In context: Interrogation report merits introspection, not politics

What is the reason a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence would release for international distribution a report on interrogation techniques involving terror suspects after 9/11?

There are many who are asking that question after the release of an executive summary that basically skewers the CIA for its actions in the years following the attacks on the U.S.

And they are wondering something else, too, especially as former members of the CIA have publicly challenged the findings, calling them at the least misleading and at the worst, patently false.

They want to know the motive as well.

There are calls of partisanship, retribution and just plain bad judgment.

But perhaps there is something to be learned from the report and how it was handled -- and a chance for another lesson in international relations and how to move forward intelligently in the future.

This nation needs to look at how it conducts itself in times of war and strife. It makes us better people and a stronger ally.

But to release an internal examination like this, out of context, without taking the time to investigate a response is not just irresponsible. It is dangerous.

And, sad to say, another example of an international policy that is flawed.

One wonders if anyone actually thinks that the U.S. release of a report of this nature would do anything but inflame terror groups who will pick and choose portions of the report to motivate and to recruit.

So what is the purpose of the sudden "openness"?

Sure looks like politics.

But let's set that aside. The concerns that are addressed in the report are worth discussing, examining and a protocol created from the findings.

But to do that honestly, officials have to look at the context of a time when 3,000 people had just been killed on 9/11 and a world where no one knew from where the next strike would come.

They also have to remember the fact that U.S. officials were and are dealing with a terror group that has had no qualms about executing, in a brutal and public way, innocents whom they captured, confined and did a good amount of terrorizing themselves.

The purpose of the interrogations of those early years was to find out information on potential attacks. The CIA officials say that is exactly what they gained. Who knows how many lives were saved.

The Senate committee -- all Democrats -- says there is no foundation to that claim.

The U.S. has a responsibility to act with intelligence and humanity at all times -- especially during times of war. To review what we have done and are doing with regard to the treatment of prisoners is never a bad idea.

To release a one-sided report -- to everyone and their brother -- is just dumb and seems to perpetuate the failed analysis that if we show al-Qaida what good guys we are, that a diplomatic resolution to this conflict will be reached.

One would think, by now, someone would get -- especially after the news that many released Guantanamo detainees have moved right back into the terror ranks -- that it is time for another approach.

Maybe that could be the next report.

Published in Editorials on December 10, 2014 10:47 AM