Back to newspaper home page

By Marc A. Znaniecki

Abuse of the al-Queda and Taliban prisoners seems to have taken the forefront in our nation’s news coverage.

During a press conference, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that all prisoners were being treated in accordance to the Geneva Convention.

When I heard him say that, I found myself hoping that what he said is true, because our country is often perceived as being hypocritical. The prisoners should be granted their rights and we should abide by the decrees that we often deem to be so important, I thought to myself.

Then I thought, "What is the Geneva Convention really?" I’d heard many references to it throughout the years and was still not sure what it entailed.

After a little research, a discovered that the required conditions for armies and militias to be treated under the GC are:

"1) To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; 2) To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable from a distance; 3) To carry arms openly; and 4) To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war."

I believe the Taliban were a legitimate army of Afghanistan and the al-Queda were a militia of that army qualifying them for the rights deemed from the Geneva Convention.

But, Article 25 states, "The attack or bombardment of towns, villages, habitations or buildings which are not defended, is prohibited."

I wondered if this would revoke the al-Queda’s and/or Taliban’s rights to be treated under the rules of the GC.

Our leaders, and there seems a consensus from other nations, have stated that there is irrefutable evidence that Bin-Laden and his al-Queda network are responsible for the World Trade Center attacks. Wouldn’t this be a breach of Article 25?

Do they still have rights under the GC?

If they are no longer protected under the GC, wouldn’t that mean that we don’t have to adhere to the GC, that we can do with them as we desire?

I do not understand the media focus on "mistreatment" of the prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Are the prisoners indeed being "mistreated? And, I have yet to read or hear a report in the media that the prisoners are entitled to the rights of the GC.

I was outraged when I watched some so-called "reputable news organizations" taking polls of everyday average Americans about whether or not the prisoners are being treated properly. Since the prisoners are under military "protection" and access to them is very, very limited, aren’t the American citizens, media and other organizations just making assumptions about what is or is not being done?

I believe it is under the scrutiny of the military and the government to be concerned with the treatment of their prisoners. If those prisoners are entitled to the rights under the GC, then we should treat them according to those rules.

If they are not subject to the GC, then I believe that the American government has done nothing legally wrong with their confinement of "detainees."

However, the government needs to clarify whether or not the "detainees" in Cuba are in fact "Prisoners Of War" or merely "captured hostiles."

That is the only way to truly settle the dispute over whether they are being treated humanely.