Gitmo & Bagram: Sanity Prevails and Bush Upheld

There were two interesting developments over the weekend that shows Obama is beginning to see the light with regards to the War On Terror and Bush's position on prisoners of war: namely those of Gitmo and Bagram.

First, the Obama administration is siding with Bush's with regards to the prisoners held at Bagram Airforce Base in Afghanistan. Obama agrees that these detainees do not have any constitutional rights. Here's the AP story from Friday (emphasis added):

Obama Backs Bush Stance on Bagram Prisoners

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama sided with the Bush administration Friday, saying detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights.

In a two-sentence court filing, the Justice Department said it agreed that detainees at Bagram Airfield cannot use U.S. courts to challenge their detention. The filing shocked human rights attorneys.

"The hope we all had in President Obama to lead us on a different path has not turned out as we'd hoped," said Tina Monshipour Foster, a human rights attorney representing a detainee at the Bagram Airfield. "We all expected better."

The Supreme Court last summer gave al-Qaida and Taliban suspects held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the right to challenge their detention. With about 600 detainees at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and thousands more held in Iraq, courts are grappling with whether they, too, can sue to be released.

After Obama took office, a federal judge in Washington gave the new administration a month to decide whether it wanted to stand by Bush's legal argument. Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd says the filing speaks for itself.

"They've now embraced the Bush policy that you can create prisons outside the law," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who has represented several detainees.

The Justice Department argues that Bagram is different from Guantanamo Bay because it is in an overseas war zone and the prisoners there are being held as part of an ongoing military action. The government argues that releasing enemy combatants into the Afghan war zone, or even diverting U.S. personnel there to consider their legal cases, could threaten security.

Then, on Saturday The Washington Post reported that a Pentagon committee reviewed the treatment of the Guantanamo prisoners and found that the conditions and treatment met within the guidelines of the Geneva Convention. Here is the story from reporters Peter Finn and Del Quentin Wilber (emphasis added):

Pentagon Review Finds Guantanamo Detainees' Treatment Legal

A Pentagon review of conditions at the Guantanamo Bay military prison has concluded that the treatment of detainees meets the requirements of the Geneva Conventions but that prisoners in the highest-security camps should be allowed more religious and social interaction, according to a government official who has read the 85-page document.

The report, which President Obama ordered, was prepared by Adm. Patrick M. Walsh, the vice chief of naval operations, and has been delivered to the White House. Obama requested the review as part of an executive order on the planned closure of the prison at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, on the southeastern tip of Cuba.

Another aspect of the closure -- what to do with the approximately 245 detainees -- will be considered by an interagency task force, and yesterday the Justice Department announced the head of that group: Matthew G. Olsen, a 12-year career prosecutor and acting assistant attorney general for national security.

Review teams will examine each detainee's case and report to Olsen, who will make recommendations to senior officials from Justice and other agencies, including the departments of State and Defense and the CIA. Those officials will make the final decision on each prisoner.

"The Task Force will consider whether it is possible to transfer or release detained individuals consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States; evaluate whether the government should seek to prosecute detained individuals for crimes they may have committed; and, if none of those options are possible, the Task Force will recommend other lawful means for disposition of the detained individuals," the Justice Department said in a statement.

Defense attorneys for the detainees have complained bitterly about the isolation of some prisoners. They allege that over several years, it has led to mental problems for some detainees. The lawyers also have criticized the force-feeding of prisoners on hunger strike. About 40 prisoners are now on hunger strike, according to Pentagon officials.

Walsh concluded that force-feeding, which involves strapping detainees to special chairs and inserting a tube through one nostril and into their stomachs, is in compliance with the Geneva Conventions' mandate that the lives of prisoners be preserved, according to the government official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the report publicly.

Walsh also found that prisoners should be allowed more communal recreation and prayer time. Prisoners in Camp 6 and the highly secret Camp 7 -- which holds such high-value detainees as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed organizer of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks -- can be held in windowless cells for up to 22 hours a day.

Walsh said the most isolated prisoners, including those in Camp 7, should be allowed to pray and have recess together in rotating groups of at least three for more extended periods of time.

Walsh's report was a broad endorsement of the Pentagon's management of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and it urged prison authorities to continue efforts across the system to maximize the ability of the detainees to socialize and practice their religion, according to the government official. "Continue to avoid actions that are disrespectful to the detainees," Walsh wrote.

Civil liberties groups, including the Center for Constitutional Rights, which is about to issue a report on conditions at the prison, challenged Walsh's findings.

"We do think conditions are in violation of U.S. obligations to treat prisoners humanely, and prisoners are at a physical and mental breaking point," said Pardiss Kebriaei, a staff lawyer at the center. "These are not the conclusions we had hoped for under Obama. It's very disappointing."

The article continues with the civil liberties groups' concerns and arguments, as well as an explanation about the different "camps" or security levels for the prisoners.

One question that keeps running from my mind: How do Bagram and Guantanamo truly differ? Neither prison is on U.S. soil. They both hold "enemy combatants." I wonder how much longer before it is decided that the Guantanamo needs to stay as it is.