I have two questions: why should the problems of former enemy combatants concern me? And, how did they become former combatants in the first place?
The answer to the latter question is time. Their attorneys argue that the men have been confined for too long. The attornies say authorities could supervise them much as they monitor criminal defendants released pending trial. Yes, I suppose it is a reasonable argument that Washington D.C. is a particularly crimeless area. I wonder if the Judge might like to have the former enemy combatants next door since he was intrigued by the question of release.
How these individuals become enemy combatants is clearer. In 2001, most of the Uighurs now in Guantanamo Bay were living in camps in Afghanistan until U.S. airstrikes drove them into neighboring Pakistan. They were captured there and turned over to U.S. authorities. It is likely then that most of these people were receiving terrorist training and have been biding their time in prison in preparation. Prisons in Britain and Iraq are leading places of terrorist training and development.
The two options that are presented, release into the Homeland, or continued incarceration are the only two choices offered by attorney's on behalf of the Uighurs.
However, I see no reason why Americans should be welcoming individuals who were found in Afghani camps in 2001. Yet, a Supreme Court ruling in June gave camp dwellers the right to have their cases reviewed by federal judges under the legal doctrine of habeas corpus. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon has been conducting closed-door hearings. There are six Algerians who were picked up in Bosnia in late 2001. The only way to block the continued incarceration or release is evidence that the incarcerated received terrorist training. The Justice Department is expected to make the same argument for the other detainees. The government has asserted that the Uighurs were members of the East Turkistan Islamic Movement and trained at camps affiliated with the Taliban or al-Qaeda. The Bush administration designated ETIM a terrorist organization in August 2002, after the Uighurs were taken into custody.
One academic sees no other alternative than the two options proposed: "It boils down to: either you keep these people in prison at Guantanamo Bay for the rest of their lives or you release them into the United States," said Donald E. Wilkes Jr., a professor at the University of Georgia Law School and an authority on habeas corpus rights.
I see no reason why the U.S. should harbor not only the poor and the tired yearning to be free but those training at terrorist camps while providing rights of habeus corpus to them as well. If there is no reason to hold them, then release them back to China or anywhere so it is not a problem for people in the United States. They voluntarily left their own country for Afghanistan so another move, elsewhere, should not bother them now.
Posts
