Gen. Wesley Clark made his first appearance as a member of the
UCLA International Institute on Monday to discuss changes in U.S.
policy regarding the Geneva Conventions.
Clark, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nominee in
2004, led faculty in a discussion on current legislation that would
change the way in which the U.S. follows the Geneva Conventions,
the treaties that guide humanitarian aspects of international
law.
The bill would protect detainees from blatant abuses, but does
not require that they receive legal counsel. It would also bar
detainees from protesting their detentions in federal courts. The
legislation would only apply to those selected by the military for
prosecution.
Clark voiced his dissatisfaction with the legislation, which was
sent to President Bush for signature last week.
Clark first questioned the practicality of using extreme
techniques to get information from terrorists.
“If you put people under pressure, some will talk,”
Clark said, but warned that more cohesive units are harder to
break, calling al-Qaeda tough and hardened.
“What we have found … is you have to get people to talk
voluntarily,” he said.
He gave the example of a technique used by Yemen with captured
al-Qaeda operatives. There they have had some success in
“deprogramming” terrorists, Clark said.
The Yemenites brought in “imams,” Muslim religious
leaders, to try and reason with the terrorists that they capture
and dispute the means and aims of the terrorists, he said.
Clark said that to his knowledge, no such similar attempts were
made in Guantanamo Bay.
“I think it would be very smart if we did something like
this,” he said.
Supporters of the legislation say the Geneva Conventions are too
limiting to fight current threats.
The legislation received extensive support in both the House and
Senate.
The House endorsed Bush’s plan 253-168, and the Senate
passed a nearly identical bill Thursday by 65-34. The House then
voted to send the Senate version to the president.
“In this new era of threats, where the stark and sober
reality is that America must confront international terrorists
committed to the destruction of our way of life, this bill is
absolutely necessary,” said Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.
But UCLA law Professor Jack Beard said the Geneva Conventions
are not as limiting as the bill’s supporters claim.
“The Geneva Conventions has been a part of a political
rhetoric that implies it requires a country to lose,” Beard
said.
The Geneva Conventions are not as weak as the bill supporters
imply and do include a separate process for unlawful combatants, he
said. They do not enjoy the rights of the prisoner-of-war status
given to lawful combatants, he said.
Clark spoke against the movement away from a strict
interpretation of the Geneva Conventions on the basis of moral
legitimacy as well.
Following the Geneva Conventions prevents “peremptory
battlefield justice,” he said.
Clark is a retired four-star general with 34 years of military
experience. He held the rank of supreme allied commander of NATO
and negotiated peace in Kosovo in the 1990s.
Stepping away from the Geneva Conventions is also moving out
from the “ethical umbrella” around it, he said.
Adhering to the Conventions gave the United States both moral
legitimacy and protected soldiers around the globe, he said.
“We thought we were in uniform because we stood for
something,” Clark said.
He emphasized the importance of policy that maintains allies to
fight terrorism, saying that there is no other country in the world
that supports al-Qaeda.
Clark plans to spend his time at UCLA taking part in similar
discussions and sitting in on classes, he said. He plans to teach a
seminar, though not this year.
Clark does not plan to return to campus until the end of the
month.
With reports from Bruin wire services.