RETHINKING TRIBUNALS

Despite the courageous revolt by four U.S. Republican senators, Congress may still give President Bush some version of the approval he demands for his secret network of foreign “alternative” interrogation techniques and military tribunals for prosecution of suspected terrorists. It’s an open question whether a bill that emerges will allow interrogators to continue to employ waterboarding or simulated drowning and other methods that amount to torture. And it may permit tribunals that deprive defendants of normal constitutional protections.

Still, the president has had to give ground on these crucial issues. He originally asserted the right, under his “inherent powers” as commander-in-chief, to act alone without any checks and balances. Now he pleads for the congressional authority that the Supreme Court has required.

His defense of torture and the tribunals is full of holes. In his news conference Friday, he dodged a flat question as to whether he was “basically seeking support for torture, coerced evidence and secret hearings.” He continued to insist on the value of questioning suspected al-Qaida leaders, although The New York Times had reported a week earlier that intelligence information extracted from them was already known, as shown in the

9-11 Commission report and in the federal indictment of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker.

However the current debates over torture and tribunals come out, they are part of a Bush administration pattern of war making that includes the unprovoked invasion of Iraq, the doctrine of preemptive war against perceived enemies, eavesdropping without warrant, manipulation of intelligence, mishandling of the occupation, wholesale roundups of suspected terrorists, and their incarceration for years without charge.

Picking at the details of the tribunals and interrogation methods is not enough. Both parties in Congress should more aggressively question the means used by the Bush administration to make war and the results of those methods. Five years after 9-11, the public deserves a thorough assessment of what has worked -the absence of attacks on U.S. soil is one important piece of evidence – and what has not. The chaos in Iraq and widespread antipathy toward the United States are two others.

Congress held back far too long, persuaded by false intelligence and intimidated by accusations that critics lacked patriotism and were traitors to their country.

When a presidency falters, it is up to Congress to take a lead in setting matters straight.

As a starter, Congress should reject the tribunal system and the secret network of torture camps. Let even suspected senior al-Qaida operatives face their accusers, hear the evidence against them and undergo trial by either military court martial or the federal system of criminal justice. In short, Congress should lead the way toward peace and justice.