Search This Blog

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

U.S. eyes remote island for Gitmo detainees

What's $0.75 from every man, woman, and child in the U.S. to keep us safe from 17 possible terrorists. Seems like a bargain, eh? Wait, $200 million?! Doesn't that work out to more than $10 million each?

Here is a better idea. We offer $200,000 to any gang in Detroit or Los Angeles who will take care of the problem for us... no holds barred. No, that's too messy.

How about we give each of the 17 $1 million each and drop them off at the border between Pakistan and China. The only provision is that they have a tracking device implanted in their skull that can't be removed without death. As long as they stay outside of the U.S., no problem. Let them figure out whether they want to be martyrs or playboys.
U.S. eyes remote island for Gitmo detainees [MSNBC.com]

Officials say South Pacific's Palau a candidate for group of Chinese Muslims

In a photo reviewed by the U.S. military, Chinese Uighur detainees at Guantanamo Bay's detention facility, show a home-made note to visiting members of the media on Monday, June 1.
Updated 2:29 p.m. ET, Tues., June 9, 2009

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is in talks with the remote South Pacific island nation of Palau to resettle a group of Chinese Muslims now held at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, The Associated Press has learned.

As they attempt to fulfill President Barack Obama's order to close the Guantanamo facility by early next year, administration officials are looking to Palau to accept some or all of the 17 Uighur detainees, officials said. There has been fierce congressional opposition to releasing them on U.S. soil.

A federal judge ordered them released, but an appeals court halted the order, and they have been in legal limbo ever since. Thus far no country has agreed to take any of the 17 individuals.

Three U.S. officials familiar with the situation said, however, that Palau is now a prime candidate for their relocation.

Asked about the status of the Uighurs, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly declined to comment beyond saying the U.S. is "working closely with our friends and allies regarding resettlement" of detainees at Guantanamo. He said the department would not comment on talks with individual countries.

500 miles east of the Philippines
Palau, with a population of about 20,000, is an archipelago of eight main islands plus more than 250 islets that is best known for diving and tourism and is some 500 miles east of the Philippines in the Pacific Ocean.

"We have spoken with the Palauans, but neither they nor we have made any decisions," said one senior official. That official and two others spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks.

Two of the officials said the U.S. was prepared to give Palau up to $200 million in development, budget support and other assistance in return for accepting the Uighurs.

The third official did not deny that a significant amount of money would be involved. But the official denied it would be a direct transfer to the Palau government.

The U.S. will not send the Uighurs back to China for fear they will be tortured or executed. Beijing says Uighur insurgents are leading an Islamic separatist movement in China's far west and wants those held at Guantanamo to be returned to China.

In 2006, Albania accepted five Uighur detainees from Guantanamo but has since balked at taking others, partly for fear of diplomatic repercussions from China. Palau is one of a handful of mainly Pacific island, Latin American and African countries that does not recognize China and maintains diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

Diplomat visited Palau
The State Department said last week that Daniel Fried, the career diplomat who was named earlier this year by Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to oversee Guantanamo's closure, had visited Palau but offered no details on his mission. Fried has been negotiating with third countries to accept many of the Guantanamo detainees.

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Fried had visited Australia and Palau as part of a tour of the Pacific. The three officials said Fried had been discussing the disposition of Uighurs.

Australia has already twice rejected U.S. appeals to resettle the Uighurs, but its foreign minister said late last month it would consider a new request to take in 10 Uighurs. The previous requests were turned down on immigration and security criteria and it is not clear if a new Australian review of the Uighurs would have different results.

Justice Department spokesman Matt Miller declined to comment and an official at the Embassy of Palau in Washington said he had no information about the negotiations.

A former U.S. trust territory in the Pacific, Palau has retained close ties with the United States since independence in 1994 when it signed a Free Compact of Association with the U.S.

While it is independent, it relies heavily on U.S. aid and is dependent on the United States for its defense. Native-born Palauans are allowed to enter the United States without passports or visas.



1 comment:

Anonymous said...

So, did these guys do something wrong or not? If they did, why are we letting them go? Why not give them to China for torture and execution? It isn't like we oppose torture and execution for terrorists. Hell, we don't even oppose torture and execution for alleged terrorists, or potential terrorists, or guys who once met a potential alleged terrorist. Surely the Chinese can be trusted to do a great job torturing and executing. They don't even waste the organs.

Of course, if we got the wrong guys and these fellas didn't do anything wrong, then that won't work. Usually torture and execution aren't considered appropriate punishments for being incorrectly arrested, even if it is done humanely by our well-trained urban gangs. And from a diplomatic perspective, dropping rich angry separatists on the Chinese frontier is unlikely to be helpful. Of course, we could give them refugee status and let them live in the U.S - sort of our way of saying sorry for the hassle of incorrectly imprisoning you for all these years. But I don't think that's gonna get anyone reelected.

So, yeah, that seems pretty expensive, but I don't see a real workable solution that's any better. Sometimes when you randomly imprison people you end up regretting it.