| SUBSCRIBE | | Why we charge |
|
|
|
Front Page
opinion guest_columns
Monday, June 30, 2008
What Court's Ruling Means at Gitmo
By Brig. Gen. Greg Zanetti
N.M. National Guard
GUANTANAMO, Cuba — The Supreme Court issued a controversial decision last week affording limited rights to detainees held at Guantanamo Bay. Predictably, my e-mail exploded with emotional reactions, with many asking for my view of the ruling. Since I am neither a political analyst nor an attorney, I will leave those arguments to those more knowledgeable. I can, however, speak to the immediate reaction “on the ground” at Guantanamo.
At the soldier level, confusion is the operative word. The day after the decision was announced, one of the guards inside the camps asked me, “Sir, you mean a detainee who just splashed me with a bodily fluid 'cocktail' has rights? How can that be? The fact that they abuse us and we can't retaliate is bad enough; but sir, they're not even Americans.” I gave the soldier an answer that emphasized doing our duty under difficult circumstances, but I believe my words rang hollow with him.
On its face, the rationale behind the ruling is hard for a soldier to comprehend. As such, it presents a leadership challenge for the officers and NCOs here. To understand the challenge, however, requires some background knowledge.
The troopers who guard the detainees know they are dealing with some of the darkest souls on earth. The guards and the detainees view the camps as a battleground. The guards are prepared for the abuse from the detainees. The guards also understand today's sensitive political environment requires them to exercise exceptional restraint. The guards expect resistance and a fight from the detainees.
What they find hard to reconcile is criticism from Americans and members of the international community. They know they are routinely vilified by self-proclaimed human rights groups, media members, and civic leaders for sins not committed. They know Guantanamo is not a popular assignment. They also know it can hurt their careers. Still the troopers do the mission because they know it is important and necessary.
Beyond this though, Guantanamo is more than a detention facility. Gitmo is a national and international symbol. The detainees know this as well and have made it clear that their contribution to jihad would be to force the closure of Gitmo.
Toward that end they exercise a sophisticated strategic communications campaign — from their cells. The detainees mimic tactics used effectively by the Irish Republican Army against the British in the 1980s. Hunger strikes, feces smearing, and mass suicides were all techniques used by the IRA to pressure the British government and draw international attention to the cause.
Today, we see the same script playing out at Guantanamo. We even have some of the same human rights groups, attorneys and media members who supported the IRA decrying the “stain of Guantanamo.” All the while the detainees smirk and cynically congratulate themselves on the successful manipulation of their pawns.
It is in this environment, that the Supreme Court added a weapon to the detainees' arsenal.
For example, a few days after the decision was announced, a detainee told me he was eager to read the 134-page decision. His attorney had promised to deliver it to him. He wanted to know the full extent of his rights under American law. I asked him about the rights Americans had under his law. He just smiled; and the guards who overheard the conversation just looked down and shook their heads.
In an unprecedented move, we are allowing attorneys on the battlefield. The test bed is Gitmo. It is unique in the history of warfare to have legal proceedings occurring simultaneously with combat operations. Prior experience dictated war crimes trials commenced after hostilities ceased. This new concurrent-dynamic has allowed warfare to morph into law-fare.
We at Guantanamo expect to see more habeas attorneys inside the camps visiting their clients. We recognize this will serve as a force multiplier for the detainees. The attorneys admit they are eager to “establish rapport” with their clients. Toward this end, there are suspicions that some attorneys (both civilian and military) act as couriers of information to other detainees. The attorneys see it as harmless. Yet, this seemingly innocuous communications helps detainees coordinate increasingly sophisticated and organized operations.
The command is very aware of this new dynamic. We believe our troopers are more than up to the task of safely, humanely, legally and transparently detaining some of the most dangerous men on earth. Guantanamo will adapt.
Finally, I do not mean for this missive to sound like an indictment of the Supreme Court's decision. Just because the mission at Guantanamo is now more complex does not necessarily mean the decision was wrong. Many years ago the Court's decision mandating suspects be given their Miranda Rights made police work more difficult, but it was still the right decision.
History will determine if that proves to be the case with detainee rights at Guantanamo.
Zanetti and other members of the New Mexico National Guard are serving a tour of duty at Guantanamo, where he is second in command.
...go to bookmarks
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
