As such, America should include all nations in the prosecution of terrorism suspects. A special International Criminal Court (ICC) should be set up for the exclusive detention, interrogation and prosecution of those suspects. It can be under the auspices of the current ICC, to which the United States, unfortunately, is not a signatory.

Once terrorism suspects are apprehended, they should be turned over to this new ICC for prosecution. American intelligence agents would be allowed to interrogate them for vital information, but the process would be observed by human rights monitors so the detainees’ rights are not abused. The monitors could then certify that information was not extracted via coercion, and therefore valid as evidence in the detainees’ future trials.

The same ICC should also try the suspects for crimes against humanity and punish them accordingly. It has become painfully obvious that America does not know how to prosecute terrorists without trampling hard-won principles of international human rights laws, such as the Geneva Conventions. Why not delegate this responsibility to those who do? This process is already in place for war criminals such as Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic, Charles Taylor and others. Are Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed any less horrific war criminals?

With this new system, there would be no need to stain the national fabric with Guantanamo Bay or the indefinite detention of “unlawful enemy combatants” or the setting up of military commissions in contravention of international laws. With a new ICC, the burden of fighting and prosecuting violent terrorists will not fall solely on America. It will also go a long way toward restoring the reputation of the United States.

It is a radical shift in philosophy and tactics. Yet, I believe that it is a welcome shift with benefits for all countries, not just the United States. Human rights are too precious to be abandoned because America was attacked by 19 fanatics. Adherence to international laws is too vital to be bypassed because America has had to face the ugly reality of terrorism. Upholding the Geneva Conventions is too important an obligation to be set aside because we face “a different type of enemy.”

We can successfully wage a war on terrorism without betraying our principles and values as a people. We can defeat terrorists and simultaneously win the hearts and minds of the world. We can isolate the ideology of hatred and brutal fanaticism without creating more brutal fanatics. It just needs a dramatic and long overdue rethinking of our strategy in the “war on terror.” Our nation’s interests and security hang in the balance. “Staying the course” is something we simply cannot afford to do. 

____________________ 

DR. HESHAM HASSABALLA is a Pulmonary and Critical Care physician in Chicago. He is a columnist for Beliefnet and co-author of The Beliefnet Guide to Islam.

References:

[1]     “CIA holds terror suspects in secret prisons,” by Dana Priest.  
         Washington Post, Nov. 2, 2005.
[2]     “U.S. seeks silence on CIA prisons,” by Carol D. Leonnig and            Eric Rich. Washington Post, Nov. 4, 2006.
[3]     “Extraordinary rendition.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia.
[4]     Rumsfeld v. Padilla. U.S. Supreme Court, No. 03-1027.
[5]     Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. U.S. Supreme Court, No. 05-184.
[6]     “President Bush signs Military Commissions Act of 2006.”              Office of the Press Secretary, White House, Oct. 17, 2006.
[7]     “President Bush signs un-American military commissions act,           ACLU says new law undermines due process and the rule of              law.” American Civil Liberties Union, Oct. 17, 2006.
[8]     “Q and A: Military Commissions Act of 2006.” Human Rights          Watch.
[9]     Ibid.
[10]   “Spy agencies say Iraq war worsens terrorism threat,” by              Mark Mazzetti. New York Times, Sept. 24, 2006.