Abuse of Prisoners in Iraq

Abuse of defenseless prisoners is gratuitous barbarity, rarely accomplishing anything but gratification of the sadistic impulses of some low-level functionary. It certainly has no military value in a block-to-block war against irregular bands of radical zealots. It is the sort of thing good old-fashioned firing squads are best suited to deter and redress.

If the president and various general officers are sincere in their expressions of abhorrence, then a string of courts martial will ensue. Dishonorable discharges will not suffice. Prisoner abuse is a war crime, not a matter of administrative discipline. Prison time is called for.

Much was made of Saddam Hussein's torture chambers when we went into Iraq. Now, President Bush is reduced to distinguishing our prison treatment from Hussein's by saying that, unlike Hussein, we investigate our torturers. So much for superior Western values.

JEREMIAH A. DENTON III

Virginia Beach

•

The Post built a very strong case for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's responsibility for the atrocities that occurred in the prison systems in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ["Mr. Rumsfeld's Responsibility," editorial, May 6]. But it stopped just short of stating that he should resign. I would not be so circumspect: He should resign, and do so quickly, so the United States can demonstrate that this type of treatment is not and will not be tolerated.

KEVIN J. BRODERICK

Alexandria

•

"Mr. Rumsfeld's Responsibility" incorrectly states that the "Pentagon ruled that the United States would no longer be bound by the Geneva Conventions." It is wrong to imply that the abuses at Abu Ghraib occurred in whole or in part because the United States has ruled itself as not bound by the Geneva Conventions, because no such ruling has been made.

It is U.S. policy to comply fully with all U.S. laws -- including the Constitution, federal statutes and our treaty obligations -- in the conduct of military activities. Both the United States and Iraq have long been parties to the Geneva Conventions, and the United States is bound to observe the conventions in the war for the liberation of Iraq. The United States seeks to comply fully with its convention obligations with respect to prisoners of war and security prisoners in Iraq. In recent days, horrific abuses have come to light, but there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the United States fully recognizes its obligations under the Geneva Conventions. Moreover, the Department of Defense is conducting a full investigation of this matter and will hold accountable anyone found responsible.

With respect to the war on terror, the president determined in February 2002 -- with the advice of the attorney general, the secretary of state, the secretary of defense and others -- that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to al Qaeda and that, under the Third Geneva Convention, Taliban detainees are not entitled to prisoner of war status. At the same time, the president ordered that U.S. armed forces treat detainees humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of the Third Geneva Convention. Nothing about these decisions concerning al Qaeda and the Taliban provided any license or encouragement for what occurred at Abu Ghraib.

As the president has said, the abuses at Abu Ghraib are abhorrent and completely unacceptable. All Americans, and especially members of our armed forces, share in the outrage and sadness of knowing that abuses occurred.

ALBERTO GONZALES

Counsel to the President

The White House

Washington