Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Austin Bay :: Townhall.com Columnist
A Quiet Step Forward for the Rule of Law
by Austin Bay
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Arguably, Col. Mark Martins runs the most multifaceted, pressure-packed and press-scrutinized law practice in the Middle East.

Martins serves as staff judge advocate for Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I), which makes him Gen. David Petraeus' top legal adviser.

He's prepared for the job. Martins' military career began with a tour leading an airborne infantry platoon. His resume is a record of demanding military law assignments, including a stint in the chairman of the joint chiefs office. His academic record speaks volumes: first in order of general merit in his class at West Point, Rhodes Scholar with first class honors at Oxford, Harvard Law School and Law Review.

Within Iraq, Martins' "law firm-in-uniform" handles an array of legal issues that have immediate analogues in the civilian world. The Judge Advocate General's (JAG) office oversees courts martial (trial work) and authorizes investigations (district attorney work).

Military lawyers, of course, have "service unique" legal tasks. In the War on Terror, they often must advise senior commanders on the legal ramifications of attacking certain types of targets. That's a complicated job in a complicated theater of war.

However, Martins, his staff and civilian legal personnel serving with other U.S. agencies in Iraq have an even more complex and, in my view, more critical assignment. These legal experts are helping Iraq's nascent democratic government implement the Rule of Law.

Replacing the violent whims of ideological, theocratic or tribal tyrants and terrorists with democratic law is a slow, frustratingly incremental process, but nevertheless a strategically essential and potentially decisive endeavor if peace, justice and genuine security are your goals.

In a phone interview from Baghdad, Martins told me that in his estimation the Iraqi government made a small but significant step on April 2, when the Iraqi judiciary opened criminal trial proceedings in its new Rule of Law Complex in Baghdad.

The new facility itself is a compound in Baghdad's Resafa district that co-locates investigation and judicial operations. It is certainly a target for terrorists and fascist thugs because the murderers understand its physical existence represents precisely the kind of systemic change that will ultimately defeat them. Because it is a target, Iraq's ministries of interior and justice have devoted extensive resources to securing the Rule of Law Complex.

Martins wanted to address the specifics of the complex's first criminal proceedings. There were two men brought into the investigative court, "an alleged Sunni al-Qaida operative and a Shia police officer," Martins said. "Both had proceedings initiated for crimes again the Iraqi people. The al-Qaida operative was accused of killing scores of people, and the police officer accused of abusing detainees in his custody."

The Sunni terrorist accused of mass murder (likely of Shia Arabs) and the Shia cop nabbed for abuse and torture (likely of Sunnis) are, of course, symbolic of Iraq's sectarian strife. They are more than mere symbols, however. They are dreadful men who have committed vicious crimes.

Martins did not want to oversell the judicial proceeding. "I've got to look at results on the ground and not get exuberant. This (proceeding) was just an investigation and a first couple of cases. It's still the early days (in this process). That's why I'm taking a measured approach."

But I pushed him: This is Iraq, Colonel, Islam's tectonic collision of Shia and Sunni. Four years ago, one of the world's most vicious dictators was still in charge. He preyed on ethnic and religious differences and ran a prison state in the Stalinist mold.

"You've got to give the Iraqis their due," Martins replied. "The Rule of Law works in little steps, often methodical. Those steps are calm and deliberate when applied. I think as a lawyer it is dramatic, a small step that provides hope that Iraqis can reject the politics of revenge."

So then it's really significant, isn't it, Colonel? Instead of tribal or sectarian revenge slayings -- more bodies in the morgue -- they've begun the process of systemic change.

"It is a step forward," Martins agreed. "The Iraqi government made a step toward reconciliation by rejecting revenge -- submitting these two alleged criminals to a court."

No, the two criminal proceedings didn't get sensational headlines.

But they should have.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Austin Bay Austin Bay is author of three novels. His third novel, The Wrong Side of Brightness, was published by Putnam/Jove in June 2003. He has also co-authored four non-fiction books, to include A Quick and Dirty Guide to War: Third Edition (with James Dunnigan, Morrow, 1996).
 
Be the first to read Austin Bay's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
An Eye for An Eye

You saying the Iraqis will no longer practice an eye for an eye law ?

I'll believe it when I see it.

One small step
The US countless times has built things -- schools, hospitals, now courtrooms -- that were going to change the course of the resistance and civil war. Each time the project is announced as a piece of uder-reported "good news" from Iraq.

Each time it was a failure. Either the thing wasn't built, or it was built so badly it could not be used, or it got blown up right away, or the staff got killed, ... (lots of failure modes). Is there any reason to think this is any different? US lawmen coming to show Iraqis how it's done???

Face it, there's way more bad news than good news & Bush hasn't a clue what to do about it.

liberalgoodman
Such an oxymoron in a name - oh well ~ Your repeated display of optimism is refreshing; your glass must always be half empty.

Pappy - don't hold your breath!

After 17 months in Korea well over 50 years ago, I thought Korea was a disaster, yet today South Korea is an economic powerhouse - although still with political problems.

Then, after a year in RVN (66-67), I thought "If we could come out of RVN half as well as we did in Korea, we'd be most fortunate". We didn't, and it surely wasn't the military's fault.

Yes, Iraq appears to be another disaster, but then so is the entire Middle East, thanks to Islam. Again, I do not blame the military. The Military is ALWAYS called upon AFTER diplomacy and politicians have FAILED!

Is it better to try to do something, even if it may result in failure - or never try and always wonder why we 'failed'.

Freedom has a meaning for those who have fought for it the protected shall never understand. And too many will never understand.






liberalgoodman
Typical response of whiners.

"It's not enough!"
"It won't work!"
"Everything isn't perfect, yet!"
"It takes too long!"
"It wasn't what I meant!"
"Why can't it all be done, now?"

Get tired of it and ignore it. Nothing is good to people that are always looking to lay blame and quit.

You want it better over there? Sign up or go as a contractor. Then YOU can fix it.

But you won't. You'll just say it is Bush's war and that it has nothing to do with you.

Typical.

It is a lost cause.
The goal of making Iraq into a working democracy is a lost cause. The people don't want freedom, they want tyranny.

Just look to Iran, for example. The people of Iran have allowed Sharia law to be imposed upon them. Sharia law is the EPITOMY of evil (Let's put this in context: A teenage girl who was said to be mentally unstable was raped by a married man. The Sharia judge overseeing the case determined that the man had done nothing wrong, but the girl, by "allowing" herself to be raped by a married man, ought to be hanged from the neck until dead. On her execution day, the judge was said to be gleeful as he wrapped the noose around this child's neck. The noose was tied to a crain, and she was slowly lifted into the air to die a slow and painful death.), and yet the people WANT this tyranny to be imposed upon them. Iran has a military-ready population of about 35 million.

If those people actually wanted freedom, all that needs to happen is for those masses to rise up, march into the Ayatollah's house, drag him and his family out, then publicly mutilate them. Make it UNMISTAKABLY obvious that they aren't going to take that any longer. Problem solved. No more Sharia law. That they don't do this is tantimount to the fact that they WANT Sharia law.

Let's put it this way: If George W. Bush announced that tomorrow he would impose Sharia law here in the US, exactly how many seconds following that announcement would he live? 4? 5? 6 seconds at the outside? He wouldn't live long enough for him to chuckle out a "Hehe! Just kiddin' folks!"

We enjoy freedom, and will do what it takes to preserve that freedom. The freaks in the Middle East enjoy tyranny, and, as can be plainly seen in Iraq, they will fight to keep that tyranny. Let's let them have it.

We went into Iraq for the right reasons, and with justifiable hopes that we could create another ally, a la Germany after World War II (well, until the USSR took half of it). It is now apparent that those knuckledraggers are too primitive to care about freedom. Maybe in a few decades they'll leave the 7th century and join the rest of us in the 21st century, but I'm not holding my breath.

My advice is to annex a 50 square mile plot of land in Iraq, up near the Iranian border, and build a big military base. Wall it off from the outside, and permanently station 150,000 troops there, and let our "friends" in the region know that they are there just in case any of them decides to not be nice.

beowulfe

I agree with most of your comment. Except that Iraq is a lost cause.

I believe it is still possible for Iraq to have a relatively democratic government.

Lebanon had one, then lost it, then got one back again. If tiny Lebanon with enemies all around can do it, so can Iraq.

Only question really is this; will they?

"Imus"
.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.