Detention and Interrogation of Captured “Enemies”: Do Law and National Security Clash?

In October, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed an amendment to the Defense appropriations bill that would regulate the interrogation and treatment of prisoners held by American military forces. Senator John McCain’s (R-AZ) amendment would dramatically restructure interrogation rules and ban “cruel, inhumane and degrading” treatment of detainees here and abroad. Later, another bipartisan Senate majority passed the Graham-Levin-Kyl amendment, which would dramatically overhaul the rules for judicial review of detentions and prosecutions of alleged enemy combatants. The detailed provisions displease human rights groups and the Bush administration alike.

Going forward, one burning question remains for Congress and the rest of the nation: can we strongly protect our nation against terrorism while giving captured terrorists traditional protections of federal and international law? To debate this question and discuss the future of the Geneva Conventions and international norms, Nonresident Senior Fellow Stuart Taylor moderated a panel discussion with Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA); Brad Berenson, former associate White House Counsel under President George W. Bush; David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor; David Rivkin, a partner in a Washington law office and expert in the legal aspects of the war on terrorism; and Thomas Wilner, partner in the Washington office of Shearman & Sterling, who represents 12 Kuwaitis detained at Guantanamo Bay.