Republican senators revolt over terror suspects' rights
Friday 15 September 2006
Latest in Americas
On Facebook
From the blogs
CC kills more people than cervical cancer; why haven’t we heard about it?
There is a disease whose incidence is rising in the UK and most of the industrialised world. However...
We need to avoid another ‘lost generation’
A tiny green shoot one day, and then a chill wind the next. Anyone hoping for signs of economic spr...
More than half of Afghanistan’s families live in extreme poverty
Leila is watching her baby intently, as his mouth moves trying to swallow the small blob of yellow p...
Time for a new approach to alcohol
Ambulances were called and three drunk teenagers were brought to my care. One was so drunk we had to...
In an open rebellion against President Bush, a Republican-controlled Senate committee voted through its own bill reaffirming the Geneva Conventions and establishing clear protection for the rights of detained terrorist suspects.
The move, by the powerful Armed Forces Committee, came just hours after Mr Bush went in person to Capitol Hill to urge Republicans to support the far tougher legislation the administration is proposing, which the President says is vital for an effective waging of the "war on terror".
It splits the party down the middle on an issue which could play a crucial part in the upcoming mid-term elections, in which Republicans are struggling to hold their majorities in both the Senate and House of Representatives.
Among the demands of the Bush bill are a narrow definition of the Convention's all-important Article 3 on the humane treatment of prisoners and immunity for US interrogators from possible prosecution for war crimes. It would also set rules for terrorist trials that would permit hearsay testimony - yet allow prosecutors to withhold key evidence from defendants.
But some of the most senior Republicans were having none of it - including the committee's chairman, John Warner, as well as John McCain, a former prisoner of war and favourite for the party's 2008 White House nomination, and Lindsey Graham, Senator for South Carolina and a former military lawyer.
All three joined with Susan Collins of Maine, another moderate Republican, and with committee Democrats in a 15-9 vote for the Committee's own bill.
A showdown now looms when the full Senate takes up the detention issue, probably next week.
Further underlining divisions in the party, the previous secretary of state, Colin Powell - who resigned in strained circumstances at the end of Mr Bush's first term - went public with his opposition to the President's plan. "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," Gen Powell, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in a letter. Redefining what is permitted under the Geneva Conventions "would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk."
In a stinging rejoinder, Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, described Gen Powell as "confused" in his understanding of what the White House was trying to do. "The President will not accept something that shuts down the programme for interrogating detainees." For his part, John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, has warned that the Senate bill would almost certainly mean the end of the CIA's involvement in interrogating and detaining terror suspects.
Last week, Mr Bush for the first time confirmed the existence of secret CIA camps, as the Pentagon formally banned some of the most notorious techniques, including "water-boarding" and sexual humilation of detainees. The camps are now empty, after the transfer last week of 14 top al-Qa'ida suspects to the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Mr Bush made crystal clear the CIA retained the right to hold and interrogate prisoners - despite the international outcry over the camps, and over the US's practice of "rendition", whereby it secretly hands over detainees to their home countries, where they are likely to be tortured, and worse.
Whatever the outcome, the Republican rift threatens to undermine claims by the Bush administration that it has shown a steady hand on security matters and that Americans should should trust it, not the Democrats, when they vote in November.
- 1 Ninety gaffes in ninety years
- 2 Cameron's 'drunk tanks' are dangerous, say police
- 3 Can you master a language in a weekend?
- 4 Rothschild loses libel case, and reveals secret world of money and politics
- 5 No secularism please, we're British
- 6 Apple admits it has a human rights problem
- 7 You couldn't make it up: Sun staff hope Strasbourg can save them from Murdoch
- 1 Ninety gaffes in ninety years
- 2 Spotify: 1 million plays, £108 return
- 3 Apple admits it has a human rights problem
- 4 Rothschild loses libel case, and reveals secret world of money and politics
- 5 Rangers future could be bright says administrator
- 6 MP faces charges over Nazi stag night
- 7 Six Grammys, five years off: Adele puts love before career
- 8 No secularism please, we're British
- 9 Mark Steel: If religion is 'marginal', I'm the Pope
- 10 Lightning kills an entire football team
Free trial of new Independent iPad app
Get your daily dose of the best of British journalism, sponsored by American Airlines
Amazing restaurant offers
Three glasses of free champagne and a special menu at 46 top London restaurants.
Latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Career Services
Day In a Page
How an abortion divided America
Did they all live happily ever after? That's up to you...




Comments