Will the Senate Question Alberto Gonzales about Panama?

With the US Senate ready to begin confirmation hearings for Alberto Gonzales to the post of Attorney General, there is an air of uncertainty around the Capitol that is almost palpable. No one is quite sure how much antagonism Gonzales will face from the Democrats on the Hill. Because of Arlen Specter’s brash announcement on judicial nominees, many Judiciary Committee members may be keen to ask him about abortion and other hot-button issues. But the most important question will have to with an oft-cited memo Gonzales wrote to advise the President on observing the Geneva Conventions toward Taliban members and Al-Qaeda operatives. Gonzales has been criticized roundly for such zingers as calling provisions in the treaty “quaint”. But it appears those comments are overshadowed by a remark about precedent. As White House Counsel, he mentions that already there had been a consensus in 1989 that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to the US action taken against Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega. However, Gonzales duly notes that then President George H. W. Bush decided to observe the treaty anyway.

So who knew that the Road to Abu Ghraib went through the Panama Canal? The parallels between the American intervention in Panama and the Iraq war are surprising. Both seemed elective conflicts by President Bush with a degree of occupation as well as the capture of a former US ally running each country as a dictator. Or that both of these strongmen were involved in a global proliferation of bad things infiltrating the US. For Noriega it was drugs, for Saddam Hussein, weapons of mass destruction. In both instances, not just Gonzales but other top administration attorneys believed the Geneva Conventions did not apply. The January 2002 memorandum does not explain why.

The answer may be timing. US Marines did not arrive in Panama until December of 1989, a month after the fall of the Berlin Wall. It has been alleged, however, that preparations had been made throughout the year. Could it have been that policy advisors in Bush Sr.’s administration already believed that the Geneva Conventions were “quaint”, but that the presence of the Soviet Union meant serious repercussions if the US opted out. Yet, reluctance by the Soviet Union to intervene in East Germany demonstrated that the old “bipolar paradigm” was gone. The invasion of Panama would be the crucible to try a new strategy. That is, until Bush Sr. got cold feet and demanded the Conventions be adhered to.