McCain Floor Statement on Detainee Amendments

Senator Graham has now introduced his amendment that would define "unlawful enemy combatant" for terms of detention, interrogation, and disposition of trials; Senator Warner has said he'll support it. I have learned that Senator McCain introduced his amendments earlier in the day, and his statement of introduction is now online here. I wanted to post some excerpts from the speech that I found particularly relevant:

"To fight terrorism it is obvious that we must obtain intelligence, but we have to ensure that it is reliable and acquired in a way that is humane. To do otherwise not only offends our national morals, but undermines our efforts to protect the nation’s security. Abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our honorable country in the eyes of millions. Mistreatment of our prisoners also endangers U.S. service members who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. ...

The amendment I am offering would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody. The Manual has been developed by the Executive Branch for its own uses, and a new edition, written to take into account the needs of the war on terror and with a new classified annex is due to be issued soon. My amendment would not set the Field Manual in stone – it could be changed at any time. But it would require that the Congressional defense committees be informed 30 days prior to a revision. And of course, the revisions would have to be consistent with our laws and treaty obligations. ...

The advantage of setting a standard for interrogation based on the Field Manual is to cut down on the significant level of confusion that still exists with respect to which interrogation techniques are allowed. ...

Confusion results in the kinds of messes that will once again give America a black eye around the world, and will make the war on terror that much harder to fight. We need a clear, simple, and consistent standard, and we have it in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation. That’s not just my opinion, but that of many more distinguished military legal minds than mine. I would refer you to a letter expressing strong support for this amendment, signed by eleven former high-ranking military officers, including RADM John Hutson and RADM Don Guter, who each served as the Navy’s top JAG, and LTGEN Claudia Kennedy, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Army Intelligence. These and other distinguished officers believe that the abuses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and elsewhere took place in part because our soldiers received ambiguous instructions, which in some cases authorized treatment that went beyond what the Field Manual allows, and that, had the Manual been followed across the board, we could have avoided the prisoner abuse scandal. Mr. President, wouldn’t any of us do whatever we could to have prevented that? I say let’s pass this amendment and follow the Manual consistently from now on. Our service members deserve no less.

Mr. President, let me mention one other provision of this amendment. It simply requires that each individual detained in a DOD facility who is a national of a foreign country be registered with the International Committee of the Red Cross. That’s it. Just registered. This will help us eliminate the problem of 'ghost detainees' we faced in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, in which 'other government agencies' held unregistered detainees in a facility operated by our military. I believe this provision to be just basic common sense, and I can hardly see how anyone could object, though I don’t doubt the sensitivity of my colleagues.

Mr. President, let me just close by noting that I hold no brief for the prisoners. I do hold a brief for the reputation of the United States of America. We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise, as I have noted, undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation. We are not simply any other country. We stand for something more in the world – a moral mission, one of freedom and democracy and human rights at home and abroad. We are better than these terrorists, and we will we win. The enemy we fight has no respect for human life or human rights. They don’t deserve our sympathy. But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are. These are the values that distinguish us from our enemies.

President Bush understands that the war on terror is ultimately a battle of ideas, a battle we will win by spreading and standing firmly for the values of decency, democracy, and the rule of law. I stand with him in this commitment. And by applying to ourselves the basic standards we rightly preach to others, we will only increase our effectiveness as the world’s ultimate champion of liberty."

I am hard pressed to try and figure out the case against these amendments. I really am. Why the veto threat, President Bush?

There won't be any votes tonight, but they may come tomorrow at some point. Stay tuned. Senator Graham's statement of introduction was quite well-phrased as well, and I'll post that if I can find the text.