More questions on the Afghan detainee issue this morning

A Globe report last night suggested that Canadian Forces might be handing over detainees to the U.S. forces who have a prison at Bagram in Afghanistan, now that we've temporarily stopped handing them over to the Afghans:

It's not clear whether Canadian troops are still taking prisoners only to release them or whether – despite the claims of senior generals – they are being held for months in the temporary cells run by Canadian Military Police on Kandahar Air Base or whether prisoners are being turned over to U.S. forces, which do operate a big prison at Bagram in Afghanistan.

Bagram might be a problem. The Washington Post has reported on what has happened at U.S. facilities at Bagram and in Afghanistan:

The U.S. military holds 300 or so people at Bagram, north of the capital of Kabul, and in Kandahar, Jalalabad and Asadabad. Human Rights Watch estimates that at least 700 people had been released from those sites, most of them held a few weeks or less. Special Forces units also have holding centers at their firebases, including at Gardez and Khost.

In December 2002, two Afghans died in U.S. custody in Afghanistan. The U.S. military classified both as homicides. Another Afghan died in June 2003 at a detention site near Asadabad.

"Afghans detained at Bagram airbase in 2002 have described being held in detention for weeks, continuously shackled, intentionally kept awake for extended periods of time, and forced to kneel or stand in painful positions for extended periods," said a report in March by Human Rights Watch. "Some say they were kicked and beaten when arrested, or later as part of efforts to keep them awake. Some say they were doused with freezing water in the winter." (emphasis added)

More:

In Afghanistan, the CIA used to conduct some interrogations in a cluster of metal shipping containers at Bagram air base protected by three layers of concertina wire. It is unclear whether that center is still open, but the CIA's main interrogation center now appears to be in Kabul, at a location nicknamed "The Pit" by agency and Special Forces operators.

"Prisoner abuse is nothing new," said one military officer who has been working closely with CIA interrogators in Afghanistan. A dozen former and current national security officials interviewed by The Washington Post in 2002, including several who had witnessed interrogations, defended the use of stressful interrogation tactics and the use of violence against detainees as just and necessary.

If this is the Harper government's temporary solution, it will require further scrutiny to ensure that such activities are not occurring at the present time.

Note that the halt to the transfer of detainees to the Afghans is one of the top "World" stories in the New York Times today, "Canadian Military Has Quit Turning Detainees Over to Afghans." It calls attention to the public denials of the Harper government and also the specific details of the instances of torture that have appeared in the Canadian media. I'm sure that the news of the torture claims from Afghan prisoners is very newsworthy to Americans who are now witnessing an additional 2-3000 troops headed to Afghanistan. It's more evidence that raises questions about the state of affairs in Afghanistan for all the NATO countries.

And in a Globe update to their report last night, there is some new context provided about the goings on in the lawsuit to stop the transfer of detainees. Specifically, it points out that in December, a month after detainees were no longer being transferred, the government filed evidence in the lawsuit swearing to the need to continue the detainee transfers. Misleading the court? You be the judge:

More than a month after it stopped handing prisoners over to Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security, the Harper government sent a senior general to give a sworn affidavit in the case brought by Amnesty and BCCLA.

The rights groups wanted transfers banned, claiming the government is bound by both international law and the Canadian Constitution from delivering detainees to those likely to torture or abuse them.

Brigadier-General André Deschamps, chief of staff to Canada's Expeditionary Forces Command, which runs the counterinsurgency operation in Afghanistan, asserted that Canada would have to quit fighting if it was barred from transferring detainees.

He also said, in his Dec. 14 affidavit, that more Canadian troops might be killed if detainee transfers were halted.

Listing a long series of possible embarrassments and defeats, Gen. Deschamps, outlined what he said would be the dire, war-losing consequences should Canada be barred from turning prisoners it captured on the battlefield over to Afghan security forces.

Taliban fighters might surrender in droves, warned the general, if they knew Canada would release them because it could not either hold them or transfer them.

"The insurgents could attack us with impunity knowing that if they fail to win an engagement they would simply have to surrender and wait for release to resume operations," he said.

"The Canadian Forces has no capacity or ability to hold detainees other than for transfer purposes," said Gen. Deschamps, an air force officer.

Building a NATO detention facility, perhaps on the Kandahar base, which currently houses more than 10,000 troops, has been repeatedly suggested by international human-rights groups. Canada and most NATO nations are opposed.

"The long-term, indefinite detention of detainees in such circumstances would be inconsistent with the sovereignty of Afghanistan," Gen. Deschamps said.

Madam Justice Anne Mactavish has ordered Gen. Deschamps to appear in Federal Court today where he is expected to face tough questioning from lawyers for Amnesty and the BCCLA.

"Tough questioning." Now that's a restrained way of putting it.