Posted on 01/07/2006 6:08:02 AM PST by mcg2000
BERLIN (Reuters) - German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in an interview published days before her first visit to the United States, said Washington should close its Guantanamo Bay prison camp and find other ways of dealing with terror suspects.
"An institution like Guantanamo can and should not exist in the longer term," Merkel said in an interview with the weekly magazine Der Spiegel published on Saturday. "Different ways and means must be found for dealing with these prisoners."
Merkel has vowed to repair ties with the United States, severely strained over the U.S.-led Iraq invasion, which her predecessor Gerhard Schroeder strongly opposed.
But her comments to Der Spiegel -- also covering ties with Moscow and the European Union -- suggested she would not shy away from speaking out on issues where disagreement exists.
There is widespread skepticism in Germany about the way the United States is fighting its "war on terror", compounded by the recent scandal over the CIA's abduction and detention of German citizen Khaled el-Masri -- later acknowledged to be a mistake.
Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. detention center in Cuba denounced by human rights activists and many governments, is deeply unpopular in Germany.
Merkel travels to Washington next week for her first visit since becoming chancellor in November, and will meet U.S. President George W. Bush on Friday.
Merkel told Der Spiegel she expected to speak to Bush about the fight against terrorism. "But I want to accentuate that our relationship with the U.S. will not be reduced to talking about fighting terrorism and the Iraq war," she added.
NO FRIENDSHIP WITH RUSSIA
Merkel described relations with the United States as a "friendship", but said the term "strategic partnership" would be more fitting to describe Germany's relationship with Moscow.
"I don't think we share as many of the same values yet with Russia as we do with the United States," she said. "But we have a huge interest in seeing Russia develop in a sensible way." Continued ...
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
Of course it can. If we choose for it to. Trials or no trials.
Well, didn't take her long to toe the Chirac/Schroeder line!!
As I have said before, her stated desire to "improve relations" with the US was nothing more than a ruse.
Appears that I was right!
Mrs. Merkel is usually thinking twice before making such a statement. The thing is that she is no bought yes-woman that is controlled by anybody from the outisde. Maybe you wish it would be that way but it isn't. It is simply her own opinion and she has for sure some reasons for it.
Personally I believe like most Americans here that Gitmo is inevitable. On the other hand it would be a good idea to give this prison a better legal framework.
BTW - Your country needs western Europe/Germany just as much as we need America. There are too many interests we share that our relationship would break because of different opinions about Gitmo.
Rather than cite Google listings or Wikepedia or whatever other civilian sources are out there, it is best to go directly to the Geneva Convention article that addresses this issue and use that exact terminology.
In order to avoid any semantic arguments about how Webster's Dictionary defines a "combatant" Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention uses the phrase:
"persons, having committed a belligerent act "
***********
Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention
"The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.
Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal."
***********
I wouldn´t say that Bin Laden were a combatant ordering attacks from his bed. AQ isn´t an "armed force" - rather a terrorist organization. And what´s the "enemy combatant" (Pentagon)??
We can argue all day whether von Hindenburg was a "combatant" during World War One if he never fired a shot or whether an "armed force" is an organization of 100 men under orders from a foreign leader bombing the Berlin subway or whether an "armed force" requires uniforms, a Quartermaster Corps and regimental colors.
What is clear, however, is that all of them fall under the category of "persons, having committed a belligerent act ".
If Osama bin Ladin orders a terrorist attack from his sick bed, he is a "person, having committed a belligerent act ".
Have inmates in Gitmo the status POW?
No. They do not meet the criteria under Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention to qualify as POW's.
If there is a question about that, then Article 5 and Article 89 apply. Those Articles state that such determination shall be made by a Tribunal and that such a Tribunal shall be military.
The criticism is, as you know, about the lack of trials and transparency. So, Merkel is quite right when she has that Gitmo cannot exist "in the longer term".
What "lack of trials"?
US defends Guantanamo tribunals
Article 5 of the Geneva Convention specifically states that, if the Article 4 status of an individual is in question, then "such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal".
According to Article 84 of the Third Geneva Convention, those tribunals are Military Courts.
Those Articles in the Geneva Convention were written precisely so that captured combatants would not be put on trial in civilian courts where the enraged citizens of Berlin or London would judge combatants with a civilian mindset instead of a professional military mindset.
Now Europeans are crying out that they have changed their minds and that the mandates of the Geneva Convention, which they themselves wrote, when carried out to the letter by Americans, are unjust.
Nope, I understand why she said it. Politics within her own country - which would soon include her being tagged as a USA lap dog.. Too bad it could not have stayed in her own country. And there you go on the defensive again. I do not wish her to be controlled by anyone but I also do not favor any leader talking out of both sides of mouth. Not only does she want to make her GITMO statement - she will be here expecting aid in one way or another. Germany is close to being on the ropes economy wise and if we pull our bases from there....well, that won't exactly be an economy plus.
Bottom line, I don't care what German politicos do or say concerning their own. Do not expect US citizens to act as puppies when your officials believe their negative opinion on our actions count for something.
I read 6 German papers on a daily basis. Sometimes I wonder if those leftist institutions tell the politicians what to do and say or the other way around?
I guess, it is like what came first, the chicken or the egg?
Middle ages?
Define that one :)
Nope. My point is that I don't think they have to twist the words of people who believe the same things they do.
You're an expert on German politics, then? Are you suggesting Frau Merkel does not have to deal with a hostile press?
[chuckle]
Germany has 80.000.000 inhabitants. It is one of the biggest economies in the world. The USA have between 70.000 to 30.000 soldiers left. Mainly in two Bases. Just to give you the proportion. Being on the ropes is for sure something different. :-)
It would be sad if you would go. You can be assured that the economic point of view is of no bigger interest to me. We will survive it. But... ...the connection between America and Germany (Europe) is simply something too precious to be wasted just because of your little dungeon in the sun.
On the other hand you must be aware that our gouvernment makes its own decisions. If you can not accept this than it will be indeed better if you go. It is the question if you could see us as friends or as a occupied area?
Good point. Next we will be listening to advice from Russia and China.
I'm sure the German Press is hostile to Merkel on a lot of things. But on criticism of America and American policies, it sounds like Merkel and the German Press are on the same page.
You seem to be outraged that we don't give Merkel the benefit of the doubt. The damage done to US-German relations by Schroeder runs deep and won't be repaired soon. Me and a lot of conservative Americans like me are not giving any German the benefit of the doubt until there are some actions to back up words. This rather harsh position is based partly on lingering resentment over Schroeder's anti-American pact with the French, and partly on the growing realization that we really don't need European allies after all.
Wow! Although I am a complete news junkie I can't take more than the FAZ (sometimes I read the New York Times, but that is no German newspaper) and the local rag of my hometown. Weeklys like the SPIEGEL or DIE ZEIT are obviosly not in your portfolio. Anyway I do not read because of professional causes - maybe you do.
Sometimes I wonder if those leftist institutions tell the politicians what to do and say or the other way around? I guess, it is like what came first, the chicken or the egg?
Maybe we Germans just have our own view of things. That could be the egg of Columbus.
"There are too many interests we share that our relationship would break because of different opinions about Gitmo"
That statement highlights what Europeans don't understand about post-9/11 America. Many Americans no longer believe that Germany supports the same interests and values that America does. Europeans talk about "shared values that bind the West", but that boat has left port. We're defending the values of the West, and Germany and the French are surrendering them as fast as possible.
If you're willing to fight for Western culture and accomplishments in the face of the Islamofascist onslaught, you'd better emigrate to the US (we'll still take you) because your own continent it doomed.
The French resistance only put on arm bands during the liberation of Paris to avoid being shot by the allies.
Your insignia argument doesn't wash.
And the Nazi's were convicted for executing non uniformed resistance fighters, including spys requited by British intelligence.
Can you tell me who is the one to define the shared values of the west? America is just a part of the western hemisphere. Maybe post 9/11 America doesn't understand that we Europeans (and that is not just France and Germany) will not give up all of our legal standarts and values. You can trust me in the view that we have some that are really worth fighting for. Freedom is always the possibility of a choice.
If you're willing to fight for Western culture and accomplishments in the face of the Islamofascist onslaught, you'd better emigrate to the US (we'll still take you) because your own continent it doomed.
I have the will to fight for western culture (in my definition) and I face the islamofaschist onslaught. But - believe it or not - I am really happyathome.
first it was tweedledee,,, now tweedledum
1933-1945?
Legalism is, in this case, no more than a facade that elites hide behind when they don't want to commit to war. Europe is demanding that the United States to adopt its version of the laws of war, and this entails awarding to bandits the rights normally assigned to soldiers in uniform. I call this posturing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.