Tag: international law

Torture Awareness Month: Remember the victims, honor the resisters

Posted on by kathiemm
Torments of the Slaves
Image in public domain

The United Nations General Assembly has designated June 26 of each year as International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.

Today, June 27, 2011,  and in subsequent posts, we want to honor several military leaders in the United States and elsewhere who have spoken out against torture, labeling it appropriately morally offensive, a violation of human rights, and a defiance of international law.

For his work in exposing the myths regarding torture and urging reform of U.S. interrogation practices, we honor Matthew Alexander, a former Special Operations pilot who saw combat in Bosnia and Kosovo, volunteered to go to Iraq as a senior interrogator, and refused to participate in the use of torture that was rampant there (See 2008 Washington Post article).

Alexander’s book, How to Break a Terrorist: The U.S. Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq, will be reviewed in an upcoming post.

For his book “The Fight for the High Ground: The U.S. Army and Interrogation During Operation Iraqi Freedom, May 2003 – April 2004,” we honor Major Douglas A. Pryer, who criticizes the policies and training that led to the abuse of detainees in Iraq during the first year of the post 9/11 Iraq War. We will review his book in an upcoming post.

We also want to honor the ordinary enlisted men and women who have spoken out against torture. In particular, see the article about Ray Bennett (a pseudonym) and the video by David DeBatto.

 

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

Humiliation: Terry Jones and the deadliest of emotions

Posted on by kathiemm
Poster of Terry Jones: Intolerance breeds hatred
Poster by Eric Gulliver, 2011

If you have ever been deeply humiliated—by a schoolyard bully, members of a gang, even a loved one—you know what feelings of powerlessness and rage can beset you. Humiliation is exactly what was done by Pastor Terry Jones when he followed through on his threat to burn the Qu’ran last week.

Sadly, Jones has achieved many of his probable goals: he has proven himself able to defy that bugaboo, the government; he has gained notoriety as a crusader for the supremacy of his hate-filled form of Christianity; he has incited the violence he knew he would incite, thereby making a few small groups of Muslims look like vicious animals.

The dangers of humiliation are many:

  • Amnesty International has designated humiliation as psychological torture, along with sleep deprivation, isolation, and mock executions.
  • Efforts at humiliating the enemy in times of armed conflict can also take a markedly physical form, as when the armed forces of one side rape the women of the other side.

Humiliation has been widely recognized as an experience that can lead to many forms of violent confrontation, including war and terrorism.  For example:

  • Many historians believe that humiliation of the German people at the end of World War I  led to the rise of Hitler and World War II. Allied powers were sufficiently convinced by this argument to prevent a similar humiliation of the defeated powers after World War II.
  • Perceptions of historical injustice and humiliation have been identified as factors leading to suicide bombing and other forms of terrorism. When individuals and groups believe that they have been repeatedly and unjustifiably humiliated, they may decide they have nothing to lose by committing violent and punitive acts of revenge.

Let us all work to be sure that Pastor Terry Jones does not achieve what is likely his ultimate goal–a genocidal attack on Muslims.  Let us hope that he is jailed for the rest of his life for violating international law and the dignity of adherents to Islam.

Let us also consider alternative ways to cope with people who frighten and anger us. I will have some suggestions on that topic in Thursday’s post.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

Using war to stop or undo harm (Just war, part 5)

Posted on by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we once again welcome guest contributor Dr. Michael Corgan, for his ongoing series on just war.]

Animated image comparing two columns of dots
Animation by Sbyrnes321; in public domain. From Wikimedia Commons.

The idea of proportionality is one of the more comprehensive notions in both the international laws governing war and in just war theory. Proportionality applies both to the resort to war and the conduct of a war, however justly or legally entered into.

In terms of international law, the only just or legal cause for war is self-defense against aggression. But the UN Charter in particular countenances not just the repulsion of aggression and punishment for its having been used. In just war theory, proportionality places no such requirements on those repelling aggression. War can stop or undo the harm but not be an excuse for vengeance or aggrandizement.

Instead, proportionality in just war theory implies that only war can correct the wrong suffered. The wrong to be corrected must be grave. Insults to national pride or need to maintain reputation are insufficient reasons to use war. So, too, for example would be economic harm that does not materially destroy a national economy.

Weighing scale
Image in public domain

War, even a just war, always involves the loss of innocent life and destruction of things that are simply too near the battle area. The inevitability of this so-called  “collateral damage” means that war is necessarily a blunt instrument. This reality undergirds the just war notion of proportionality.

Consider the current conflict in Libya. In your opinion, would war be justified according to the just war principle of proportionality?

Michael T. Corgan, Associate Chair and Associate Professor of International Relations, Boston University

Responsible democracy

Posted on by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we welcome the second of several contributions by our guest contributor, Dr. Majed Ashy. And be sure to listen to his recent interview on Internet radio; just click on the sidebar links.]

Egyptian protests, January 25, 2011
Egyptian protests. Photo by Muhammad Ghafari (licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic; from Wikimedia Commons)

Some international stereotypes about the Middle East might be convenient, but can mislead those who hold them, lead to inappropriate responses, and serve as obstacles to further development in the Middle East.

It is important to acknowledge that relative freedoms already exist in several Arab countries such as the Gulf States; many of these countries adhere to Islamic laws in various degrees and many have experienced remarkable economic and social development in the past 40 years, along with good and responsible relations with many other nations.

I suggest that there is an international need to develop what I call Responsible Democracy. Responsible democracy would require that people take their freedoms seriously and understand the consequences of their choices and political participation. It entails gathering information from multiple sources on the issues at hand, and attending to principles of morality, peace, and international law before making political choices. Successful governments adapt to and respect the needs and the development of their peoples.

Responsible democracy rejects intellectual laziness, stereotyping, and adolescent tendency towards screaming, adventures, taking sides, fighting, and winning. It is based on a healthy understanding of politics, citizenship, patriotism, international law, one’s own place in the world and history, and recognition of how the world and its people are interlinked.

I think the Middle East is evolving towards responsible democracies driven by internal forces of morality, culture, and history. Some of its governments have been reforming wisely, gradually, and peacefully towards that achievement.

I believe that a fair form of government that respects, takes seriously, and responds to its peoples’ needs and aspirations, as well as their natural rights, and their historical and cultural developments, is a prerequisite for mental health. In turn, mental health can contribute to responsible democracy and governance, and to international peace.

Majed Ashy, Ph.D., assistant professor of psychology at Merrimack College and a research fellow in psychiatry at McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School