CIA Agents Were Not Following "Orders"by: Daniel De GrootSat Apr 18, 2009 at 16:11 |
| Given what Paul has been discussing here today, I want to make a correction to the general debate about whether to prosecute the CIA operatives who directly participated in torturing detainees. The CIA is a civilian agency, and that means its employees are not subject to prosecution for refusing to obey instructions (not "orders") from superiors in the agency. They can quit, like anyone of conscience when asked to do something in conflict with their personal ethics. Inside I will elaborate on the implications of CIA's civilian status. I believe it only strengthens the case for prosecution. |
| Daniel De Groot :: CIA Agents Were Not Following "Orders" |
| The CIA was created by the National Security Act of 1947. It replaced the (too-blandly named) wartime military Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and was deliberately concieved of as a civilian, non-law enforcement agency. ... The point of all this is that for 60 years, Congress has been very deliberate in trying to maintain a strong level of civilian control over the process and activities of intelligence gathering. This is a vital wall of seperation, due to the great power an agency like CIA can wield. I'm sure the example of the KGB and the domestic abuses of other totalitarian intelligence agencies was a large part of Congress' reasoning in keeping CIA in the realm of dirty civies. This isn't a minor matter, as from a pragmatic standpoint of intelligence gathering there is much to be said for consolidating all intelligence gathering into the military or FBI. FBI is technically civilian, but the powers of domestic federal law enforcement are dangerous enough without adding spying to the mix. All of this was to both protect society from CIA, and to protect the CIA. CIA agents cannot be "ordered" to do anything in the legal sense, since they are mere civilian employees of a federal agency. They can quit and should do so when instructed to do things contrary to the Laws of War and numerous international treaties. These aren't scared 18 year old kids being intimidated into following Lt Calley into atrocity, nor do they go through months of indoctrination into a culture of rigid discipline as is done in the military. They are independent moral agents, and should not get any kind of pass for this. http://www.openleft.com/diary/12912/cia-agents-were-not-following-orders |
Sunday, April 19, 2009
CIA Agents Were Not Following "Orders"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.
ReplyDeleteAs a corollary
ReplyDeleteI think pretty much everyone would agree that prosecuting the agents who did the torturing without prosecuting their superiors who gave the order/directive is a bad idea. Under the circumstances, it could be argued that unless Bush and Cheney are to be prosecuted, nobody should be prosecuted. I think there are higher-ups lower than Bush and Cheney who are 100% culpable and should be prosecuted even if Bush and Cheney are not - for instance, who made the request for legal clarification regarding the precise methods of "non-torture"? But if only the CIA agents who actually carried out the torture were to be prosecuted, that would be a travesty.
This really is the reason for the international court. It does turn out to be quite difficult for a country to prosecute its own war criminals. And regarding the Nuremberg comparison, it's worth noting that the Nuremberg Principles all refer to international law - the facts of the case at the time being that the criminals were to be prosecuted and punished in an international court because it was deemed unlikely that they could be prosecuted in German courts.
It would be nice if Obama took a hard line on Bush administration criminal behavior, but I'll be perfectly happy if he simply avoids too much obstruction of international courts that decide to weigh in.