abu Ghraib

With the court-martial of Lt. Col. Jordan now complete, the official apologists will be out busily explaining that Abu Ghraib is all over now—see, we even court-martialed an officer, and it went nowhere, the jury let him off. But as the New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor and a number of other publications have properly pointed out, the lesson to be drawn from the Jordan court-martial is different from what the Pentagon would have us understand—it’s one of the most audacious cover-ups in military justice history.

In American literature, one writer, Herman Melville, was captivated with the subject of military justice. He wrote about it frequently. Billy Budd of course turns on a court-martial. But an earlier novel, White-Jacket is an extended tirade against the military justice system. In both novels, Melville makes a point which I consider—for all the advancements in military justice today compared to the Articles of War regime that Melville knew from his days at sea—still absolutely true. Military justice operates to reinforce command authority. It is, as it were, a command authority adjunct. Therefore we should never consider military justice to be about the ultimate, namely, justice. It may be about justice on the periphery, but concerns for justice fade when they clash with the authority of the administering command.

billy-budd

So we come to the ultimate tension of the military justice system: the closer the wrong-doing is to the command authority from which the military justice emanates, the more fundamentally unstable the system becomes, the more it flounders, and ultimately fails. That’s the principle that Melville demonstrates very powerfully in the two novels I mentioned. And the court-martial of Lt. Col. Jordan demonstrates it once more.

The prosecutors held back in presenting and developing a full case because of blinders imposed on them—they were required to avoid the trail that led up the chain of command. But that trail was completely obvious.

If you have only five minutes in which to educate yourself about the Abu Ghraib scandal, here’s how: watch this web interview with Gen. Janis Karpinski. She was one of two female general officers in Iraq shortly after the invasion, and she had responsibility for MP operations. And prisons? Well the U.S. plans called for limited POW operations. What in fact occurred was something radically different. In this interview you’ll learn:

  • The prison system was supposed to have been operated by J. Paul Bremer’s Coalition Provisional Authority with assistance from the U.S. Justice Department. The Justice Department’s involvement in this whole project is a study in astonishing and far-ranging corruption—starting with DOJ contracts given to a team of prison officials from the U.S. who had all been fired for prisoner abuse, frequently including assaults and homicides. All of these figures had tight Republican Party connections which they parlayed into lucrative contracts to “build a prison system” in Iraq. What they created was not a prison system, but something different. How does Marlowe put it? “Hell hath no limits, nor is circumscrib’d/In one self place; but where we are is hell,/And where hell is, there must we ever be.” Indeed.

  • Without informing Karpinski or her people, and on instructions that came from Dr. Stephen Cambone (the mastermind of the torture policies that emerged at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere), “security detainees” were sent to Abu Ghraib.

  • Karpinski was told by Colonel Marc Warren that these “security detainees” had “no rights.” (In an act of truly inspirational command bravery, Warren later told investigators that he was “ill” or “away” when the key decisions were taken and was thus uninvolved. Rumsfeld subsequently tried to promote Warren to general in recognition of his services, a move which was blocked by two Republican senators on the Senate Armed Services Committee).

  • Major General Geoffrey Miller visited Abu Ghraib on orders directly from Rumsfeld and Cambone (facts about which Miller subsequently lied in testimony before Congress). The “security detainee” program was operated directly by Cambone.

  • Karpinski makes clear many times that the direction for all the nasty stuff done to the detainees was not coming from Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, his deputy, or anyone else on the ground in Iraq. It was coming straight from the Pentagon, and Donald Rumsfeld personally, and his sidekick Steve Cambone were the hardasses running the program and pushing it.

You might think, of course, that Karpinski is trying to clear herself. I’ll just say that I’ve been studying this set of facts for more than three years now, have interviewed dozens of participants. Not only is Karpinski telling the truth, no varnish has been applied. Everything that Karpinski says in these interviews stacks up perfectly with what I have discovered.

Go watch the Karpinski interviews here.

Share
Single Page

More from Scott Horton:

Context, No Comment August 28, 2015, 12:16 pm

Beltway Secrecy

In five easy lessons

From the April 2015 issue

Company Men

Torture, treachery, and the CIA

Six Questions October 18, 2014, 8:00 pm

The APA Grapples with Its Torture Demons: Six Questions for Nathaniel Raymond

Nathaniel Raymond on CIA interrogation techniques.

Get access to 165 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

March 2016

Mad Magazines

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Killer Bunny in the Sky

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Bird in a Cage

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Hidden Rivers of Brooklyn

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Save Our Public Universities

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Rogue Agency

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Save Our Public Universities·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“Whether and how we educate people is still a direct reflection of the degree of freedom we expect them to have, or want them to have.”
Photograph (crop) by Thomas Allen
Article
New Movies·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Force Awakens criticizes American imperialism while also celebrating the revolutionary spirit that founded this country. When the movie needs to bridge the two points of view, it shifts to aerial combat, a default setting that mirrors the war on terror all too well.”
Still © Lucasfilm
Article
Isn’t It Romantic?·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“He had paid for much of her schooling, something he cannot help but mention, since the aftermath of any failed relationship brings an ungenerous and impossible impulse to claw back one’s misspent resources.”
Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Article
The Trouble with Iowa·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“It seems to defy reason that this anachronistic farm state — a demographic outlier, with no major cities and just 3 million people, nine out of ten of them white — should play such an outsized role in American politics.”
Photograph (detail) © Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Article
Rule, Britannica·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“This is the strange magic of an arrangement of all the world’s knowledge in alphabetical order: any search for anything passes through things that have nothing in common with it but an initial letter.”
Artwork by Brian Dettmer. Courtesy the artist and P.P.O.W., New York City.

Number of people who attended the World Grits Festival, held in St. George, South Carolina, last spring:

60,000

The brown bears of Greece continued chewing through telephone poles.

In Peru, a 51-year-old activist became the first former sex worker to run for the national legislature. “I’m going to put order,” she said, “in that big brothel which is Congress.”

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Two Christmas Mornings of the Great War

By

Civilization masks us with a screen, from ourselves and from one another, with thin depth of unreality. We habitually live — do we not? — in a world self-created, half established, of false values arbitrarily upheld, largely inspired by misconception, misapprehension, wrong perspective, and defective proportion, misapplication.

Subscribe Today