George Washington and the Ethics of Occupation
Posted on: October 8, 2007 9:23 AM, by Ed Brayton
I found this quote on Andrew Sullivan's blog:
"Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner] ... I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause... for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country," -
George Washington, charge to the Northern Expeditionary Force, Sept. 14, 1775.
...
It still applies quite well, of course, to our government's behavior
in Iraq. Like the Canadians and Indians whose treatment Washington was
concerned about, the Iraqi people have been caught up in a battle that
they did not choose. And just as Washington was right that ill
treatment of the Canadians and Indians in 1775 would bring disgrace and
ruin and would turn their hearts and minds against us, the same is true
of the Iraqis today.
What a shame, then, that instead of a commander in chief who demands
that those he sends in to battle behave with honor at all times we have
one who plays legalistic games with the definition of torture. A
commander in chief who contracts tens of thousands of private soldiers
to do the work of the military and insists that they not be subject to
any rule of law, Iraqi or American.
George Washington demanded "severe and exemplary punishment" for any
soldier who harms the person or property of innocent people in lands
occupied by our military. Today, we have a government that sits idly by
while a Blackwater soldier gets drunk and kills the bodyguard of a high
ranking Iraqi official. And what was the State Department's primary
concern when the perpetrator was quickly whisked out of the country,
escaping any possible punishment for his actions? Here was their concern:
Within 36 hours after the shooting, the State Department
had allowed Blackwater to transport the Blackwater contractor out of
Iraq. The State Department Charge d'Affaires recommended that
Blackwater make a "sizeable payment" and an "apology" to "avoid this
whole thing becoming even worse." The Charge d'Affaires suggested a
$250,000 payment to the guard's family, but the Department's Diplomatic
Security Service said this was too much and could cause Iraqis to "try
to get killed." In the end, the State Department and Blackwater agreed
on a $15,000 payment.
Did they demand swift and severe punishment? No. Their only concern
was that it was bad for PR and needed to be contained. And God forbid
you place the value of that man's life at more than $15,000 because
those crazy Iraqis will start jumping in front of the bullets fired by
every drunk American they can find. That's exactly the time to
negotiate a lower fee, don't you think?
I guess it's a good thing there was no Blackwater in George
Washington's day. A good thing for Blackwater, that is; a sad day for
America to come face to face with how far our leaders are today from
what they once were. The shame, disgrace and ruin that Washington
warned against has come as a result of this administration's contempt
for the rule of law and concern only for covering their ass rather than
doing the right thing.
(link Dispatches from the Culture Wars)
Recent Comments