March 21, 2010 in Nation/World

U.S. mulls Afghanistan prison camp

Few options for replacing Guantanamo
David S. Cloud And Julian E. Barnes Tribune Washington bureau
 

Fast facts

There are about 800 prisoners at Bagram, but fewer than 10 are foreign fighters not captured in Afghanistan or in the Afghan-Pakistan border region, according to a Defense official. No suspect captured elsewhere has been brought to Bagram during the Obama administration.

WASHINGTON – The White House is considering whether to detain international terrorism suspects at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan, senior U.S. officials said, an option that would lead to another prison with the same purpose as Guantanamo Bay, which it has promised to close.

The idea, which would require approval by President Barack Obama, already has drawn resistance from within the government. Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and other senior officials strongly oppose it, fearing that expansion of the U.S. detention facility at Bagram air base could make the job of stabilizing the country even tougher.

That the option of detaining suspects captured outside Afghanistan at Bagram is being contemplated reflects a recognition by the Obama administration that it has few other places to hold and interrogate foreign prisoners without giving them access to the U.S. court system, the officials said.

Without a location outside the United States for sending prisoners, the administration must resort to turning the suspects over to foreign governments, bringing them to the U.S. or even killing them. In one case last year, U.S. special operations forces killed an al-Qaida-linked suspect named Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan in a helicopter attack in southern Somalia rather than trying to capture him, a U.S. official said. Officials had debated trying to take him alive but decided against doing so in part because of uncertainty over where to hold him, the official added.

U.S. officials find such options unappealing for handling suspects they want to question but lack the evidence to prosecute. For such suspects, a facility such as Bagram, north of Kabul, remains necessary, officials said, even as they acknowledged that having it in Afghanistan could complicate McChrystal’s mission.

“No one particularly likes any of the choices before us right now, but Bagram may be the least bad among them,” a senior Defense official said.

With such a move certain to draw furious criticism by allies and human rights groups that the administration was re-creating Guantanamo, officials stressed that no final decisions have been made, and a White House spokesman declined to comment.

The idea of using Bagram emerged as the White House National Security Council solicited suggestions on how to handle detainees from the Justice Department, CIA and other government agencies.

The procedures for holding suspected terrorists have been largely in limbo as the White House sought to carry out Obama’s pledge last year to close Guantanamo and overhaul the U.S. detention process.

Although it has been known for some time that the Obama administration was seeking options other than Guantanamo for holding existing prisoners, it has not been reported previously that the administration was considering Bagram for suspected terrorists that might be captured in the future.

The prison remains controversial in Afghanistan because of allegations that detainees were abused there near the start of the Afghan war.

McChrystal fears a decision to expand Bagram could be used by extremists for propaganda purposes, as Guantanamo has been. The prison has drawn controversy over interrogation techniques and the amount of time suspects have been detained there without trial.

“Gen. McChrystal’s singular focus is on making sure our military campaign is successful,” the senior Defense official said. “Anything that potentially complicates that is something they are reluctant to embrace.”

U.S. officials emphasized that the number of additional prisoners at Bagram would be modest. If Osama bin Laden or other senior al-Qaida leaders were captured, they likely would be sent to the U.S. for prosecution. Bagram, by contrast, would hold less-well-known terrorists, whom the government may not be able to prosecute but who would remain a threat if released, the officials said.

Get stories like this in a free daily email


Please keep it civil. Don't post comments that are obscene, defamatory, threatening, off-topic, an infringement of copyright or an invasion of privacy. Read our forum standards and community guidelines.

You must be logged in to post comments. Please log in here or click the comment box below for options.

comments powered by Disqus