Could Afghanistan be the Next Guantanamo?
New America Media, Commentary, Stacy Sullivan, Posted: Mar 02, 2009
When Pres. Barack Obama issued an executive order just hours after taking office announcing that he planned to close the detention facilities at Guantanamo within a year, few were happier than those of us who were down at Guantanamo Bay monitoring the irreparably flawed military commissions. As human rights advocates, we had been lobbying for Guantanamo’s closure for years and hoped the decision would be a precursor to ending other “war on terror” abuses.
But while Obama has signaled a clear break with some of the most abusive Bush Administration practices – halting the unfair military commissions, renouncing torture and directing the CIA to abide by the same interrogation standards approved by the military – the Obama Administration has made a number of disappointing decisions that quietly signaled support for many of Bush's “war on terror” policies.
One of those decisions came late last week, when administration lawyers upheld the Bush Administration position that persons picked up around the world but transferred to Afghanistan and detained by U.S. forces there are not entitled to habeas corpus rights – that is, the right to challenge the grounds of their detention in U.S. courts. The decision would not be so troubling if the detainees being held there had any other legal recourse, such as a functioning Afghan judicial system Unfortunately, they do not.
More than 600 detainees are being held at Bagram, the U.S. detention facility in Afghanistan, many for several years. Few have seen lawyers or had access to a court. Although the International Committee of the Red Cross visits Bagram, little public information is available about the detainees. However, some are known to have been picked up in other countries – Thailand, the United Arab Emirates and Somalia – and then transferred by the United States to Bagram. These men are no different from the men being held in Guantanamo, but for the fact that they were brought to Afghanistan rather than Cuba. They should be granted habeas rights. The United States cannot use Afghanistan as another Guantanamo in which to hold people from other lands, unbound by any law.
The detainees captured in Afghanistan may not be entitled to habeas rights in the United States, but they still cannot be held indefinitely without an impartial process to review the grounds of their detention. International law provides people detained in civil wars the right to a process to challenge the ground of their detention, ideally before local courts. The United States, however, has not provided any such process. The detainees in its custody – some of whom may have been picked up by mistake – have no way to contest the allegations against them, and often don’t even know what the allegations are.
The dangers of holding terrorism suspects without review have been illustrated all too vividly by Guantanamo, where many of the men turned out to be innocent, the victims of having been turned over to U.S. forces in exchange for bounty. Holding men who had done nothing wrong did not make the United States any safer. To the contrary, it may well have provided ammunition to those who would do harm to the United States. And it also undermined the fundamental right not to be deprived of one’s liberty without legal basis.
As the Obama Administration prepares to send more troops into Afghanistan in the hope of defeating the resurgent Taliban, it needs to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. It can only do that by upholding the valuesfor which it claims to be fighting. A good place to start would be ensure that those in U.S. detention are granted lawyers and a meaningful opportunity to challenge the grounds of their arrest.
Stacy Sullivan is a counterterrorism advisor at Human Rights Watch.
Related Articles:
Musharraf: ‘Pakistan is Not a Perpetrator of Terrorism’
Immigration Detention Reform Moves to Front Burner
Eye on Arab Media: Obama Charms Arabs on TV
Page
1 of 1
|
User Comments
Austin on Mar 04, 2009 at 11:29:41 said:
Another attack on me, that is called Ad Hominem, frickin Google it man. Nothing but name calling and attacks on my person. This is the life of being a conservative. Can either of you stay on topic, honestly? Now allow me to lower myself to your level.
People like you are totally unaware of the crimes we committed in WWII. We did some horrendous things to win WWII, many things that went against our \"American values\". Of course you have no idea of those things, because you are completely one sided and most of your attacks comes from your animosity of Republicans. Get your head out of the sand. I\'m a realist. I want the U.S. to succeed at all costs, and terrorists DO NOT have the rights of an American citizen IMAO. Just like illegal immigrants should have no rights here.
We should be doing what Israel is doing, conducting highly secretive missions in the night to assassinate known leaders, no court, no trial, all progress.
You say it will help with the view of the U.S. to treat our prisoners this way. Maybe Europe will thinker higher of us (but probably won\'t), but our actual enemy (isn\'t that who we should really be worried about?) will view us as weak or just not care at all, their hatred for us is bone deep, it\'s NOT GOING ANYWHERE. So
Austin on Mar 04, 2009 at 11:29:39 said:
Another attack on me, that is called Ad Hominem, frickin Google it man. Nothing but name calling and attacks on my person. This is the life of being a conservative. Can either of you stay on topic, honestly? Now allow me to lower myself to your level.
People like you are totally unaware of the crimes we committed in WWII. We did some horrendous things to win WWII, many things that went against our \"American values\". Of course you have no idea of those things, because you are completely one sided and most of your attacks comes from your animosity of Republicans. Get your head out of the sand. I\'m a realist. I want the U.S. to succeed at all costs, and terrorists DO NOT have the rights of an American citizen IMAO. Just like illegal immigrants should have no rights here.
We should be doing what Israel is doing, conducting highly secretive missions in the night to assassinate known leaders, no court, no trial, all progress.
You say it will help with the view of the U.S. to treat our prisoners this way. Maybe Europe will thinker higher of us (but probably won\'t), but our actual enemy (isn\'t that who we should really be worried about?) will view us as weak or just not care at all, their hatred for us is bone deep, it\'s NOT GOING ANYWHERE. So
Dave on Mar 04, 2009 at 10:00:45 said:
Ok, you have a point, but that wasn't an attack on you Austin. I began by questioning your patriotism. It was a masked insult, and I apologize. If you ignore the first sentence you can see that its not an attack on you but something that is on topic. For your information I am a conservative, I was alive during world war 2 and I also want hostility against the United States to end. What I'm suggesting is that the ideals in the US constitution about all men being equal and deserved of a fair trial apply to all men, regardless of their nationality or race. I am also suggesting that those found guilty of murder, or conspiracy to murder be punished. Severely. Such an approach would foster respect for a just nation, but also one to be feared if you are truly its enemy. As for Israel, they have made very little progress in my lifetime. In fact, every year the resistance of the Palestinians becomes more determined and more bloody. I do not wish to see my family at the same risk of bombing as those in Tel Aviv. There was a time when US intervention abroad, particularly in Europe during ww2, was about liberation and relief of tyranny. Now the goal is hegemony and resource control and we have become what the British Empire was before it was destroyed. We need to change our foreign policy drastically or we are headed down the same path.
Dave on Mar 04, 2009 at 09:58:21 said:
Ok, you have a point, but that wasn't an attack on you Austin. I began by questioning your patriotism. It was a masked insult, and I apologize. If you ignore the first sentence you can see that its not an attack on you but something that is on topic. For your information I am a conservative, I was alive during world war 2 and I also want hostility against the United States to end. What I'm suggesting is that the ideals in the US constitution about all men being equal and deserved of a fair trial apply to all men, regardless of their nationality or race. I am also suggesting that those found guilty of murder, or conspiracy to murder be punished. Severely. Such an approach would foster respect for a just nation, but also one to be feared if you are truly its enemy. As for Israel, they have made very little progress in my lifetime. In fact, every year the resistance of the Palestinians becomes more determined and more bloody. I do not wish to see my family at the same risk of bombing as those in Tel Aviv. There was a time when US intervention abroad, particularly in Europe during ww2, was about liberation and relief of tyranny. Now the goal is hegemony and resource control and we have become what the British Empire was before it was destroyed. We need to change our foreign policy drastically or we are headed down the same path.
Austin on Mar 04, 2009 at 09:05:38 said:
Another attack on me, that is called Ad Hominem, frickin Google it man. Nothing but name calling and attacks on my person. This is the life of being a conservative. Can either of you stay on topic, honestly? Now allow me to lower myself to your level.
People like you are totally unaware of the crimes we committed in WWII. We did some horrendous things to win WWII, many things that went against our \"American values\". Of course you have no idea of those things, because you are completely one sided and most of your attacks comes from your animosity of Republicans. Get your head out of the sand. I\'m a realist. I want the U.S. to succeed at all costs, and terrorists DO NOT have the rights of an American citizen IMAO. Just like illegal immigrants should have no rights here.
We should be doing what Israel is doing, conducting highly secretive missions in the night to assassinate known leaders, no court, no trial, all progress.
You say it will help with the view of the U.S. to treat our prisoners this way. Maybe Europe will thinker higher of us (but probably won\'t), but our actual enemy (isn\'t that who we should really be worried about?) will view us as weak or just not care at all, their hatred for us is bone deep, it\'s NOT GOING ANYWHERE. So
Austin on Mar 04, 2009 at 08:51:07 said:
Another attack on me, that is called Ad Hominem, frickin Google it man. Nothing but name calling and attacks on my person. This is the life of being a conservative. Can either of you stay on topic, honestly? Now allow me to lower myself to your level.
People like you are totally unaware of the crimes we committed in WWII. We did some horrendous things to win WWII, many things that went against our \"American values\". Of course you have no idea of those things, because you are completely one sided and most of your attacks comes from your animosity of Republicans. Get your head out of the sand. I\'m a realist. I want the U.S. to succeed at all costs, and terrorists DO NOT have the rights of an American citizen IMAO. Just like illegal immigrants should have no rights here.
We should be doing what Israel is doing, conducting highly secretive missions in the night to assassinate known leaders, no court, no trial, all progress.
You say it will help with the view of the U.S. to treat our prisoners this way. Maybe Europe will thinker higher of us (but probably won\'t), but our actual enemy (isn\'t that who we should really be worried about?) will view us as weak or just not care at all, their hatred for us is bone deep, it\'s NOT GOING ANYWHERE. So
Austin on Mar 04, 2009 at 08:43:47 said:
Another attack on me, that is called Ad Hominem, frickin Google it man. Nothing but name calling and attacks on my person. This is the life of being a conservative. Can either of you stay on topic, honestly? Now allow me to lower myself to your level.
People like you are totally unaware of the crimes we committed in WWII. We did some horrendous things to win WWII, many things that went against our \"American values\". Of course you have no idea of those things, because you are completely one sided and most of your attacks comes from your animosity of Republicans. Get your head out of the sand. I\'m a realist. I want the U.S. to succeed at all costs, and terrorists DO NOT have the rights of an American citizen IMAO. Just like illegal immigrants should have no rights here.
We should be doing what Israel is doing, conducting highly secretive missions in the night to assassinate known leaders, no court, no trial, all progress.
You say it will help with the view of the U.S. to treat our prisoners this way. Maybe Europe will thinker higher of us (but probably won\'t), but our actual enemy (isn\'t that who we should really be worried about?) will view us as weak or just not care at all, their hatred for us is bone deep, it\'s NOT GOING ANYWHERE. So
Dave on Mar 04, 2009 at 05:52:41 said:
Are you a patriot Austin? It sounds like you don't uphold the right of all men to have a fair trial. The point here is not that we are treating terrorists less harshly than American offenders, but that they are declared guilty until proven innocent. The US should set an example to the world in the way it deals with prisoners. The current situation undermines the values on which this country was founded and the US has become the tyrannical empire that it first fought so hard to escape.
Our politicians are sharks in suits, and they seem to have no respect for the values of most Americans, and so long as we are distracted by arguing amongst ourselves they will continue to wipe their asses on the American flag.
Killers must be brought to justice, but not at the cost of us sinking to their level.
Austin on Mar 03, 2009 at 12:41:39 said:
Yes, the left want to handle terrorist with kid gloves. And no, I do have faith in our judicial system, but not necessarily in the people who will actually conduct the courts involving the terrorist captives.
You have entirely put words in my mouth. Where did I say "It's not evil when WE do it", I DIDN'T! This is just a liberal talking point you're injecting to give strength to your argument, and it's weak!
If anything I said lets "fight fire with fire" and condoned using controversial tactics, but that is also an oversimplification of my words.
So Scott, do you have anything constructive to say or were you just simply applying the Ad Hominem argument, which is the weakest of them all.
Scott Gallant on Mar 03, 2009 at 10:09:56 said:
To Austin,
It is not that we want to treat terrorists gingerly, we just want to make sure we got the right individual...
I charge that your type believe that Habeas Corpus is a failed system, and you have no faith in a judicial system founded by our American forefathers.
To fight those who want to destroy our way of life requires us to lower said standard to a level where those we fight in the first place stand? Could you give the old and tired rhetoric of "It's not evil when WE do it" a final resting place?
Austin on Mar 02, 2009 at 15:11:46 said:
Contrary to what this columnist would have you believe, most of the people held at Gitmo or in our "terrorist" prisons are dangerous. How one just ends up at Gitmo for no reason is beyond me. I don't have hard numbers, but I'm willing to say that at least 98% of the people housed in these prisons are of a dangerous nature. Would you believe an American citizen who's an ex-con if he said he was innocent? I bet not. So why do we grant possible terrorists such leeway? Get with the program, if we listen to people like the type who wrote this column we will NEVER get the upper hand on terrorists.
-->For those of you who think that us treating possible terrorists better will make the U.S. appear stronger, you are living on fantasy island. Terrorists will continue to torture their captives (that's us) and suicide bomb us. This "can't we all get along" attitude does not work.