Translated material
With a drill at his temple
CIA to be held accountable for brutal interrogations of terrorists
Former US Vice President Dick Cheney yesterday defended CIA officers who used dubious methods to interrogate terrorism suspects. He said the interrogators "saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks." Therefore, they “deserve our gratitude” and should not become “a target for political investigation or persecution.”Since 2002, Mr. Cheney said, interrogations have assisted in virtually every capture of al-Qaeda members and associates. He disapproved of current President Barack Obama's decision to ban harsh interrogations and his order to conduct a criminal investigation into the CIA's actions. According to Dick Cheney, these steps show why today "many Americans doubt the ability of the current administration to take responsibility for national security."
The scandal began with the recent release in the United States of a report by the CIA inspector general, drawn up five years ago, describing the tactics and interrogation techniques used by intelligence officers after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on prisoners who were considered carriers of “particularly important information.” The details outraged liberals and human rights advocates. CIA officers staged a mock execution of one prisoner in front of another for the purpose of intimidation. Another defendant, Abdel Nasiri, accused of involvement in the explosion of the USS Cole in 2000, was threatened with an unloaded pistol and an electric drill. And the most famous captive, considered the main organizer of the September 11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, was told that his children “would be immediately destroyed” if anything else happened in America.
The CIA inspector general did not approve of these measures and called them "illegal, improvised and inhumane." However, the previous administration did not pay attention to these objections. President Obama ordered a new investigation, sparking a fierce public debate about how to deal with terrorists and terrorist suspects. The White House has taken away the CIA's monopoly right to interrogate high-value suspects; now this will be handled by a team of investigators made up of specialists from various intelligence and law enforcement agencies. It will be based at FBI headquarters and will be under the direct supervision of the President's National Security Council (NSC). The field regulations of the US Army ground forces are recognized as the main legal basis for interrogations.
It was understood that the perpetrators would not be held criminally liable - after all, they acted on directives, instructions and hints coming from the White House, the National Security Service, the Pentagon, the Department of Justice and the FBI. Barack Obama and his advisers have repeatedly said they don't want to sow uncertainty and anxiety among intelligence officials -- they have promised to "look forward" and not focus on condemning the interrogation tactics endorsed by the George W. Bush administration.
However, at the beginning of the week, the US administration ordered Justice Secretary Eric Holder to begin a criminal investigation into the circumstances of the “inhumane interrogations” - this refers to cases where the CIA officers who conducted the interrogations exceeded their authority. The initial investigation has been entrusted to prosecutor John Durham, who is already studying the circumstances surrounding the destruction of videotapes of interrogations of the most important prisoners by the CIA. CIA Director Leon Panetta sent an email to his subordinates assuring them that he would stand by "officers who did what their country asked and acted within their legal boundaries." According to him, the president has the same position.
Lawyer Jeffrey Smith of the venerable law firm Arnold & Porter published an op-ed in The Washington Post outlining the case against criminal charges against CIA interrogators. He argues that the interrogation technique was approved at the highest level, that no attempt has been made to address it since the appearance of the relevant report in 2004, while returning to this topic could jeopardize the work of intelligence officers.
A former CIA employee, who wished to keep his name secret, in a conversation with Vremya Novostei, called the decision of one administration to initiate criminal cases against career officers for their actions under another administration “ridiculous”: “The CIA has just recovered from personnel shortages and regained its self-respect. Now everything could return to the early 2000s, when the best specialists will look for other jobs, and there will be no influx of fresh forces due to incomprehensible political leapfrog and attacks on people who were doing their job to protect America.”