Who's staying, who's going at Gitmo

Posted on Friday, June 13, 2008 1:37 PM ET

By Robert Windrem, Courtney Kube and Jim Miklaszewski

Beyond the legal and political arguments surrounding the Supreme Court decision on the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, there is the practical reality of how many of the prisoners got there, and where they will wind up after the camp is emptied.

Some are, of course, high-value prisoners who will be tried for war crimes and terrorism.  But the overwhelming majority will be repatriated – as they have been in the past.

About 780 detainees have been held at Guantanamo Bay since the facility opened more than six years ago.  Almost all were apprehended in Afghanistan or in Pakistan near the Afghan border.

Since then, most have been transferred to their homeland or released, and the facility now houses about 270 detainees.

Surprisingly, the largest contingents are not from states most associated with al-Qaida. There are a few Saudis, a few Pakistanis, perhaps a few Egyptians.

The largest contingent consists of “about 100 Yemeni nationals,” says the Pentagon.  In addition, there are “about 30 Afghan nationals, about 25 Algerian nationals and – the biggest surprise – 17 Uyghurs, Muslim natives of western China. All the other nationalities are single digit groups.  Uiyghurs live in what they call East Turkistan but what the Chinese call Xingyiang in far western China.

Beyond the high-value prisoners, why are so many detainees still at Guantanamo? Pentagon officials say there are three basic reasons: 1) the home country has a poor record of keeping track of those repatriated, declining to make a significant commitment to keep the detainees in custody, detention or on a watch list; 2) they could subjected to torture or execution on return; and 3) the detainees are essentially stateless, that the home country refuses to take them back.

The officials say there are so many Yemenis still in Cuba because they don’t trust the Yemeni government’s commitment, particularly after some high-profile prisoners have repeatedly escaped from prison.  Among them, those involved in the October 2000 bombing of the U.S. Cole in Aden harbor.

A spokesman for the Yemeni Embassy tells NBC News his government recently submitted a “rehabilitation and reconciliation” program to U.S. State Department to "assure that those detainees who don't have blood on their hands will be assimilated" into the Yemeni nation.  So far, he says, there is no agreement on repatriation.  Yemeni officials admit the escapes have caused tension with the Bush administration.

As for the Uiyghurs, Pentagon officials quietly say the U.S. fears that the Chinese government will execute the militants on their return. So they stay behind bars at Guantanamo. Officials say the number of those whose homeland won’t accept them is “very small.” One of those countries is Algeria, which has had a significant rise in jihadi attacks in recent years and has no interest in possibly adding to the terrorist threat.

There is also the issue of uncertain nationality. U.S. officials as well as officials of other countries say some of the detainees disguise their nationalities out fear they will be subjected to torture when they are repatriated. In the past, Egyptians have claimed to be Syrians and some of the Yemenis may actually be Saudis.

While the U.S. believes 100 of the detainees are Yemeni nationals, Yemeni officials aren’t so sure. The actual number, said a Yemeni official, is "not clear yet...there are uncertain nationalities."  So much so, said the official, that his government has twice sent security delegations to Guantanamo to meet with and interview detainees to clear up the nationality issue. 

Yemen, like many in the Arab and Muslim worlds, praised the Supreme Court decision.

"We are pleased about the Supreme Court's decision because it is the basic right of a human being to have a fair trial acceptable to international standards," said the statement. "We remain committed to work with American government to transfer Yemeni detainees to Yemeni custody."

Comments

I think they should not be tried in a U.S. court.  I spent over 20years protecting this country and see we are giving more rights to non U.S. people, then the one's trying to destroy it.  We need judges that believe in the U.S and not rewrite history to fit their LIBERAL view.
Interesting.  I am tired of hearing the anti-Bush people accuse the US government of "torture". Whatever tactics we use at Gitmo do not scare these people.  They laugh at us.  What they're really afraid of is being sent back to their homelands.  That should should tell you which culture values human rights the least.
Hi

Surprising that this article does not mention the person who was placed in Gitmo as a teenager. Very doubtful some who was 15 could be considered a High value prisoner.

Basically the US has locked up a juvenile for 6 years. Mind you my own country Canada finds the teenager too hard to deal with on our own, so we let him languish in Gitmo.

Why don't you ask the persons responsible for detaining these detainees who is more mistreated? The Medical care is first rate, many have never seen a dentist before. Most detainees gain 30+ pounds eating 3 meals a day, which they never have before. They pray 5 times a day. The detainees treat those caring for them very poorly; splattering nurses and other care givers with a cocktail of 1, 2 and 3. Yes, the detainees even masterbate onto those trying to keep them healthy or protect them in court. Ask the soldiers and sailors...show that on night line.
Pat,

It isn't just anti-Bush people saying the US has tortured some of these people, water-boarding and all that. It is also moderates, independents, and some republicans.  

They say it because it is true. Some just think it is OK.  Like McCain even though he was tortured.  Boy is that amazing.

Of course these people are afraid to get sent home if they are going to be tortured or killed.  Wouldn't you be afraid?  Which is it?  Are they laughing at us or afraid?  Seems you can't have both.

The decision by the Supreme Court is a landmark in turning around the habitual violations of the constitution that the current administration has pursued.  
Bush propaganda. Everyone deserves a fair and impartial trial. Our Constitution has been violated for the last 7 years. When we respect human rights, it makes us safer- not in any way more threatened. The excuse that their countries do not want them is absolutely no reason to deny these individuals a trial. Who knows, maybe some of them are innocent- now that would be a novel concept- innocent until proven guilty.
Bush/Cheney probably didn't attend that course.
We can see the system of justice which Washington would impose on the rest of the island if it were able to get its hands on it.

It seems to me that those who've been held without any charge for all these years should be allowed to come and live in the United States if they want to as their home governments would wonder what had become of them during all their years under the custody of the United States.

Thanks for your report.
If the Bush administration had observed the rule of law, this continuing disaster would not have happened. For those who care, google these names: Murat Kurnaz or Khaled al-Masri. Read their stories, then ask yourself who are the terrorists. There is no doubt that our military must be able to detain enemy combatants in time of war without having to go to court to keep them locked up. So why is there no outrage at the Bush administration for compromising that principle by kidnapping innocent civilians far from the field of battle? Bad enough that their methods have been no different than those of the terrorists they are supposed to be protecting us from, but once you know a person is completely innocent (as in the case of Mr. Kurnaz) send him home, don't keep him incarcerated for 4 more years!

As a Republican, I resent deeply this botched 'war on terror', which has resulted in justifying and legitimizing a handful of despicable "entrepreneurs of mayhem" who cut people's heads off with kitchen knives, send women wearing dynamite to kill and maim children, and who are willing to murder people because of cartoon. But botch it they have!

George Bush has not only violated our own national security laws (a felony, and clearly a high-crime), he has demonstrated himself to be the most incompetent person ever to hold the Presidency. He has upstaged the Nazis by an endless series of human rights atrocities, some high profile, even more we never hear about. In spite of numerous specific warnings from our intelligence community concerning a potential civil-conflict and insurgency, he swaggered into Iraq thinking he could take out Saddam Hussein, and go home a hero. If anyone thinks he had considered the consequences of his actions any further than that, they haven't watched his famous fly-in to the aircraft carrier, Abraham Lincoln, in May of 2003. He was wearing his flight clothes for that photo-op, but in retrospect, we now know the emperor had no clothes (or perhaps more accurately, he had no brains).

Now, today, we are losing the real war against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, as these  two groups have all but setup a new country of their own in the mountains of Pakistan. Every strategic initiative the Bush administration has tried has failed, and this most important one carries with it the risk that Al-Qaeda might soon take power in a country which already has nuclear weapons.

I am thankful for the 5 Justices on the Supreme Court who held for the Constitution after the 8 years battering it has taken at the hands of President Bush. I can only hope that one consequence of the ruling will be to expose the moral vacancy of this President, and his henchmen in Congress, notably Senator Graham and Senator McCain (who I contemplated voting for in November just a few weeks ago).

I want to know how many more like Mr. Kurnaz and Mr. al-Masri have been held there. When we reach the point where agents of the United States are routinely guilty of kidnapping, torture, and consignment of innocent civilians to what amounts to an American Gulag, those of us who fail to see it, and those who fail to speak up about it, don't deserve the blessings of liberty Thomas Jefferson wrote about so eloquently in 1776, and for which so many of our countryman have fought and died since then.  
While I AGREE with today's majority opinion that "all enemy combatants detained during a war, at least insofar as they are confined in an area away from the battlefield, [but] over which the United States exercises 'absolute and indefinite' control, may seek a writ of habeas corpus in federal court," I also AGREE with Chief Justice Roberts (and his fellow dissenters) that the Writ can be suspended in time of war, such as the war on terror that we find ourselves involved in right now, and that suspension power belongs to Congress, such as Congress has exercised in this case, "as the Constitution surely allows Congress to [wield]."

I guess one can REASONABLY conclude that the Court's Majority knew where they wanted to end up, and proceeded to get there, however s-l-o-w-l-y they weaved their way through precedential minefield!

OsiSpeaks.com


Send a comment

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

About the blog

Deep Background is NBC News’ investigative blog. It covers national security, terrorism, spies, Iraq, and politics, as well as government waste, fraud and abuse. It is edited by NBC News Senior Investigative Producer Jim Popkin.

Archives


Browse by topic:

Add this blog to your news reader