Friday, February 22, 2002

Behind-the-Scenes Clash Led Bush to Reverse Himself on Applying Geneva Conventions
President Bush's decision this month to reverse himself and apply the Geneva Conventions to the Afghan war came after the Pentagon and State Department lined up against the administration's top lawyers, senior administration officials now say.

Senior officials also disclosed for the first time that NATO allies were so concerned with Mr. Bush's initial decision to reject the conventions that Britain and France warned they might not turn over Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters captured by their troops in Afghanistan unless Mr. Bush pledged to honor the treaties.

"What we heard from the French and the British was that if we didn't determine that the Geneva Conventions applied, then they would find it difficult to transfer to our custody people that they might take into custody that we'd want," a senior administration official said. These complaints were voiced informally, the official said.

Further pressure on Mr. Bush to shift his stance came when the Defense Department agreed with warnings from the State Department that ignoring the treaties could put American troops at risk if they were captured. The State Department and the Pentagon have not always seen eye to eye on how to carry out antiterror policy; in other debates since Sept. 11, defense officials have sometimes adopted a harder line and more hawkish stance than State.


Although the Bush administration came into office expressing deep skepticism about a number of international agreements, arguing that decades-old treaties restricted the pursuit of American interests in a rapidly changing world, few anticipated that President Bush would actually reject the Geneva Conventions.

The four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949 were intended to avoid the mass abuses of civilians and of military prisoners that took place during World War II. Although they have periodically been ignored by some nations, they remain the world's most revered accords, garnering signatures of 189 countries, a number exceeded by only one other treaty (on the protection of children).
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/22/international/asia/22DETA.html

No comments:

Post a Comment

con·cept