UNITED STATES Liberty for All
Some Americans fear a curb of civil liberties could
damage the U.S. and its image abroad
From Far Eastern Economic Review
By Murray Hiebert/WASHINGTON
Issue cover-dated October 4, 2001
THE UNITED STATES government faces a dilemma
as it tries to make the country more secure after the
terror attacks of September 11: Can it balance the
long-standing freedoms that Americans see as their
inalienable rights with the need for a heightened security
that could erode the civil liberties of Americans and
their foreign guests?
While the rest of the world also takes a new look at
security, U.S. officials, prompted by fears of a new
round of attacks, have already introduced security
measures not witnessed since World War II. They are
proposing further steps that could significantly change
the way the U.S. deals with foreigners on American soil
and, some believe, could undermine the credibility of
Washington as a human-rights champion abroad.
People entering government buildings, office towers and
sporting events are now subject to the kind of
beefed-up precautions they once faced only at airports.
Military surveillance flights regularly circle over
Washington and New York, while the U.S. Coast
Guard patrols major ports and the National Guard is
deployed at dams and around utilities. President
George W. Bush has announced the creation of an
Office of Homeland Security to coordinate the
country's new domestic anti-terrorism efforts.
These stepped-up safeguards and patrols may comfort
some Americans. But many are worried by Bush
administration proposals to seek broad new authority to
wiretap suspects and deport immigrants without a
review of the evidence by the courts, along with dozens
of other proposals included in the Justice Department's
draft Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 prepared for
Congress.
In response, over 150 groups--from the liberal
American Civil Liberties Union to the conservative Gun
Owners of America--released a joint petition urging the
administration "not to erode the liberties and freedoms
that are at the core of the American way of life."
One of the more controversial proposals in the 21-page
draft would give the government greater authority to
detain and deport foreigners. This comes at a time of
growing concern about making people who appear to
be of Muslim or Arab descent a target of increased
security measures. Legislation would be expanded
beyond the current power over foreigners who are
suspected of supporting terrorism to include those who
are suspected of being only indirectly associated with a
terrorist group. Another proposal would grant the
attorney-general (who heads the Justice Department)
the authority to order an arrest by declaring that the
individual is a threat to American security.
Current regulations require that investigators first obtain
a court order to seize and listen to voice-mail devices;
the new proposals would allow law-enforcement
officers to do this with only a search warrant. Similar
measures would allow authorities to read e-mail,
subpoena credit-card information from Internet service
providers, wiretap phones and collect DNA samples
with greater ease than before.
RECONSIDERING ASSASSINATIONS
Bush administration officials have also said they are
reconsidering a ban imposed 25 years ago against U.S.
involvement in foreign assassinations. Secretary of State
Colin Powell said a few days after the terror attacks
that "we are examining everything: how the CIA does
its work, how the FBI and Justice Department does its
work, are there laws that need to be changed and new
laws brought into effect to give us more ability to deal
with this kind of threat."
Congressional leaders have called hearings to review
the proposed new anti-terrorist laws and their
implications for civil rights. "If the constitution is
shredded, the terrorists win," warned Senate Judiciary
Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont
Democrat who is drafting alternative proposals. It could
take at least one to two weeks to hammer out a
compromise bill.
Foreign governments are watching. Washington has
long voiced concern about how Asian governments
from China to Malaysia have used draconian measures
to deal with perceived threats from separatists and
alleged subversives. "The U.S. could inadvertently give
them cover by putting restrictions on civil liberties here,"
says Mike Jendrzejczyk of Human Rights Watch. "This
could seriously undermine American credibility on
human rights abroad."
Since the attacks, Chinese officials have said they
would welcome U.S. support in combating separatist
movements in Tibet and Xinjiang. The U.S. and China
were already preparing to resume their human-rights
dialogue. "I hope the State Department uses the
dialogue to press for an end to serious abuses," says
Jendrzejczyk. "But they will have to answer some hard
questions from the Chinese."
feer.com |
