What a wonderful turnout we had for last Saturday's Responsible US Global Engagement call! 184 chapter leaders and activists of CGS and our co-sponsoring organizations took time out on a Saturday to phone in and hear about our priorities for the beginning of the Obama administration, as well as those of some other organizations that are working on the same issues. Most importantly, we went over some specific ways CGS members in every state can help achieve these foreign policy goals. We want make sure our goals become priorities for the Obama administration and that our constituents play a role in drawing up policies on the United Nations, human rights, climate change and arms control. If you are a Citizens for Global Solutions activist, you'll find the information in your January Partners for Global Change Toolkit. Others who would like to get involved can find out how by emailing Laura Hendrick at Outreach@globalsolutions.org.

Sharon Kelly of Human Rights First led off our call with a great assessment of the prospects for achieving some important human rights goals during the next few months. HRF will be working to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center and ensure that the detainees are moved to prisons where they can have regular access to attorneys. HRF also wants to shut down the military tribunal system and try the detainees in the regular court system. Another goal they're optimistic about achieving is increasing accountability for US contractors overseas; they've drawn up a detailed blueprint for this which you can find on their website. Finally, they're asking the new president to issue an executive order prohibiting torture.

Next, Katherine Silverthorne of E3G talked about the upcoming goals on climate change. We should be able to make some major progress on slowing climate change, since the Obama administration has already made it clear that the environment is going to be a key issue for them. Katherine talked about some of the steps they're taking to get the US involved in the next meeting of the UN conference on Climate Change, scheduled for Copenhagen later this year. It will be the last government-level meeting before the Kyoto agreement needs to be renewed, so it'll be a very important gathering.

John Isaacs of the Council for a Liveable World gave us an update on arms control issues. The Council is calling on the administration to resume talks with Russia on a new arms control agreement that would significantly cut U.S. and Russian nuclear stockpiles, and strengthen the monitoring provisions of the START treaty. The Council also wants Congress to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and it's pressing the administration to bring more countries on board so the treaty can go into effect.

Finally, Todd Shelton of InterAction briefed us on their goals; increasing resources for agencies involved in development and diplomacy; putting a development professional in charge of U.S. development programs and ensuring that that the National Security Council staff includes a senior staffer dedicated to development; ensuring that international talks on the global financial crisis include representatives of developing countries, and that decisions on managing the crisis take account of critical development needs; and lobbying Congress to grant at least as much money for the International Affairs Budget as the current administration has requested.

That's a lot to work toward, but we have a lot of manpower in the combined forces of these organizations. If we all get involved, we can do it. The next step is to go to the Partners Toolkit and find out how you can help. Our new director of Community Outreach, Laura Hendrick, gave us a great list of things we can do to help us reach our global objectives. Again, check your Partners for Global Change Toolkit, or contact Laura at Outreach@globalsolutions.org

I want to thank our co-sponsoring organzations that participated on Saturday's call: 20/20 Vision, the United Nations Association , Women's Action for New Directions, and Americans for Informed Democracy . On Wednesday, we'll be part of a group of organizations releasing a letter to the Obama administration formally calling for the adoption of these goals. Watch for the press coverage of that.

In 2006, just like Eric Massa in upstate New York, Mary Jo Kilroy lost a tight race in Ohio's 15th District. Her race in the Columbus suburbs wasn't decided until mid-December of that year. This time around, she got her victory. The race wasn't a rematch since her 2006 opponent has retired. But, she battled state Senator Steve Stivers in a contest that stretched long past Election Day. It was worth the wait. Congresswoman-elect Kilroy will be joining the incoming freshmen class of the 111th Congress.

Steve Stivers wouldn't answer our candidate questionnaire, but from his campaign site, it appeared he wasn't interested in our global solutions. Kilroy, on the other hand, filled out both our '06 and '08 questionnaires. She wants to tackle climate change, opposes torture, supports the Geneva Conventions, opposes developing new nuclear weapons and offered to cosponsor a UNEPS resolution, if it is introduced in the 111th Congress. We look forward to working with Rep.-elect Kilroy next year.

October 23, 2008 - NEW YORK - On Friday, the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly held an interactive discussion with the UN expert on torture. At the Assembly, Manfred Nowak , the UN Special Rapporteur on the subject, conveyed his disappointment that "torture is still a frequent or even standard practice in many countries, even 60 years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

In the dialogue, Nowak articulated his belief that a lack of sustained public scrutiny is to blame for the continued practice of torture and inhumane treatment taking place largely behind closed doors.

To address these problems, Nowak called on all nations to ratify the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention Against Torture (OPCAT) and to establish well-resourced National Preventive Mechanisms (NPM). These mandates are designed to develop a system which would oversee the maintenance of human rights by establishing "a system of regular visits undertaken by independent international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Such provisions would create and maintain a public climate of observation that could do a lot to prevent torture from happening.

In his report, Mr. Nowak paid particular attention to the torture of persons with disabilities . Since such persons are often deprived of their liberty, being placed in prisons, social care centers, orphanages, and mental health facilities, they are particularly vulnerable to ill-treatment and torture. Nowak argued for the protection of such people from maltreatment, sexual exploitation and medical experimentation.

In addition, the UN Special Rapporteur raised concern over the disproportionate use of solitary confinement as a method to put psychological pressure on detainees. From his findings, Nowak concluded that "solitary confinement should only be used in very exceptional cases, for as short a time as possible and only as a last resort."

Perhaps with the oversight Mr. Nowak suggests, we can begin to work towards a future free from torture and ill-treatment in all spheres of life.

On August 13, 2008 the state of California passed Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 19 , which effectively prevents any California healthcare professional from engaging in torture, as defined by international standards.

The resolution comes in reaction to President Bush's March veto of a bill passed by Congress that would have amounted to a nationwide ban on torture.

The need for the resolution was articulated by its author Ridley-Thomas , who stated that "the U.S. Department of Defense has failed to oversee the ethical conduct of California licensed health professionals related to torture."

By passing this bill, the state of California has withdrawn its tacit consent of U.S. torture practices in areas such as Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay.

Since the passage of SJR 19, the state medical boards have informed all California healthcare professionals that they are obligated under both domestic and international law to treat all prisoners and detainees in accordance with those laws.

In addition to this, the state of California further demanded that the Central Intelligence Agency and Department of Defense remove California-licensed healthcare professionals from settings in which they might be asked to torture or abuse detainees.

No longer will California doctors and psychologists be allowed to engage in "coercive, rough or enhanced" interrogation methods. Now - cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners is expressly outlawed.

Any California healthcare professional found to be engaging in such treatment of prisoners will face certain prosecution by the State.

SJR 19 exists as a vehicle to inform professionals of their legal and ethical obligations with respect to torture. A subject, studies have shown, that most healthcare professionals are ill-informed about. The principle 'do no harm' may have been lost during the War on Terror for some, but California is determined to remind its citizens that it still applies to them.

More than an ethical reminder, the bill will also be a tool. SJR 19 gives professionals legal reference to be able to remove themselves from abusive situations, even if a commanding officer orders them to continue.

The President may be able to veto a nationwide ban on torture, but states have power too. By virtue of the tenth amendment , states have traditionally held the power to license and regulate their own health professionals.

The resolution was authored by Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas of Los Angeles who commented , "Torture is much more than a political issue. It is an ethical, moral and spiritual issue that has not only become a shame, but it is an evil in our midst. Right-minded Americans understand that to protect foreign prisoners of war from torture, also protects the rights of our citizens if they become war prisoners."

Ridley-Thomas concluded his endorsement of the bill with this remark, "In this period of international crisis, we must be ever reminded of what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated so emphatically, 'An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

By passing SJR 19, California has declared its commitment to international law with respect to torture, and has pioneered the way for other states to do the same.

Trial Begins in Miami for Torture Committed in Liberia

September 23, 2008 - The upcoming trial for the ex-Liberian president's son, Charles 'Chuckie' Taylor, Jr., marks the first remarkable step towards prosecuting human rights offenders who commit their abuses abroad.

Chuckie Taylor is accused of ordering torture during his father's presidency in Liberia between 1997 and 2003 as head of the nation's Anti-Terrorist Unit (ATU). Mr. Taylor is an American citizen, and was born in Massachusetts.

According to a 14-year-old federal law never before exercised, American citizens or persons on U.S. soil accused of committing torture abroad are to be prosecuted in the United States. The case is the first of its kind and should trigger the beginning of an aggressive campaign to bring human rights violators to justice, whether they commit their transgressions on U.S. soil or abroad.

According to Human Rights Watch's senior counsel Elise Keppler , the "trial is a vital, long-awaited step by the U.S. government to ensure human rights abusers do not escape justice."

Although Chuckie Taylor was apprehended and detained in March of 2006, he has not faced trial yet due to several amendments made in order to add more victims to the indictment.

The alleged victims have reported shocking ill-treatment and torture including but not limited to: electric shock, burning, imprisonment in holes in the ground, execution and genital mutilation.

This trial is very important for Liberian victims who in the past have seen these crimes conducted during Liberia's wars go largely unpunished.

Although it may seem highly unusual for this trial to be taking place in Florida, thousands of miles away from where the crimes were committed, U.S. law has been steadily expanding to allow the prosecution of torturers and individuals who commit genocide.

For example, the Genocide Accountability Act , passed in December of 2007, declared that any U.S. citizen or person on U.S. soil who committed genocide anywhere would be prosecuted under U.S. federal law.

"The Department of Justice should actively apply these laws so that the United States avoids ever being a safe haven for human rights abusers," Keppler stated recently. Without such laws the U.S. runs the risk of attracting torturers and perpetrators of genocide who wish to escape prosecution in other countries.

Another interesting note about this extraterritorial torture statute is that it applies to U.S. citizens and officials as well as non-citizens. Human Rights Watch is currently urging the Department of Justice to conduct an investigation of human rights abuses performed by American officials abroad.

If the U.S. ever wants to be taken seriously as an enforcer of international human rights law, it must begin to hold its own citizens to those standards, this trial marks a small but definitive step in that direction.

On June 22, 2008, "Report: Torture failed on Sept. 11 Planner," highlighted the growing acceptance that torture does not work. CIA agent, Deuce Martinez, notably established a relationship with Khalid Shaikh Mohammad (suspected 9/11 conspirator) that produced actionable intelligence. After years of experts pleading that "cruel and unusual" methods of interrogation do not result in valuable information, it is not surprising that establishing rapport, and a level of personal understanding, were effective.

Even in 2005, this not-so-new phenomenon of the invalidity of torture was addressed by Washington Post Columnist, Anne Applebaum, in her piece, "The Torture Myth." During the Vietnam War, Applebaum notes, that while faced with a ticking-time bomb scenario, Air Force Colonel John Rothrock utilized some "not nice" methods, but those methods could not be characterized as torture. Methods of cruel and inhumane treatment of suspects does not mean that "not nice" methods are not used or cannot be considered legitimate (given boundaries) since the methods still maintain the prisoner's human rights (such "not nice" practices include forcing a prisoner to watch his wounded comrade die). Psychological manipulation produces useful intelligence, whereas humiliation, physical and mental abuse, isolation, etc. (methods used currently by the U.S. military in Iraq and Guantanamo) all result in the detainee telling the interrogator what he wants to hear, however false it may be, to get the pain to stop.

Research shows that a prisoner will more likely produce actionable intelligence if he is "befriended" rather than "interrogated." Even if we were to forget the immorality and illegality of torture, the fact remains that, practically, it does not do us any good. We have to ask ourselves: Why does our U.S. Military continue to utilize torture when they know it does not work and at the same time puts our soldiers and citizens in greater danger? Do they deny reality? Are they plagued by combat and see these measures as a defense mechanism?

The reality, to get to the bottom of it, seems to be a lack of training. Soldiers have documented that they were not provided with adequate education, information, and intelligence upon their arrival to army prisons to act as interrogators (i.e. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo). Many soldiers who were trained in combat are placed in prisons and merely given orders to extract confessions and information from the detainees - sometimes by whatever means necessary. Without proper guidance, it is not inconceivable that these soldiers resort to the tactics that they do. In no way do I mean to excuse their methods, but the lack of training can certainly be an explanation. The men and women faced with the turmoil of war cannot help but feel frustrated, angered, and threatened by the enemies they face; and without the proper tools and outlets to channel those emotions, a resort to violence has resulted.

A real and concrete way to make immediate changes in the way interrogations are carried out is to provide soldiers with the appropriate training. FBI and CIA personnel are instructed on valid, legal methods of how to turn out relevent intelligence, and thus have not been prosecuted for torture. Since the U.S. Military mainly carries out the interrogations, it would make sense to devout resources to guarantee soldier's proper training. Of course, training is not the sole determinant of whether torture results, but it is one step closer to ensuring that it doesn't.

Is John Yoo a monster...or just a war criminal? Esquire's John Richardson asks the man himself in this interview.

Errol Morris, the talented documentary filmmaker best known for his film Fog of War, has a provocative essay ("The Most Curious Thing") in yesterday's New York Times about the Abu Ghraib torture scandal.

Tip o' the hat to Lisa!

I am not a lawyer and I didn't even sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but how could President Bush threaten to veto a bill that would require U.S. intelligence agencies to follow Army rules adopted last year that explicitly forbid waterboarding? The bill, which passed the House of Representatives last night, would also require interrogators to adhere to a strict interpretation of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war.

As signatures to the Geneva Conventions our nation needs to adhere to this vital and humane international treaty. However, this latest waving of the veto pen by our president appears to be just another act of defiance that must be turned around.

Today's New York Times notes this by editorializing:

During the presidential campaign, candidates from both parties will warn of the risk of another terrorist attack on this country. Americans should insist that they also explain how they will repair the damage President Bush has done to America's intelligence-gathering capabilities in the name of fighting terrorism?.

The recent disclosure that the Central Intelligence Agency destroyed videotapes of the interrogation of two Al Qaeda prisoners was a stark reminder of the catastrophic blunder that Congress made by enacting the Military Commissions Act of 2006. In addition to creating kangaroo courts to try the Guant?namo detainees, the bill permitted Mr. Bush to abrogate the Geneva Conventions by creating secret, extra-legal rules for interrogations by intelligence agents.

Meanwhile, at The Huffington Post, political reporter Sam Stein writes about 30 retired admirals and generals urging members of Congress to ignore Bush's veto threat and "pass legislation requiring U.S intelligence agents to follow strict standards for detainee treatment."

Isn't it about time we as a nation live up to the standards we request of other nations when it comes to human rights? And, whatever happened to the Commander in Chief taking his lead from military leaders? On this issue - and many others - the president would be wise to listen more and put his pen in his pocket.

On Wednesday a group of students from the University of California Santa Barbara sabotaged a CIA recruiting presentation to protest covert U.S. torture and rendition policies and waterboarding in particular. Dressed as clowns, one of the group was placed on a table in front of the recruiter, who subsequently made a quick exit, their hands bound and water poured over their head to simulate waterboarding, the controversial mock-drowning strategy practiced by the CIA.

Furthermore, an anti-torture rally at UC Berkley went even further , seeing a man pulled from the crowd and used as the subject in a real life waterboarding demonstration. The event was clearly effective and shocked the audience significantly. In the words of one student:

"I was aware of it on a purely intellectual level but actually seeing it in person is a whole different thing. It's one thing to know its torture and say that's really bad, that really sucks. But to see somebody screaming and coughing and choking in front of you, it's a very emotional experience."

With the nomination of Michael Mukasey as the new U.S. Attorney General following the departure of Alberto Gonzales, which was opposed by Citizens for Global Solutions due to his inability to state categorically on the record that waterboarding constitutes torture, California students are clearly ensuring that this issue stays on the agenda, which is an encouraging sign.

Check out Mike Otterman's blog for more information.