"Screwed up" and "abused": Omar Khadr's Canadian interrogations at Guantanamo

As the Abu Ghraib scandal demonstrates, a photo is worth a thousand words -- even if, as Errol Morris' newly-released documentary Standard Operating Procedure demonstrates, those words are sometimes what the viewer wishes to see, rather than what actually happened.

There is, therefore, enormous excitement in the media about the first ever release of images from interrogations in Guantánamo: seven and a half hours of footage (highlights available here in a ten-minute version) from interrogations of Canadian citizen Omar Khadr, who was just 15 years old when he was seized after a firefight with US soldiers in Afghanistan in July 2002.

In February 2003, when he was still only 16, Omar was visited by representatives of his home country's Air Force Office of Special Investigations. As has already been widely reported, the video footage from these interrogations -- released to Omar's Canadian lawyers, Nathan Whitling and Dennis Edney, as the result of a decision in May by the Supreme Court of Canada and a decision in June by the Federal Court of Canada -- shows Omar displaying his wounds, weeping uncontrollably and pulling at his hair in despair.

Despite the excitement, however, documents relating to these interrogations have been available for the last six days, and it's my belief that they demonstrate the confusion of a desperately lonely imprisoned child without any of the dubious voyeurism that the images bring, whilst also allowing a useful distance from which to appreciate the general coldness and indifference of the interrogators. As Whitling noted in an email accompanying the documents' release, "The documents paint a picture of a victimized and exploited boy."

The Canadian representatives interrogated Omar for four days, and in three separate documents relating to the sessions they ran through the lines of questioning they pursued, which were mainly to do with his family history and his knowledge of al-Qaeda. Omar's father, who funded orphanages in Afghanistan, was also friendly with Osama bin Laden, and Omar and his three brothers spent much of their childhood in Afghanistan and Pakistan, on occasion sharing a compound with the bin Laden family.

Absent from these reports, however, is any detailed questioning relating to Omar's supposed crime -- the killing of a US soldier during the firefight in which he was captured, the veracity of which has only recently been exposed to scrutiny. Also missing are the odd flashes of humanity that can be gleaned from the videotape, when, for example, one of the interrogators attempts to calm Omar, who is clearly distraught, by saying, "I know this is stressful."

These human touches are, however, overshadowed by the interrogators' general indifference to Omar's plight. As Whitling and Edney noted when they released the documents, although Omar was clearly "suffering from severe emotional problems connected with his detention and interrogation, crying heavily on more than one occasion," the Canadian officials "dismissed his claims of abuse on the flimsiest of pretexts," writing, in one of the reports, that his allegations of torture at the US prison in Bagram, Afghanistan, which have, of course, subsequently been verified by numerous sources, "did not ring true."

The interrogators were also indifferent when Omar broke down after describing how he was severely wounded in one eye during the firefight that led to his capture. One report relates, "Khadr stated, 'I lost my eyes,' indicating that when he was shot, it affected his vision. Khadr put his head back in his hands and cried heavily. The interrogators left him at this point." On another occasion, another report states, "Khadr has not received any letters from family since being detained. The interviewers then provided Khadr with a letter, which had recently arrived at Camp Delta. The letter was from his grandmother in Canada. Khadr was left along to review the letter. Khadr was watched using a video monitor and a one-way piece of glass. Khadr appeared to cry while reading the letter. Tears were coming from his eyes and he was rubbing his eyes and nose."

This might not be quite so worrying if Omar was an adult at the time of his capture and interrogations -- although it would still raise uncomfortable questions about Canadian complicity in the US detention of a Canadian citizen in worryingly novel circumstances, held neither as a Prisoner of War protected by the Geneva Conventions, nor as a criminal suspect facing a regular trial.

Given Omar's circumstances, however, it directly contravenes the terms of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which both the United States and Canada are signatories, which stipulates that juvenile prisoners -- defined as those accused of a crime that took place when they were under 18 years of age -- "require special protection." The Optional Protocol specifically recognizes "the special needs of those children who are particularly vulnerable to recruitment or use in hostilities", and requires its signatories to promote "the physical and psychosocial rehabilitation and social reintegration of children who are victims of armed conflict."

Clearly, these requirements have not been fulfilled in Omar's case, and the Canadians' complicity in Omar's detention and interrogation also, of course, make a mockery of the Canadian government's insistent mantra -- that it would not intervene in Omar's case since it had received assurances from the United States that Omar was being treated humanely -- which, as Whitney notes, "has now been proven to have been an attempt to misinform the Canadian public."

Also included in the documents released by Whitling and Edney, although not featured in the videotapes, are notes from a second visit with Omar, by Jim Gould of the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, in March 2004. In a summary of the visit by R. Scott Hetherington, the Director of the Foreign Intelligence Division, Gould, who regarded himself as "an amateur observer of the human condition," described Omar as "a thoroughly 'screwed-up' young man," adding, pertinently, 'All those persons who have been in positions of authority over him have abused him and his trust, for their own purposes. In this group can be included his parent and grandparents, his associates in Afghanistan and fellow detainees in Camp Delta and the US military." Significantly, Gould also noted that, as during the visit in 2003, Omar "recanted all previous statements, including his confession to having thrown the grenade that killed the American soldier."

Despite being rather patronizing about Omar, Gould's statement included riveting details of the US military's treatment of Omar, explaining that, "in an effort to make him more amenable and willing to talk" the authorities had placed him on the "frequent flyer program," the euphemistic name for a program of prolonged sleep deprivation. "For the three weeks prior to Mr. Gould's visit," the report continued, Omar "has not been permitted more than three hours in any location. At three hour intervals he is moved to another block, thus denying him uninterrupted sleep." Gould was also told that Omar would "soon be placed in isolation for up to three weeks" and would then be interviewed again.

Although Gould was critical of Omar's US interrogator, noting that he "seemed to be trying to intimidate Omar or force Omar to talk rather then trying to cajole him into cooperation," he was unconcerned about the prolonged sleep deprivation, noting, nonchalantly, that Omar "did not appear to have been affected by three weeks on the 'frequent flyer' program." Four years later, however, on June 25, 2008, Mr. Justice Richard Mosley of the Federal Court of Canada thought differently, and ruled that this treatment constituted a breach of the United Nations Convention against Torture and the Geneva Conventions. As Nathan Whitling noted, without elaboration, "The Canadian government did not attempt to appeal this decision."

The most distressing anecdote from Gould's report, however, which, bizarrely, he portrayed as an example of Omar "hav[ing] some feelings," followed a session with an interrogator from the Department of Defense, who had shown him a photo of his family, only for Omar to deny that he knew anyone in the picture. "Left alone with the picture and despite his shackles," the report continued, "Omar urinated on the picture. The MPs cleaned him, the picture and floor and again left him alone with the picture -- after shortening his shackles so that he couldn't urinate on the picture again. But, with the flexibility of youth, he was able to lower his trousers and again urinated on the picture. Again the MPs cleaned up and left him alone with the picture on a table in front of him. After two and a half hours alone and probably assuming that he was no longer being watched, Omar laid his head down on the table beside the picture in what was seen as an affectionate manner."

This is an example of Omar "hav[ing] some feelings"? In my world, which I hope you share, it shows a horrendously isolated and abused teenager displaying mood swings that are symptomatic of extreme mental disturbance.

As Dr. Eric Trupin, who has conducted extensive research on the effects of incarceration on adolescents, explained in 2005 after reviewing the results of mental status tests administered by Omar's US lawyers, which followed three years of interrogations that began as soon as Omar was captured, and which had a cumulative effect that the Canadians either could not or would not consider:

The impact of these harsh interrogation techniques on an adolescent such as O.K. [Omar], who also has been isolated for almost three years, is potentially catastrophic to his future development. Long-term consequences of harsh interrogation techniques are both more pronounced for adolescents and more difficult to remediate or treat even after such interrogations are discontinued, particularly if the victim is uncertain as to whether they will resume. It is my opinion, to a reasonable scientific certainty, that O.K.'s continued subjection to the threat of physical and mental abuse places him at significant risk for future psychiatric deterioration, which may include irreversible psychiatric symptoms and disorders, such as a psychosis with treatment-resistant hallucinations, paranoid delusions and persistent self-harming attempts.

For more on the background to Omar Khadr's story, and his abuse in US detention, see my book The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America's Illegal Prison (published by Pluto Press/the University of Michigan Press).

Follow Andy Worthington on Twitter: www.twitter.com//GuantanamoAndy

Comments

[pcplz]

Al Quaida doesn't need a recruitment for terrorists. We do it for them. I know that if I were innocent and grabbed up and sent to Gitmo........I would become so full of hatred and revenge that I would do anything to get back at them.

This was a boy. He may have been filled already with hate but still a boy. We started the conflict. We started the war.....we were on the land of his ancestors. If one of us was living in Greece and the home state was attacked....we would go home to defend it. That is natural.

He was a boy......now he is a f#cked up man and future hater and no remorse terrorist. Just as he has been treated...this boy will treat.

We will reap what we sow. God help us!

[dosch]

"He was a boy......now he is a f#cked up man and future hater and no remorse terrorist. Just as he has been treated...this boy will treat.

We will reap what we sow. God help us!"

Great response! We have taken people who might otherwise not have hated us and turned them into exactly what we SAY we want to avoid. By heaping evil upon this person, we have destroyed him. Should we be surprised if he ultimately opts to destroy us?!

[zjr909]

As long as we have the CaseyBabes of this world, whose idea of justice seems to be "If we do it, it's right; if they do it, it's wrong," we'll never move beyond the endless spiral of violence and mayhem that threatens to finally engulf the world for good. What to do with criminals, be they war or street gang, does not boil down to an "either-or" paradigm. Either brutalize them to death or wipe their tears and set them free. There really is a middle ground. It's called the Rule of Law. It works very slowly, and one case at a time, and gives mixed results. But it's better than living in a perpetual Hatfield/McCoy world.

[Sarahjan]

"As the Abu Ghraib scandal demonstrates, a photo is worth a thousand words -- even if, as Errol Morris' newly-released documentary Standard Operating Procedure demonstrates, those words are sometimes what the viewer wishes to see, rather than what actually happened."

Hello Andy,

yes, image is always taken from a perspective, but please let us not forget what this story of about: the torture interrogation of a16 years old boy who was kept without being charged with anything for 6 years. Errol Morris's documentary about the US sexual torture of prisoners in Abu Ghraib or to use the term preferred by US and British reporters, 'abuse" was critiqued for not going the distance and for being simplistic and a whitewash. Here is a link to a review piece on E M’s doc on Abu Ghraib published in the Guardian. The real question is can we face political and moral implications of Abu Ghraib and Gitmo and Fallujaha without falling back to relativism?As for the torture of this teenage boy at Gitmo, I do not think majority of Americans will pay attention to it; this will be taken seriously in Canada. Canadians have heavily invested on their respect for human rights and international law and this video will create bad feeling in the minds and hearts of some Canadians, much less so in the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans.
. http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,,2257971,00.html

[HBeachbum]

Poor little terrorist. The anger should be pointed at his father that put him in this position.

[dosch]

This is a CHILD you are talking about!! What is wrong with you?! I bet you claim to be a Christian, too. Tell me, if Jesus were standing at the elbow of this child's interrogators, what do you think he'd have to say about this disgusting treatment of a child, a fellow human being?

Do you believe in the rule of law? As the article states, both the US and Canada are signatories to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Clearly both this and the Geneva Convention have been violated in the case of Omar Khadr.

Do you have children HBeachbum? Would you view this as appropriate treatment for YOUR child?! Just in case you missed it, I am totally outraged by your response to the plight of this child and fellow human being.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Mr W,

Thank you again, and as always, for your good works.

No amount of torture and abuse of ANY detainee, especially one captured at age 15, constitutes anything but the grossest perversion of justice.

The perpetrators need to be held accountable in the same courts of law they deny their captives.

No that I'm done venting, I will take a moment to weep in private for America.

[CaseyBabes]

............"is a thoroughly screwed-up young man." So, mostly, are the young toughs who choose acts of violence, whether on the Canadian streets or battlefields. They're capable of the most terrible of sadistic acts......­......don'­t believe me? Pick up any morning newspaper of a large city recounting the last 24-hour's crime activities.
Ah, hell, dry the poor baby's tears and set him free. He's only a thoroughly screwed-up young man.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

I agree about young toughs.

So clearly then, we need to expand the Gitmo program to every jail, prison, and youth detention center from the Rio Grande to the Yukon.

[dosch]

Well said! Truly, that is the logical conclusion of CaseyBabes' argument.

[S1m0n]

The engagement in which Khadr was captured was initiated by US forces. In fact, so many airstrikes were called in on the building Khadr was living that the army had concluded that no one inside could have remained alive.

They were wrong; two people--Khadr and an adult--were alive, and one of these threw a handgrenade at the soldiers on the scene, thereby returning the favor.

Of the two, Khadr was the one who survived, so he was the one charged. The official incident report filed by the ranking officer was later--several months later--altered to remove any mention of the second defender. The forgery went undetected until the judge at Kadr's trial started ordering the release of evidence to his defense laywers; evidence the administration opposed releasing.

That judge was pulled from the case shortly after and replaced with a judge less inclined to rule for the defence.

[LorettaSingbiel]

On "actionable intelligence", U.S. bombed this building ... and out of the rubble, a15 year-old "young tough" survived ... and suffered at the hands of OUR country and Canada ... for alegedly killing a soldier.

His "crime" is killing a SOLDIER? If HE is a "terrorist" by THAT definition... then ALL SOLDIERS who have killed SOLDIERS are "terrorists"! Then throw them ALL in GITMO's ... throw away the key ... Then there'll be NO SOLDIERS "free" to WAGE WARS ... THEN WE CAN FINALLY HAVE PEACE!

In his last public speech, Martin Luther King had said "I've SEEN the promised land! I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people will get to the promised land!"

I'm glad MLK was spared SEEING the TORTURE that OUR land has promised us!

SHAME ON AMERICA AND CANADA!!!

[Gidster]

In the other thread the specter of 9/11 is brought up as justification for war crimes.
People scream their vitriol against this kid, who stands accused of fighting against the US.
Soldiers fight and die. It is up to Governments to use them responsibly. If the allegations against this kid are true then he is a soldier, fighting for his Cause. That does not make him a criminal. A killer yes, just as all soldiers must be. Perhaps he believed in his Cause as much as any soldier can at 15.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

As if in any war or firefight, even we Americans do FORENSICS to determine who shot J.R.

We all did.

[hphoenix]

Under international law, Khadr should have been classified as a child soldier and treated as such. How many 15 year-olds would have the ability to defy a father with tradition and religion on his side, esp when he raised his sons to die as martyrs. Omar is paying a price for being his father's son.

[zjr909]

When you read some of the comments to this post, you understand how we got where we are today. Magister Ludi ironically makes the best case for condemning the blatant torture of this 15 year old, by suggesting that the kid actually boasted of having killed an American occupier (er, soldier). If this kid was so willing to boast about everything he did, then please tell me why it was necessary to torture him to get him to talk. Clearly it wasn't. The torture was totally gratuitous. And, of course, that's the entire thing in a nutshell: torture is NEVER about obtaining intelligence. It's about inflicting fear and pain, pure and simple.

[Fudgefase]

This young man is now lost, damaged irreparably. No-one will ever really know whether he threw the grenade or not.
To have been in this environment during the formative years of 15 - 23 is truly frightening.
The Canadian Govt should have had a rep with him the minute they knew he was there. This was moral cowardice on their part.

[gvc]

And what if he did throw the grenade?

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

So let's torture every soldier we capture. Right?

If criminal, try him. I'm sure there's reasonable doubt as to who exactly threw which grenade. But don't torture him.

If a soldier, repatriate him at the end of the war. But don't torture him.

What's so friggin hard about that?

[ethancorso]

It's absurd how many people in this forum have sympathy only for the victims of Omar Khadrs alleged actions -- without expressing any regret whatsoever for the ordeal the Khadr family has had to endure.

If a foreign force, fed up with the Bush administration, were to invade the United States many Americans would be more than happy to lob a grenade in the direction of their attackers. Pulpits would be a seminal voice in the national call to arms.

Omar Khadr is no different. Motivated by religion, he chose to defend his interests with deadly force. He had been convinced that his very existence was perpetually threatened by a foreign power. It's precisely the same attitude that many Americans hold with regards to 'Islamofacism'. In both cases this perverted mindset, a demonstrable self perpetuating disaster, is sold to the masses disguised as faith and patriotism.

Please, stop feeding the delusion that American lives are somehow inherently more valuable than the lives of those from other nations. As well, bear in mind that in a similar situation many Americans would conduct themselves in much the same manner as Omar Khadr.

[awcbuddy8]

If a foreign force decided to invade the US the majority of that country's citizens would probably die before and US citizen had the oppurtunity to throw a grenade. I'm sorry, but these "scenarios" of "what if America was indaved" are so stupid. The invading force would never reach American borders to begin with.

And with the "he did what he felt was right" is another incredibly stupid argument. He lives in Canada and the war was in Afghanistan. He joined up with a pack of murderers and terrorists. And even if you discount all of that, he lost. Now he has to deal with the consequences of losing.

[Gidster]

But yet the MSM and the Bush administration went to war because it could happen!
Jingoism has never saved any country from attack.

[Gidster]

So yo are a scholar of Islam and Arabic culture?

[martinchill]

"The invading force would never reach American borders to begin with."

i'm guessing you don't live in texas or arizona.

[sisterdebmac]

What if he was TAKEN to Afghanistan by his family? He was just a kid. Ever think of that? What if he was just scared and trying to defend himself. Until you've been in his shoes, how can you judge?

[FogBelter]

I'm sure after the humane treatment afforded him by his interrogators, Omar, like Winston in Room 101, confessed to everything presented to him and implicated every friend and family member he had.

I guess that can be considered a victory in the War on Terror ... Hooray for our side!

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Our war of terror is going just swell.

[MagisterLudi]

On August 31, 2004, a Summary of Evidence memo was prepared for Khadr's Combatant Status Review Tribunal.
The summary alleged that he had admitted he threw a grenade which killed a U.S. soldier,
attended an al Qaida training camp in Kabul
worked as a translator for al Qaida to coordinate land mine missions.
In addition, he was accused of helping to plant the landmines between Khost and Ghardez,
and having visited an airport near Khost to collect information on U.S. convoy movements.[90]

His actual tribunal was convened on September 7, as Panel #5 reviewed his status in the detainment camp. The tribunal concluded that Khadr was an "enemy combatant."
But this is all not true... because... because... ah.... his lawyers say so....
Yes, much rather believe the lawyers. Thats the ticket.

[Gidster]

The only evidence presented was the summary. That is simply not enough to prove his guilt.
Proving his combat status, means he is to be treated like any POW in American custodty

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

So you're ok with his treatment?

[MagisterLudi]

Khadr was given on-site medical attention, during which time he repeatedly asked the medics to kill him, surprising them with his English. An officer present later recorded in his diary that he was about to tell his Private Second Class to kill the wounded Khadr, when Delta Force soldiers ordered them not to harm the prisoner.[42]

The unconscious Khadr was airlifted to receive medical attention at Bagram.

Khadr was interrogated on September 17, and stated that he helped the militants because he had been told the United States was fighting a war against Islam.

When asked how that made him feel at the time, the 15-year old stated "I wanted to kill a lot of American[s] to get lots of money

Officials considered him an "intelligence treasure trove" not only because his father was Ahmed Said Khadr, but because he had personally met Osama bin Laden

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

And how much actionable intel have we gotten out of him since?

Capture of OBL, ferrexample?

I guess we just haven't tortured him enough. He's still holding back.

[tkondaks]

He killed an American soldier in Afghanista­n...allege­dly.
My sympathy lies with his victim's family.
Kadr should have stayed in Canada instead of following his father to Afghanistan and joining Al Qaida.

[dosch]

His "victim" was a soldier who knew he was putting his life on the line. HE, on the other hand, was a civilian CHILD whose family was being killed around him, who undoubtibly thought his demise was immenant, who MAY, in an effort to protect himself, have thrown a grenade. What the hell do you expect him to have done?!