This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/14/opinion/sunday/how-to-end-the-stigma-of-guantanamo.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
How to End the Stigma of Guantánamo How to End the Stigma of Guantánamo
(about 3 hours later)
Washington — GUANTÁNAMO BAY prison may soon reach a milestone. The Obama administration appears close to resettling the remaining detainees recommended for transfer, some of whom have been stranded on that list for years. That prospect raises a question: What more, if anything, should the United States do to help them, and hundreds of other people who were previously released after being detained without charges for years, most of whom are not suspected of engaging in new militant activities? WASHINGTON — The Guantánamo Bay prison may soon reach a milestone. The Obama administration appears close to resettling the remaining detainees recommended for transfer, some of whom have been stranded on that list for years. That prospect raises a question: What more, if anything, should the United States do to help them, and hundreds of other people who were previously released after being detained without charges for years, most of whom are not suspected of engaging in new militant activities?
Some advocates for detainees dream of apologies and reparations, but that seems politically unrealistic; the Supreme Court upheld indefinite detention as lawful, the war against Al Qaeda and its progeny continues, and many Republican lawmakers have come to oppose releasing any more low-level detainees in the Obama era. But all sides can agree that it is in the national interest that ex-detainees reintegrate into society. One step to ease that path would be to make public more information about what the government thinks they actually did — and did not do.Some advocates for detainees dream of apologies and reparations, but that seems politically unrealistic; the Supreme Court upheld indefinite detention as lawful, the war against Al Qaeda and its progeny continues, and many Republican lawmakers have come to oppose releasing any more low-level detainees in the Obama era. But all sides can agree that it is in the national interest that ex-detainees reintegrate into society. One step to ease that path would be to make public more information about what the government thinks they actually did — and did not do.
The government has an archive of secret reports by a six-agency task force that reviewed the cases of the 242 detainees who remained at the prison when President Obama took office in 2009. The panel recommended transferring about 150 of those men, and officials familiar with its work say it called into question whether most had committed “terrorist” activities in a meaningful sense. The Times and I recently filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking to make those reports public, but the administration could disclose them voluntarily.The government has an archive of secret reports by a six-agency task force that reviewed the cases of the 242 detainees who remained at the prison when President Obama took office in 2009. The panel recommended transferring about 150 of those men, and officials familiar with its work say it called into question whether most had committed “terrorist” activities in a meaningful sense. The Times and I recently filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking to make those reports public, but the administration could disclose them voluntarily.
There is a precedent for disclosing information from those reports: In 2014, the State Department sent a letter to Uruguay about six detainees being resettled there. It said there was “no information that the above mentioned individuals were involved in conducting or facilitating terrorist activities against the United States or its partners or allies.” Officials told me that line derived from the task force reports.There is a precedent for disclosing information from those reports: In 2014, the State Department sent a letter to Uruguay about six detainees being resettled there. It said there was “no information that the above mentioned individuals were involved in conducting or facilitating terrorist activities against the United States or its partners or allies.” Officials told me that line derived from the task force reports.
The wording is ambiguous. It could mean the detainees were innocent of membership in Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Or it could mean they attended a training camp and participated in ordinary combat against Northern Alliance warlords during Afghanistan’s civil war, before the United States intervened in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks and took them prisoner. Either way, they were deemed lower threats than men who plotted to kill civilians.The wording is ambiguous. It could mean the detainees were innocent of membership in Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Or it could mean they attended a training camp and participated in ordinary combat against Northern Alliance warlords during Afghanistan’s civil war, before the United States intervened in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks and took them prisoner. Either way, they were deemed lower threats than men who plotted to kill civilians.
For ex-detainees trying to move on, a clear statement that they did not participate in “terrorist” activity, even if they were legitimate prisoners of war, could make a difference in how people viewed them. The Bush administration sent about 780 men to the prison; 76 remain, with 35 awaiting transfer. That leaves about 700 ex-detainees. Intelligence officials say about 200, mostly Bush-era transfers, are confirmed or suspected of engaging in militant activity since their release, so about 500 appear to be trying to lead normal lives. Many are struggling under a Guantánamo stigma, their former lawyers say.For ex-detainees trying to move on, a clear statement that they did not participate in “terrorist” activity, even if they were legitimate prisoners of war, could make a difference in how people viewed them. The Bush administration sent about 780 men to the prison; 76 remain, with 35 awaiting transfer. That leaves about 700 ex-detainees. Intelligence officials say about 200, mostly Bush-era transfers, are confirmed or suspected of engaging in militant activity since their release, so about 500 appear to be trying to lead normal lives. Many are struggling under a Guantánamo stigma, their former lawyers say.
Heightening their problems, leaked Bush-era dossiers that make alarming and specific claims about them are readily available on the internet — including on the website of The Times. The disclosure of these documents via WikiLeaks in 2011 opened a window on the prison, but many are flawed. Although the task force confirmed some findings in those dossiers, it determined that others contained sweeping conclusions “derived from uncorroborated statements or raw intelligence reporting of undetermined or questionable reliability” and “allegations that were not supported by the underlying source document upon which they relied.”Heightening their problems, leaked Bush-era dossiers that make alarming and specific claims about them are readily available on the internet — including on the website of The Times. The disclosure of these documents via WikiLeaks in 2011 opened a window on the prison, but many are flawed. Although the task force confirmed some findings in those dossiers, it determined that others contained sweeping conclusions “derived from uncorroborated statements or raw intelligence reporting of undetermined or questionable reliability” and “allegations that were not supported by the underlying source document upon which they relied.”
I recently visited a former prisoner, Ahmed Abdul Qader, who was resettled in Estonia in January 2015. He said suspicion clouded his interactions with the police and potential friends and employers; a shop owner who offered him an apprenticeship told me about looking him up online and reading his dossier. Among other things, it says that a fellow detainee, shown Mr. Qader’s photograph by interrogators, identified him as Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard. Yet no other detainee said that about him, and Mr. Qader was a still-beardless teenager when Pakistani police officers arrested him in 2002 for residing in a guesthouse deemed suspicious. Saying people hate him in part because they are “just assuming whatever got put on the internet” is true, Mr. Qader begged the United States to tell the world that he was never a terrorist. So far, it has not.I recently visited a former prisoner, Ahmed Abdul Qader, who was resettled in Estonia in January 2015. He said suspicion clouded his interactions with the police and potential friends and employers; a shop owner who offered him an apprenticeship told me about looking him up online and reading his dossier. Among other things, it says that a fellow detainee, shown Mr. Qader’s photograph by interrogators, identified him as Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard. Yet no other detainee said that about him, and Mr. Qader was a still-beardless teenager when Pakistani police officers arrested him in 2002 for residing in a guesthouse deemed suspicious. Saying people hate him in part because they are “just assuming whatever got put on the internet” is true, Mr. Qader begged the United States to tell the world that he was never a terrorist. So far, it has not.
That underscores the importance of the task force reports. A person who read Mr. Qader’s report told me it included a line similar to the one in the Uruguay letter about no “terrorist” activities.That underscores the importance of the task force reports. A person who read Mr. Qader’s report told me it included a line similar to the one in the Uruguay letter about no “terrorist” activities.
Cliff Sloan, who signed the Uruguay letter when he was the State Department’s special envoy for Guantánamo closure, said the administration should disclose those reports. Noting that politicians sometimes ignored distinctions and deemed all current and former detainees the “worst of the worst,” he said making them public would help people evaluate such claims.Cliff Sloan, who signed the Uruguay letter when he was the State Department’s special envoy for Guantánamo closure, said the administration should disclose those reports. Noting that politicians sometimes ignored distinctions and deemed all current and former detainees the “worst of the worst,” he said making them public would help people evaluate such claims.
“The WikiLeaks reports, for better or worse, are out there, so to the extent the task force reports went through various allegations and explained why they are not to be believed, it makes sense to have the complementary and updated document that looks at those things,” Mr. Sloan said. “Why not put them out there?”“The WikiLeaks reports, for better or worse, are out there, so to the extent the task force reports went through various allegations and explained why they are not to be believed, it makes sense to have the complementary and updated document that looks at those things,” Mr. Sloan said. “Why not put them out there?”
The current special envoy, Lee Wolosky, said the Obama administration should take a “hard look” at disclosing them on a case-by-case basis, adding: “The lodestar of our policy should be truth. So if there is information out there that is inaccurate, there is a strong argument that should be corrected, if for no other reason than to better ensure the success of our resettlement policy.”The current special envoy, Lee Wolosky, said the Obama administration should take a “hard look” at disclosing them on a case-by-case basis, adding: “The lodestar of our policy should be truth. So if there is information out there that is inaccurate, there is a strong argument that should be corrected, if for no other reason than to better ensure the success of our resettlement policy.”
Matt Olsen, who directed the 2009 task force and later the National Counterterrorism Center, said the leaking of the older dossiers “created so much noise and havoc” because of their flaws. He said he would be “comfortable” with any government decision to disclose the reports, with appropriate redactions, and thought there could be “some value” in making parts of them “public in certain cases, especially after this much time has passed and a lot of that information is already out.”Matt Olsen, who directed the 2009 task force and later the National Counterterrorism Center, said the leaking of the older dossiers “created so much noise and havoc” because of their flaws. He said he would be “comfortable” with any government decision to disclose the reports, with appropriate redactions, and thought there could be “some value” in making parts of them “public in certain cases, especially after this much time has passed and a lot of that information is already out.”
There are potential drawbacks. There are no reports taking a more rigorous look at the evidence against the 532 detainees transferred before 2009; correcting overstatements about more recent detainees might heighten the stigma against earlier ones if it fosters a misimpression that everything in all their leaked dossiers has been confirmed.There are potential drawbacks. There are no reports taking a more rigorous look at the evidence against the 532 detainees transferred before 2009; correcting overstatements about more recent detainees might heighten the stigma against earlier ones if it fosters a misimpression that everything in all their leaked dossiers has been confirmed.
Moreover, while the reports generally represent the government’s best understanding of Obama-era detainees, they may have flaws, too. The task force recommended continuing to detain an Afghan then believed to have worked on chemical and biological weapons. But the government recently decided that he was a victim of mistaken identity and a parole-like review board added him to the transfer list.Moreover, while the reports generally represent the government’s best understanding of Obama-era detainees, they may have flaws, too. The task force recommended continuing to detain an Afghan then believed to have worked on chemical and biological weapons. But the government recently decided that he was a victim of mistaken identity and a parole-like review board added him to the transfer list.
Still, Greg Craig, Mr. Obama’s first White House counsel, said the administration could assign that review board to scrutinize the evidence against all former detainees “to determine whether they are entitled to some public acknowledgment when there is no evidence of real terrorist activity.” But he predicted bureaucratic resistance to disclosing more information unless Mr. Obama personally pushed for it.Still, Greg Craig, Mr. Obama’s first White House counsel, said the administration could assign that review board to scrutinize the evidence against all former detainees “to determine whether they are entitled to some public acknowledgment when there is no evidence of real terrorist activity.” But he predicted bureaucratic resistance to disclosing more information unless Mr. Obama personally pushed for it.
“This would not be an acknowledgment of a mistake or an apology or anything like that — just trying to get right with the truth,” he said.“This would not be an acknowledgment of a mistake or an apology or anything like that — just trying to get right with the truth,” he said.