Aussaresses.

This is coolbert:

Read this interesting interview originally published in the Soldier of Fortune [SOF] magazine.

Is with the French General Aussaresses.

The French General who as a Captain serving in French Algeria in the mid 1950's conducted interrogations of captured "terrorists". Interrogations where torture was used as a normal matter of course. Torture that was approved by the highest authorities as a measure that would be effective in combating the insurgency the French were desperate to defeat.

"Aussaresses, then 35 years old [in 1954], was the intelligence official in charge of liquidating the Front Liberation Nationale (FLN)."

This man and the topic, torture, have previously been the subject of a blog entry of mine. This SOF article only adds to what was in the prior post.

Keep in mind what the French military theorist Roger Trinquier had to say about the use of torture in the counter-insurgency environment. Torture was to be permitted, but with strict protocols to be followed. Protocols to include:

* The terrorist was to be asked only questions that related to the organization of his movement.

* That the interrogators must know what to ask.

* Once the information is obtained the torture must stop.

* The terrorist is then treated as any other prisoner of war.

[again, I would argue that the word "terrorist" has be carefully defined here.]

The account by the General regarding the prelude to the The Battle Of Philippeville are most interesting. Aussaresses had concluded the time and place of the "terrorist" attack. He did not want to tip the insurgents off, but did have his men in place and "have made ready". As part of his days' activity, the General:

* Did the parachute jump to maintain "jump" status at 0300.

* Had breakfast of espresso, eggs, and wine.

* Awaited the forthcoming attack with aplomb.

"a·plomb 1. imperturbable self-possession, poise, or assurance."

Those French!!

According to the protocols of torture as enunciated by Roger Triquier, the "terrorist", when he gave up the information you desired, was to be accorded fair and humane treatment from that point on. In the case of Algeria THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. From the account of General Aussaresses, about 3,000 persons, after having been interrogated, and made to talk, were then executed. Twenty four of them by the hand of Aussaresses himself!

[I can recall when I first heard of Aussaresses. He was being interviewed on "Sixty Minutes". He made a strong impression by what he said. He also said that the torture was NOT prolonged and severely painful to the point of causing death. Most folks give up very quickly what they know when even a moderate amount of pain is inflicted through the tortures. What was done in Algeria seems to be primarily water-boarding and electrical shocks. To derive intelligence quickly. What you see in the movies does not occur. NO prolonged mistreatment! This according to the General!]

"The methods employed were always the same: beatings, electricity, water. Beatings often sufficed. Le gengene consisted of torture with electricity. Electrodes were applied to the ears or the testicles with increasing intensity. Or, water was poured over the face until the prisoner spoke or drowned."

"Some prisoners spoke freely. For others, several beatings were sufficient. It was only in the event that the prisoner refused to talk or tried to conceal evidence that torture was utilized."

I am somewhat surprised that Aussaresses is still free and about. The Belgians have that law that allows for the prosecution of war crimes commited anywhere in the world, and at any place in time [ex post facto!]. I would think that by now sommeone would have requested the extradition of the General for trial. In France, he is immune from prosecution from the 1968 Amnesty Act. But NOT in Belgium.

coolbert.