Desecrating the Enemy: The US Marines and the Taliban

Modern wars, fought with what are often misplaced high-minded ideals, are often the stuff of public relations. Indeed, the public relations feature is paramount – to be a good war, the circulated story needs to be good. In the case of Afghanistan, the narrative on the ‘good war’ has proven to be increasingly difficult to tell. The story tellers are running out of ideas.

The most recent YouTube video featuring what seem to be four US marines urinating on the bodies of three Taliban soldiers suggests why this is the case. The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) is understandably outraged by the contents of the latest video, which has, unsurprisingly, gone viral. ‘We are shocked to see representatives of our great nation engaging in behaviour that disrespects America, our values and our armed forces. This behaviour is against the military’s code of conduct as well and the Geneva Convention’s rules on prisoners of war.’ Similar views have been expressed by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The war in Afghanistan has proven to be an enduringly nasty conflict, and rules of engagement nigh impossible to make out. The occupation soldiers of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) face a formidable enemy they find hard to locate yet finds highly lethal in effectiveness. When that enemy becomes accessible, be they living or dead, the response is often one of incandescent rage and sacrificial blood lust. In such contexts, words such as interring the dead honorably, ‘if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged’ fade into insignificance. The law falls silent.

James Joyner, managing editor of the Atlantic Council, puts his finger on it when he observes that, to fulfill orders to kill ‘people you have never met and who have done nothing to you other than being born in another country, it is helpful, perhaps even necessary, to dehumanize and vilify [them]’ (Atlantic Council, Jan 12). It is a sedative, a calculated ingestion of indifference.

In 2005, US military officials investigated claims that US soldiers burned the bodies of Taliban fighters outside the southern village of Gonbaz and used their remains to taunt Islamic militants as part of a crude stab at propaganda. The bodies were supposedly placed in the vague direction of Mecca, and set on fire. ‘Wow’, expressed one of the soldiers present, ‘look at the blood coming out of the mouth on that one, fucking straight death metal’ (Guardian, Oct 20, 2005). The comments on the latest video are of a similar nature. ‘Have a great day, buddy’ and ‘Golden, like a shower’, are the not so glorious accompaniments to the gory footage.

When General Dwight D. Eisenhower commented on the lethal detritus of the German concentration camp system at the end of the Second World War – the grotesquely cruel array of human remains and exhausted, near-to-death inmates – he felt that the camera shot would preserve the moment of brutality, acting as the supreme deterrent while also expunging notions of doubt that humans were incapable of such acts. In claiming this, he failed to acknowledge that recording the image can have quite the opposite effect.

The ease with which images can be distributed and disseminated – the net, social networking technologies – do not so much act as a deterrent but as heady stimulants. The camera at the scene is not merely a device that records the act of desecration for posterity’s reasons. It also celebrates that very infliction of cruelty. American soldiers in the war against Japan would often sport photos of their trophies – the head of a Japanese soldier was not an infrequent acquisition. In more recent times, those associated with Al Qaeda are more than familiar with the recorded execution, sent streaming out into cyberspace with chilling effect. Ummat Studios, a public relations arm of the Taliban, has been in the sanguinary business of sending videos of alleged culprits who suffered decapitation for various alleged crimes.

While the Taliban will make hay on this latest atrocity video with ruthless efficiency, it is hardly likely to retreat from its latest stance of showing a willingness to open direct negotiations with Washington. Their spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid puts the matter rather clearly. ‘This is not a political process, so the video will not harm our talks and prisoner exchange because they are at the preliminary stage.’ Such is the nature of war.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com