Leveraging Another Kind of Truth

Those pensive-looking guys to the left are 20th C. philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre and Bertrand Russell. Although they come from different ends of the philosophical spectrum– existentialism and literature for Sartre, mathematical logic and analytic philosophy for Russell–they did share a passion for and commitment to the life of that long-lost animal, the engaged intellectual. It was that common interest (and the Vietnam War) that prompted Russell and Sartre, in 1967, to organize and preside over what was “officially” called the International War Crimes Tribunal but popularly known as the Russell-Sartre Tribunal (or just the Russell Tribunal). Because the Tribunal was not backed by any official government’s mandate, it was really the purest form of a truth commission, seeking to uncover the facts of “war crimes” committed by the United States (and, secondarily, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea) during the Vietnam War.

There is a lot of talk these days about the possibility of bringing former President Bush (et al) to account for war crimes, human rights violations, and the like. The truth is, that will probably never happen in any official capacity. And yet, the whole truth of that history still needs to be known. President Obama, on his first full day in Office, welcomed his senior staff and Cabinet members with some remarks that included the following:

But the way to make a government responsible is not simply to enlist the services of responsible men and women, or to sign laws that ensure that they never stray. The way to make government responsible is to hold it accountable. And the way to make government accountable is make it transparent so that the American people can know exactly what decisions are being made, how they’re being made, and whether their interests are being well served…

Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.

This is exactly the sort of historically-sensitive commitment to truth that I think we find in the work of truth commissions. That is, it is a commitment to the concept of a truth-in-common, which serves as the foundation that constitutes and legitimates truly democratic polities. When that truth is no longer shared or, worse, when it is intentionally disavowed and covered over, it is the responsibility of we, the people–powerless but universal, to borrow Sartre’s formulation– to insist upon its reintroduction into the public space.

To that end, I hope that we keep pressure on the issue of our former administration’s war crimes and human rights violations. That pressure may have to come from non-governmental bodies without a mandate, a constellation of jurymen without a judge, like the Russell-Sartre Tribunal a half-century ago. But we shouldn’t underestimate the promise of those bodies. Again, from Sartre:

This session is a communal undertaking for which the final term should be, as a philosopher said, ‘une verité devenue’. If the masses agree with our judgement, it will become truth, and we, at the very moment when we step back so that they will become the guardians and powerful supporters of that truth, will then know that we have been legitimized. When the people show their agreement they will also show a greater need: that a real ‘War Crimes Tribunal’ be created on a permanent basis, that these crimes may be denounced and not sanctioned anywhere and at any time.