Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Truth and reconciliation is probably good for whatever low-level apparatchiks who possess sufficiently useful skills to be retained in the absence of political patronage. But I am not sure that it would be a good idea for the highest echelons.

There has been an unfortunate history of American administrations committing crimes against humanity and walking away with barely a slap on the wrist. The truth and reconciliation committees worked in part because there was a very real threat that those involved would have been tried and convicted and lived out the rest of their lives in prison. I don't believe that anyone in the Bush regime believes that this is a realistic option when it comes to their crimes, so prosecuting a few of the end-of-level bad guys would show the rest of the gang that you mean business.

Actually prosecuting some of the bushies and putting them behind bars for a very long time would also demonstrate to the rest of the world that there are limits to the atrocities that US administrations can wreak with impunity. I should not think that I need to stress the effect this would have on the image and soft power of the US.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Jun 15th, 2008 at 05:53:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Focused criminal prosecution, to be completed post-election, has few problems that I can see. As you point out, there would be great value.

Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
by technopolitical on Tue Jun 17th, 2008 at 03:31:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series