This week news broke of abuses by American troops of Iraqi prisoners, with photographs and eye-witness accounts that were initially greeted with some skepticism, but later great concern. It seems that crimes against human rights have been systematically commited in Coalition-managed prisons in Iraq. The International Committee of the Red Cross have stated that they have known about this for some time and have been expressing concerns to the USA for some time, and have also grave concerns about the actions of British forces.
Donald Rumsfeld has testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee and apologised at length for these barbaric acts and, tellingly, said that they "occurred on my watch as secretary of defense. I am accountable for them and I take full responsibility."
Full responsibility for (alleged) torture, rape, murder and other horrific acts on prisoners? I doubt Rumsfeld will be held fully accountable.
A US commentator on Radio 4's PM program today said that the acts were unconscionable, but were still nothing compared to the atrocities committed in the name of Saddam Hussain. Surely, if this war is to be justified on moral grounds (as is currently the case), the behaviour of the Coalition forces must be cleaner than clean and nobody should defend themselves by saying that "at least we're not as bad as Saddam."
And what will happen if it turns out (as is looking increasingly likely) that British forces were complicit (or even active) in the abuse of prisoners?
