Chertoff: The Bush doctrine expanded definition of self-defence

The US would like to rewrite the definition of torture and also to rewrite the definition of self-defence to accomodate the practices of the US hegemon. Of course many in the world community object as even the UK has objected to the attacks in Pakistan. But the US is the world's most powerful military power by far and so it makes no difference.


Of course Pakistan is itself on an offensive against Islamic militants and suffering many casualties in the process. It is also using methods that no doubt cause many civilian casualties and also resulted in a huge refugee problem. But this is apparently not enough for the US. It needs to protect its own occupying forces in Afghanistan. Imagine if the Russian occuppiers of Afghanistan who also led incursions into Pakistan made the same pitiful arguments as the US. The world press would attack them and their arguments would be laughed out of court.. But Chertoff has the worlds biggest military behind him.





LONDON, Oct 31 (Reuters) - A country should have the right to attack another if it is harbouring a potential terrorist threat, the U.S. homeland security chief said in remarks appearing to justify recent U.S. raids in Pakistan and Syria.




Laying out what amounts to a broadened definition of self-defence, Michael Chertoff said international law should accommodate a country's need to deter a possible threat abroad even if it meant taking pre-emptive action.
His remarks, at a discussion on democracy held in the British parliament, follow recent secret raids by U.S. forces into Pakistan and Syria that were justified using a similiar rationale and drew condemnation from those countries.
"International law must begin to recognise that part of the responsibility of sovereignty is the responsibility to make sure that your own country does not become a platform for attacking other countries," Chertoff told an audience on Thursday night.
"There are areas of the world that are ungoverned or ungovernable but nevertheless technically within the sovereignty of boundaries. Does that mean we simply have to allow terrorists to operate there, in kind of badlands, where they can plan, they can set up laboratories, they can experiment with chemical weapons and with biological weapons?" he said.
His remarks, challenged by some members of parliament in the audience, follow comments made by U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates on Tuesday in which he said Washington would hold countries fully accountable for their actions.
Gates' remarks, made to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, included a warning that the United States should modernize its nuclear arsenal as a hedge against "rogue nations" such as Iran and North Korea.
WIDER DETERRENCE?
The expanded definition of what constitutes self-defence and could be permitted under the concept of deterrence has important implications for U.S. foreign policy at a time when it is engaged in two wars in unstable regions and when it has expressed frequent concern about actions by Iran.
In Afghanistan in September, the United States conducted a raid across the border into Pakistan, striking at suspected Taliban militants hiding there despite objections from Pakistan, which said its sovereignty had been violated.
Last weekend, U.S. troops went across the border from Iraq into Syria and attacked a suspected insurgent hideout. The U.S. military says the head of a militant cell and his accomplices were targetted. Syria says eight civilians were killed.
Chertoff described a world in which the United States, and other democracies, were facing extraordinary threats that required them to be super-vigilant and responsive. Waiting to see if others would attack was not good enough, he said.
"If country X, within its borders, is openly tolerating or incapable of managing a location where people are consistently attacking a neighbour, is it sufficient to say, 'well, it's within their sovereign territory, nobody can do anything about it'? I think that's not true and I think there's a serious question about whether that's what the law ought to be.
"The larger question of the responsibility to make sure your own country is not a platform for attacking others is a matter that needs to be seriously considered in terms of what the law should be," he said. (Editing by Angus MacSwan)
Source: Reuters North American News Service

There is no significant US evidence against Arar

There are good reasons to think that Gonzales and Chertoff have no significant evidence against Arar. My reasons for thinking this are as follows.

The extensive O'Connor inquiry after more than two years investigation found that Arar was not a security risk and did not have any links to terrorism.

Stockwell Day the Canadian cabinet minister in charge of security saw the US evidence that the inquiry did not see but did not change his mind about Arar not being a security risk. NOTE: The US refused to co-operate with the Canadian inquiry, itself suspicious. Stockwell Day is pro-US policy and in favor of friendlier and strong relationships with the US even to the point of being in favor of Canadas participation in the Iraq war. If Day had the remotest reason to agree to the US position he would have. He has enough decency not to try and earn brownie points with the US when he saw the emperor had no clothes.

Arar has an appeal pending on his suit against the US. The US position would be weakened if it admits an error in assessing Arar. The US immigration in its decision to deport Arar ruled that Arar was a member of Al Qaeda. The US authorities will not take that back even though they know they have no proof of it.

Finally the O'Connor inquiry revealed that US authorities were constantly asking Canadian intelligence for further evidence against Arar. They even asked whether he would be held and charged if sent back to Canada. Canadian authorities said no that he was only what they called a person of interest. Leahy is wrong when he says that if Arar were sent to Canada he would be held and investigated. He would be scot free as he is now. No charges have even been laid against Arar. The US had no evidence to lay charges even though their immigration found him to be a member of AL Qaeda. Imagine he is a member of Al Qaeda and they did not charge him but simply deported him. What a farce!

Gonzales, Chertoff, and Wilkins are quite willing to further damage an innocent person's reputation, a person already tortured, and also maligned through leaks in the Canadian press earlier. Senator Leahy needs to start his own inquiry into the Arar affair and put US policy in order. THe majority of the American people I am sure do not favor a policy that protects people who have maligned and wronged an innocent person but allows them to get away with it through uttering the mantra of national security.

Stockwell Day not convinced by US evidence on Arar

This article makes it crystal clear that the letter was written before Day met with CHertoff. At that time Day already saw the evidence and was not convinced. Gonzales did not even mention the letter in his testimony before Senate. I sure hope that Leahy continues with senate investigations into the case.


Arar to stay on watch list, U.S. says
Letter co-signed by homeland secretary two days before he met with Day
PAUL KORING AND JEFF SALLOT

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

WASHINGTON, OTTAWA — Maher Arar should remain on the security watch list barring him from the United States, the Bush administration says in a letter released yesterday that bluntly rejects pleas from senior Canadian cabinet ministers.

The letter, written last week, marks the conclusion of a Canadian-requested review by U.S. counterterrorism officials of the file on Mr. Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian citizen who was tortured in a Damascus prison after being sent there by the Americans.

"We remain of the view that the continued watch listing of Mr. Arar is appropriate," says the letter to Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, signed by both Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Attorney-General Alberto Gonzalez.

The letter was dated last Tuesday, two days before Mr. Day met Mr. Chertoff in Washington. Mr. Day said that Canadian counterterrorism officials had viewed the American dossier on Mr. Arar, finding "nothing new" that would justify keeping him on a terrorist watch list.




U.S. file fails to link Arar to terror, Day says
U Neither man mentioned the letter. Nor did Mr. Gonzalez when he was questioned about Mr. Arar the same day by the U.S. Senate judiciary committee.

However, Mr. Day said last night the letter and the U.S. intelligence dossier on Mr. Arar that it refers to changes nothing, and Canada still believes Mr. Arar is an innocent man who should be taken off any watch list.

In a written statement, Mr. Day said: "While in Washington last week, I apprised American authorities that this information which they had would not alter our position on this matter.

"I have informed the Americans once again that we have removed Mr. Arar and his family from our watch list according to the recommendation of the [Mr. Justice Dennis] O'Connor report and because we do not deem Mr. Arar or his family to be a security risk. I maintain the same position which I clearly articulated in writing to Secretary Chertoff on September 21st, 2006." At that time, Mr. Day urged the Americans to delist Mr. Arar.

The U.S. letter makes it clear that Canadian-provided information originally fingering Mr. Arar isn't the basis for continuing American concerns about him.

"Our conclusion . . . is supported by information developed by U.S. law enforcement agencies that is independent of that provided by Canada," the letter says.

Mr. Arar's U.S. lawyer said the Bush administration is still not coming clean. Maria LaHood said Canadian officials undoubtedly know far more about Mr. Arar than U.S. officials after a lengthy commission of inquiry exonerated him of terrorist allegations.

The reason Washington may still keep him on a watch list is to protect the U.S. position in the lawsuit, she said.

Mr. Arar has sued Washington for civil-rights violations in deporting him to Syria.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper telephoned President George W. Bush last fall saying it was "unfair" that Mr. Arar remained on the watch list, urging the Americans to "come clean."

Foreign Minister Peter MacKay made another appeal when he met Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice before Christmas. Ms. Rice said she would personally ask Mr. Chertoff and Mr. Gonzalez to take the unusual step of reviewing why a person was on a watch list.

Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who chairs the powerful Senate judiciary committee and has championed Mr. Arar's case, said he was "disappointed that the letter does not address the larger issues surrounding this case. The reason the Arar case is such a sore point and such an offence to American values is that he was sent to Syria, on the Bush administration's orders, where he was tortured

Stockwell Day not convinced by US evidence on Arar

This article makes it crystal clear that the letter was written before Day met with CHertoff. At that time Day already saw the evidence and was not convinced. Gonzales did not even mention the letter in his testimony before Senate. I sure hope that Leahy continues with senate investigations into the case.


Arar to stay on watch list, U.S. says
Letter co-signed by homeland secretary two days before he met with Day
PAUL KORING AND JEFF SALLOT

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

WASHINGTON, OTTAWA — Maher Arar should remain on the security watch list barring him from the United States, the Bush administration says in a letter released yesterday that bluntly rejects pleas from senior Canadian cabinet ministers.

The letter, written last week, marks the conclusion of a Canadian-requested review by U.S. counterterrorism officials of the file on Mr. Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian citizen who was tortured in a Damascus prison after being sent there by the Americans.

"We remain of the view that the continued watch listing of Mr. Arar is appropriate," says the letter to Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, signed by both Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Attorney-General Alberto Gonzalez.

The letter was dated last Tuesday, two days before Mr. Day met Mr. Chertoff in Washington. Mr. Day said that Canadian counterterrorism officials had viewed the American dossier on Mr. Arar, finding "nothing new" that would justify keeping him on a terrorist watch list.




U.S. file fails to link Arar to terror, Day says
U Neither man mentioned the letter. Nor did Mr. Gonzalez when he was questioned about Mr. Arar the same day by the U.S. Senate judiciary committee.

However, Mr. Day said last night the letter and the U.S. intelligence dossier on Mr. Arar that it refers to changes nothing, and Canada still believes Mr. Arar is an innocent man who should be taken off any watch list.

In a written statement, Mr. Day said: "While in Washington last week, I apprised American authorities that this information which they had would not alter our position on this matter.

"I have informed the Americans once again that we have removed Mr. Arar and his family from our watch list according to the recommendation of the [Mr. Justice Dennis] O'Connor report and because we do not deem Mr. Arar or his family to be a security risk. I maintain the same position which I clearly articulated in writing to Secretary Chertoff on September 21st, 2006." At that time, Mr. Day urged the Americans to delist Mr. Arar.

The U.S. letter makes it clear that Canadian-provided information originally fingering Mr. Arar isn't the basis for continuing American concerns about him.

"Our conclusion . . . is supported by information developed by U.S. law enforcement agencies that is independent of that provided by Canada," the letter says.

Mr. Arar's U.S. lawyer said the Bush administration is still not coming clean. Maria LaHood said Canadian officials undoubtedly know far more about Mr. Arar than U.S. officials after a lengthy commission of inquiry exonerated him of terrorist allegations.

The reason Washington may still keep him on a watch list is to protect the U.S. position in the lawsuit, she said.

Mr. Arar has sued Washington for civil-rights violations in deporting him to Syria.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper telephoned President George W. Bush last fall saying it was "unfair" that Mr. Arar remained on the watch list, urging the Americans to "come clean."

Foreign Minister Peter MacKay made another appeal when he met Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice before Christmas. Ms. Rice said she would personally ask Mr. Chertoff and Mr. Gonzalez to take the unusual step of reviewing why a person was on a watch list.

Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who chairs the powerful Senate judiciary committee and has championed Mr. Arar's case, said he was "disappointed that the letter does not address the larger issues surrounding this case. The reason the Arar case is such a sore point and such an offence to American values is that he was sent to Syria, on the Bush administration's orders, where he was tortured

More on the letter of Chertoff and Gonzales on Arar

This whole matter is becoming more bizarre by the minute. This letter is a week old. Stockwell Day has already seen the US evidence and even he thought it made no difference that Arar should be taken off the list. Gonzales is supposed to brief Sen. Leahy this week. It will be interesting what Gonzales will have to say and what Leahy will respond. Is Leahy going to hold hearings into the whole issue of rendition. Arar is suing the US government but it is unlikely to go anywhere since the government will plead national security grounds not to have a suit I expect.

Monday » January 22 » 2007

U.S. officials say they'll keep Maher Arar on their security watch list

Beth Gorham


Canadian Press


Monday, January 22, 2007


WASHINGTON (CP) - Two top American officials have told Canada they have no plans to take Canadian Maher Arar off the U.S. security watch list.

In a letter released Monday, Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said they've looked at the secret U.S. file on Arar and think the decision is "appropriate." "Our conclusion in this regard is supported by information developed by U.S. law enforcement agencies that is independent of that provided to us by Canada," said the letter to Stockwell Day, Canada's public safety minister.

It also offers to share the classified information with Canadians in a timely "confidential meeting."

But the letter is dated last Tuesday, two days before Day met with Chertoff and said afterward that Canadian officials had "looked at all the U.S. information" and found "nothing new" to suggest Arar was a safety risk.

"We are still maintaining that he should not be on that (no) fly list," Day said.

On Monday, Day reiterated Canada's position.

"We do not deem Mr. Arar or his family to be a security risk."

Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, who blasted Gonzales last week about the Arar case and demanded a briefing, said Monday that he is "puzzled" about the U.S. decision, given Canada's different conclusion.

"I am disappointed that the letter does not address the larger issues surrounding this case," he said in a release.

Arar, a Canadian engineer, was detained in New York in 2002 and sent to Syria, where he was imprisoned for more than a year and tortured into making false confessions of terrorist involvement.

He has become the best-known case of the U.S. policy of extraordinary rendition, which involves sending a foreigner to a third country that is known to use torture.

"This abhorrent practice stains America's reputation as a defender and protector of human rights," said Leahy, who has threatened to hold a public hearing on the case if Gonzales doesn't come through.

"Yet the Bush administration has yet to renounced (it) and it has yet to offer even the hint of an apology to Mr. Arar."

The New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents Arar in his lawsuit against U.S. officials, said the administration is trying to confuse the situation with a week-old letter.

"It is now crystal clear that the U.S. has shown everything it has on Mr. Arar to Canada and that there is no reason for him to be on a watch list," said lawyer Maria LaHood.

Last week, Leahy, who heads the Senate judiciary committee, told Gonzales officials knew "damn well" Arar would be tortured when they deported him to Syria and that Canadians are "justifiably upset."

Canada's public inquiry exonerated Arar last fall and concluded RCMP gave U.S. authorities misleading information about Arar before he was deported.

The United States did not inform Canada that he was being sent to Syria.

Last month, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she asked Chertoff and the Justice Department to investigate why Arar can't enter the country or even fly over U.S. airspace.

Chertoff refused to comment on the case last week, citing privacy rules and even suggesting it's a hypothetical issue.

"This becomes a relevant issue only if and when somebody presents themselves to come into the U.S."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper demanded an apology from the United States but had to settle last fall for a promise to collaborate with Canada on any future deportation cases.

© The Canadian Press 2007








Copyright © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications, Inc.. All rights reserved.

CBC report on Michael Chertoff and Stockwell Day meeting

Chertoff is certainly a piece of work. Imagine Arar is supposed to try and cross the border and risk being nabbed again and rendered somewhere, perhaps to Guantanamo for a change of scenery. It seems highly unlikely that the US has much more on Arar than what the Canadians gave them--and lots of that was wrong. If they had then they would have shared it with the Canadians are at least they are supposed to. Anyway if Stockwell Day saw it and it didn't change his mind it is highly unlikely that there is any damning evidence that they have even if David Wilkins says their decision was based on other sources than Canadian info. Earlier another US authority said that the decision was based on Canadian info. I will have to look that source up unless some reader has it handy!


Arar gets no break in Washington, but snowbirds do
Last Updated: Friday, January 19, 2007 | 8:08 AM ET
CBC News
Washington's homeland security chief, Michael Chertoff, says Canadians wintering in the United States will be allowed to fly home without passports after a new rule goes into effect Jan. 23.


U.S. Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff and Canadian Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day met in Washington Thursday.
(CBC)
But he isn't saying whether Maher Arar — back in Canada after being grabbed by U.S. officials, flown overseas and tortured in a Syrian prison — will ever get into the United States again.

The way for Arar to find out is to go to the border and try, he said.

"I'm simply going to say that this becomes a relevant issue only if and when somebody presents themself to come into the United States. Otherwise, it's kind of a hypothetical issue."



Chertoff declined to discuss statements by other American officials, including the U.S. ambassador to Canada, that Arar remains on a watch list that bars him from crossing the border or flying in U.S. air space.

Standing beside Canada's public safety minister, Stockwell Day, at a Washington news conference, he stressed the "good news" that most Canadians flying into or out of the United States were carrying passports, even though the rule requiring them was not yet in force.


Maher Arar was detained at a New York airport in 2002 on suspicion of involvement in terrorism. He was flown to Syria, where he spent a year under interrogation in prison.
(Canadian Press)
In the week of Jan. 8, about 96 percent of Canadian air travellers carried passports, up from 93 per cent in December, he said.

A similar rule for ground travel is to take effect in 2008.

"Of course, we'll always be open to consider hardship cases," Chertoff said, "and one thing I did say to Stockwell is that for Canadians who are snowbirds who are returning to Canada, we will allow them to depart the United States without having a passport for some significant period of time to avoid the problem of people who may have come last year, before the requirement.

"We don't want to strand them here, although I'm sure they'd like to stay an extra month in the warm weather."

On the subject of Arar, the two men seemed to agree that Washington has no information about the Syrian-born Canadian that Ottawa doesn't have.

Arar's ordeal began when he was detained during a stopover in New York in 2002, apparently on the basis of a bad tip from the RCMP.

Day noted that Arar was taken off Canada's border watch list after a public inquiry cleared him of any connection to terrorism in September.

Asked why he is still on the U.S. watch list, Day said: "Our officials recently looked at all the U.S. information and that does not change our position. We are still maintaining that he should not be on that [U.S.] list."

Chertoff said: "I know there's been some discussion between our law enforcement authorities and Canadian authorities about information to make sure that we have access to common information."

In December, the U.S. ambassador to Canada issued a statement suggesting that the Americans knew something about Arar that Justice Dennis O'Connor, whose inquiry report exonerated him, did not.

"Mr. Arar's original removal from the United States in 2002 was based on information from a variety of sources, as is his current watch-list status," U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins said.