What We Can Learn from the Lessons of Abu Ghraib

In 2004, the world was shocked after accusations that US military personnel had abused Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison. Graphic pictures were shown as evidence of what the US troops were doing in Iraq. This event tarnished their image and had violent and long last effects to other Americans and supporters of Iraqi democracy. The questions posed in this paper are who is actually responsible for these crimes and how can these events be prevented in the future. What events lead up to these horrible acts to even allow for these horrible acts to occur and could they have been prevented?

What Really Happened at Abu Ghraib?

On April 28, 2004, CBS News released graphic pictures of US soldiers posing with naked and degraded Iraqi prisoners (Carter 2004:20). Within days of the pictures being released, more and more stories and accusations of prisoner abuse kept surfacing. Over 300 reports of abuse where filed around this time by Iraqi and Afghani prisoners against the United States military (21).

The main question that has been raised by all of these complaints and the general idea that it happened was who should take or share responsibility for these events? After September 11^th and the start of the war on terror, the United States agreed that any person taken prisoner would be protected by the Geneva Convention provisions (Carter 2004:22). These provisions were created to protect prisoners of war from being treated inhumanly and to keep them from being tortured. The main problem with this was that most information on terrorism comes from human intelligence instead of surveillance or other types of electronic means (23).

The main way of extracting human intelligence is through interrogation and the officers and leaders of the United States saw the need for these tactics to be applied (Carter, 2004:23). General Geoffrey Miller was selected to find a solution that could leave open the interrogations and overhaul Abu Ghraib into an effective prison (Mazzetti, et al. 2004:¶3). The main problem he faced was overcrowded, understaffed, and under trained military personnel stationed at the prisons (¶4). His plans on how to interrogate prisoners were adopted by the top officer in Iraq and set into place (¶4). His plan was not clearly planned or laid out which caused confusion, had no clear chain of command, and even allowed for some types of physical abuse during interrogations (Olsson, 2005:102).

Effects the Abu Ghraib Scandal on the World

Many people only see this scandal as a slight tarnish on the records of some American troops. They do not realize the effects these horrible pictures had and what they caused. These pictures of the unethical behavior of these soldiers enraged many Islamic militants and turned some allies against us. Recruiting for militant groups fighting against the United States spiked after the pictures were released (Mazzetti et al., 2004: ¶7). The beheading of Nick Berg, the kidnapped American, was blamed on these events (¶6). His death was supposedly in retribution for the crimes they committed against their "brothers and sisters". These pictures and actions against these prisoners were so morally deviant and degrading to their culture that people that normally would not join these groups are willing to give their lives to kill people of a culture that would allow these things to happen.

Even though they may not have realized it since they were only doing their job for the military, these soldiers were also representing the entire security profession. This area has been in high demand since the start of the war on terror, but what effects did this have on trying to find qualified people to fill these positions? Would you want to take a job at a prison if people think that all you do is beat people and stack them into human pyramids all day? I would not like that image cast upon myself.

Two people court-martialed in the Abu Ghraib scandal were prison guards that came from prisons with known abuse problems in their civilian lives (Marks & Wood, 2004: ¶4). Both people came from prisons that had known leadership issues and severe overcrowding, the same main causes that led to these abuses (¶5). These issues show that there is a problem in the overall structure of the prison systems that need to be addressed. For good recruiting and a positive image of the profession any type of abuse needs to be prevented before it happens to keep the image of those correctional officers or guards that do not commit these crimes.

The world media has also placed a large amount of attention on this scandal. It is reported that just the New York Times ran 47 front page stories on the scandal between April and August of 2004 (O'Reilly, 2004). Extensive television coverage has also been given to the incident. Very few Americans have not seen these images. The O'Reilly Factor took an interested view on the situation and decided not to air the pictures even though they were shown on Fox News. O'Reilly stated on his August 10, 2004, show that, "Now you may remember The Factor is one of the few news organizations that did not run the abuse photos. I described them to you, but because we are seen in dozens of foreign countries, I didn't want to give our enemies abroad any more reason to harm Americans. In other words, I didn't want to incite violence against this country."

I believe O'Reilly had a valiant point by trying to save American's from this disgrace, but I do not believe that the viewers had not already seen the pictures. The media should be told the truth and allow the American public to know what was the cause of this stain on their personal records. All Americans have been targeted since these photos were released and the public should at least be told who and what were the problems that lead to this branding as infidels.

Who is to Blame?

After bickering and passing the blame around from everyone to the low ranking military members that were in the pictures, to their immediate supervisors, to the generals in charge of all Iraqi troops, and even the president how far does the responsibility for these actions go? How many people knew these crimes were being committed and did nothing to stop them? Were the people in charge guilty of negligence since they allowed these things to occur?

Even two years after the investigations have been started the answer isn't much clearer. All of the criminal charges so far that have been handed out are to the immediate soldiers that were in the pictures (Sappenfield, 2006: ¶3). The highest ranking official that has received a criminal charge was that of staff sergeant (¶8). Brigadier General Janis Karpinski and Colonel Thomas Pappas, the two officers in direct charge of Abu Ghraib, were given nonjudical punishments but since they are not public record most people are not aware they have even been given (¶10).

There have been many reasons given as to why higher officials and personnel have not been criminally or negligently charged. William Eckhard stated that people are not directly responsible for an act that has occurred simply because they hold a position of authority (Sappenfield 2006: ¶11). General John Abazaid disagrees replying, "Officers of the United States military are responsible. Every officer is responsible for what his or her unit does or fails to do" (¶2)

I believe from all of these arguments that higher officials should also take responsibility for how their actions, or inactions, led to these prisoners to be degraded. The higher commanding personnel such as Generals Sanchez and Miller should be held responsible for their guidelines they approved and wrote. Their lack of vision and the effects of their lack of planning were the direct cause of these actions that have made Americans look barbaric. Brigadier General Karpinski and Colonel Pappas both believe that Miller is the direct cause and catalyst of the abuse (Mazzetti et al., 2004: ¶9). I realize they were trying to do their best with not enough soldiers and inadequate prisons, but the military should be trained and ready to undertake any situation they would be placed into. If the troops were not trained to do their jobs maybe the entire chain of command for the military should be reevaluated since they have been at relative peace for over a decade and have had plenty of time to prepare for their next possible missions. If this was a leading cause then the Secretary of Defense needs to take a long, hard look at how he is mismanaging the military, but I do not believe that makes him criminally liable for the abuse. Morally and ethically he should be repentant, but he did not break any laws.

What Can Be Done to Fix This Mess?

As we are still fighting the war and terror and still have the need for human intelligence, freshly drafted and clearly stated directions and chain of command needs to be constructed. Without these, no one is still going to trust the American troops to help them. All units or personnel that have been charged in the scandal need to be removed from the prison whether they are directly involved or not. Jobs need to be shifted to where those people have nothing to do with the prisoner system. Fresh troops need to take over the prisons as well as new administration and commanders to lead them. All of these people need to be fully trained on what is and what is not allowed to happen inside of those prison walls.

Training, supervision, and explicit instructions are the best way to keep unfortunate events from happening. A written plan of disciple should be included in the training so that troops or leaders that are tempted to abuse or humiliate a prisoner will have prior knowledge of what will happen to them if they are caught. A stiff enough penalty should be placed on them to deter them. All training should involve the ethical and moral standards that a soldier of the United States should uphold since they are a small, usually unwanted in the area, representative sample of the entire country.

Any crime that is committed to a prisoner and can be proven should be charged as the same criminal act that would given a street person. If they hit a detainee in an abusive manner they should be charged with assault and any military person that rapes or sexually abuses a prisoner should be treated the same as any other rapist. They should not be allowed different sentences or punishments just because they were in a war situation. If they commit these crimes out of stress or hatred they should also be given counseling.

Another recommendation I have is that private contractors should not be allowed for any military interrogation or investigation processes. It has been shown that at least one private contractor hired to help in the interrogation process directly caused some of the events for which the some of the soldiers have received court-martials (Hartung, 2004:6). These private citizens can not be charged of wrong doing by a military court. This leaves them to be fairly free to do whatever they want.

Any policies that are created or implemented need have a through review process. They should be re-evaluated at least every six months to one year to make sure the most effective methods are being used. This way any problems that arise can be fixed and keep our troops out of temptation and extra stress. This whole basic process seems to have been neglected before Abu Ghraib and a cause of the troubles.

Conclusions

Less than desirable working conditions along with substandard supervision and preparation were the major causes that lead to the abuse of the Iraqi prisoners. With photographic evidence of the lower level soldiers with the prisoners and lack of a clearly defined chain of command to show exactly who was supposed to be in charge of what in Iraq, it is unlikely that anyone that was not directly involved in the abuses will ever be forced to take responsibility for their part in the crimes. This is unfortunate for those innocent people that have to deal with the consequences and for the long lasted stain that will be in place on the United States military. Clearly defined directions and plans should now be constructed and put in place so that history does not repeat itself.

References

Carter, P. (2004). The Road to Abu Ghraib. Washington Monthly, 36(11), 20-29. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from Wilson Select Plus Database (0431500164005).

Hartung, W. (2004). Outsourcing is Hell. Nation, 278(22), 5-6, 22. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from Wilson Select Plus Database (0416301569004).

Marks, A. & Wood, D. (2004, May 20). In some US prisons, echoes of Abu Ghraib; Complaints of prisoner abuse crop up at home as well as in Iraq - and may now get attention. Christian Science Monitor, pp. USA 2. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from ProQuest Database (638885251).

Mazzetti, M., Barnes, J.E., Pound, E.T., Kaplan, D.E., & Robinson, L. (2004). Inside the Iraq Prison Scandal. U.S. News & World Report, 136(18), 18-34. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from Wilson Select Plus Database (BRDG04125397).

Olsson, K. (2005). The Buck Stops Nowhere. Texas Monthly, 33(4), 98-104. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from Wilson Select Plus Database (0509100398009).

O'Reilly, B. (2004, August 10). N.Y. Times Buries Abu Ghraib Latest. Fox News. Retrieved October 16, 2006, from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2833,128599,00.html.

Sappenfield, M. (2006, March 29). For Abu Ghraib, a limited prosecution; Responsibility for the crimes has fallen almost entirely on the lower ranks - which can be typical. Christian Science Monitor, pp. USA 3. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from ProQuest Database (1011242801).