U.S. Frees 'High-Value' Detainees from Iraq

[SWJED]

20 Dec. Washington Times - U.S. Frees 'High-Value' Detainees from Iraq.

U.S. forces yesterday flew eight newly released "high-value" Iraqi detainees out of the country aboard a special military aircraft, in a move other officials said was aimed at furthering a secret peace process with Sunni hard-line groups.

The releases, made Saturday but announced only yesterday, angered Iraqi government officials who pledged to hunt down and recapture some of the detainees, including former leaders of Saddam Hussein's government and security forces.

Among those released or about to be freed is Rihab Taha, who was dubbed "Dr. Germ" by the popular press in the West and admitted to producing germ-warfare agents. A State Department official told the Associated Press she was no longer considered a security threat.

20 Dec. Reuters - U.S. Freeing Saddam's 'Dr. Germ' and 'Mrs. Anthrax'.

U.S. forces in Iraq are freeing "Dr Germ and "Mrs. Anthrax," two of Saddam Hussein's leading biological warfare experts, following the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, lawyers said on Monday.

The two weapons experts, British-trained microbiologist Rihab Taha and U.S.-educated genetic engineer Huda Ammash, were captured by U.S. forces in May 2003 after Saddam was ousted.

Baghdad lawyer Badia Aref said Taha and Ammash were among 26 senior detainees in the process of being released. U.S. military spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Barry Johnson said eight "high-value detainees" had been freed on Saturday, and were among 27 senior prisoners judged to be eligible for release.

[Mark Eichenlaub]

This just doens't sound appropriate whatsoever. I wonder what ever happened to these people and if the Iraqis actually recaptured and detained them.

[bourbon]

This just doens't sound appropriate whatsoever.

Why doesn’t it sound appropriate?

The detainment of these women was a humiliation for the Sunni’s. Addressing such a grievance as this, in addition to other measures, would enable reengagement with the Sunni’s. This in turn, would lead to the success of the Awakening movements and a reduction of violence in the country.

I wonder what ever happened to these people and if the Iraqis actually recaptured and detained them.

I imagine the female scientists are feeble, and stricken with some form of cancer.

[Mark Eichenlaub]

Can you please cite some kind of evidence that Sunni women were clamoring for her release?

[bourbon]

Can you please cite some kind of evidence that Sunni women were clamoring for her release?

“Muslims Don’t Take Kindly to Outsiders Detaining Their Women”, by Hous Bin Pharteen and Dr. I-Zheet M’Drurz. Journal of Basic Cultural Awareness, Vol. XXII, no 4. (Fall 2006)

[Mark Eichenlaub]

That's specifically in response to Dr. Germ?

If she were not someone who possessed dangerous knowledge that could be exploited, even against her will, she shouldn't be just "released" but would likely need to be in some kind of protection program as well. No?

[goesh]

There usually comes a reckoning with many folks like this, their boss was dug out of a hole and hung by the neck until dead and they have no solid protection like before - blood ties, revenge and money can have a long, long reach and a shank in an alley may await many of them - maybe Dr. Germ has been found a nice little hut on the Paki frontier someplace along with a small stipend, cynicism warranted IMO

[bourbon]

If she were not someone who possessed dangerous knowledge that could be exploited, even against her will, she shouldn't be just "released" but would likely need to be in some kind of protection program as well. No?

Maybe. The BBC reported that they were sent to Jordan.

[Rex Brynen]

Surely the problem here is what say the (supposedly sovereign) Iraqi government should have had in the process?

Under Article 22.4 of the SOFA, the US must hand over any Iraqi detainees for whom the Iraqi government has issued a valid arrest warrant--otherwise, the US is required to release them (unless the Iraqis have requested otherwise).

[jg28]

It will be interesting to see what happens with this. I haven't seen any details about the detainees, yet.

[Schmedlap]

LWJ also reports that we're turning over the Qods Force agents to the GoI. It is expected that the GoI will return them to Iran.

I can't say, however, that I buy into the statement of the anonymous source...

"If you didn't like the release of Laith and the Irbil Five, you'd better get used to it," one official told The Long War Journal in disgust. "We worked hard to catch these bastards, now we're cutting them loose with little thought to the consequences of doing this.”

I'm as cynical as the next guy, but I don't think we're so dumb as to not consider the consequences.

[Courtney Massengale]

What is repulsive is that it shows the GoI has every intention of keeping horrible precedent.

Make a big show of prosecuting the ones at the top, let the middle (wo)men responsible for the planning, execution and aftermath free. If the case against them is too complex to squeeze into three inches of text or a twenty second news clip, this is for the best since poor simple minds wouldn’t comprehend anyway. Oh by the way, toss some broad cultural generalizations in there and you can see how having wetting your finger and holding it in the wind is better than a functional judicial system.

Saddam has been executed, nobody else could possibly be held responsible for anything that happened pre-2003. Nothing to see here, please move along.

I'm sure that they can find political asylum in a place that’s very concerned about Sunni women’s rights like Syria or North Korea.

There should be riots in the street over this.

[Bob's World]

People, we have facilitated the creation of a new government in Iraq, any overt efforts by the U.S. to counter their actions severely undermines their legitimacy in the eyes of their populace and increases perceptions of U.S. legitimacy over them. Both of these are exactly what should be our MAIN EFFORT to avoid.

This is not our country. These are not our citizens.

Additionally, in all populace-based conflict their must be a certain amount of healing and forgiving in order for the populace as a whole to move forward together. Lincoln and Grant understood this and stood up in the face of tremendous pressure from those who felt strongly that the South should be punished for its crimes.

You have to move on. Let it go. Not your call.

[Ken White]

You have to move on. Let it go. Not your call.

That's quite good advice...

[Courtney Massengale]

People, we have facilitated the creation of a new government in Iraq, any overt efforts by the U.S. to counter their actions severely undermines their legitimacy in the eyes of their populace and increases perceptions of U.S. legitimacy over them. Both of these are exactly what should be our MAIN EFFORT to avoid.

Appeasing a small vocal minority so that they will take an opportunity to have a disproportionate role in the aforementioned government doesn't undermine legitimacy? There are more powers that just the US the Iraqis fear their government of becomming a puppet of...

I know it isn't our call and all that... but it also brings up some real juicy questions about what kind of democracy we're creating.

[Bob's World]

A couple of additional thoughts for those who have a hard time letting go of control of other countries, their governments or their populaces ( All good Cold War strategy, but also a strategy that carried into the post- Cold War era has done much to foment the conditions of unrest aimed at the US that we call "GWOT":

1st: A government cannot "appease" it's own populace. When a government makes concessions in support of its populace its called "doing its job." When a government makes concessions that affect its populace in efforts to support another government, then THAT is appeasement. In this case, I believe it would only be appeasement if the Iraqi government made a decision counter to what they believe is best for their populace in favor of what the US believes is best.

2nd. As to "what kind of democracy we're creating": Really? Have you read any of our founding documents as a nation? We have absolutely no right (other than the right of might that we used to overthrow the existing government of this country) to dictate what form of government they decide to establish. The ultimate arbiter will be the Iraqi populace, and if this government heads in the wrong direction it is their duty and right to sort that out. When we start dictating terms of governance for another nation we do a couple of very serious things:

a. We take on the role of "legitimizer" of that government and are thereby responsible for all of their actions (or at least will be held responsible by their populace that probably believes that we have taken a role that belongs more rightfully to them);

b. We run 180 degrees counter to the express terms of the American Declaration of Independence, that we hold out to the world as the principles upon which we were founded and stand for. I hate hypocrisy. Most people do. Either rescind the declaration, or let these guys sort it out for themselves.

[Ken White]

I know it isn't our call and all that... but it also brings up some real juicy questions about what kind of democracy we're creating.

and it's not our call whether it is or not. "We're creating" smacks of a little arrogance and exemplifies one reason we are not well loved across the world.

That whatever government the Iraqis decide upon is slightly better than its predecessor should be adequate. Progress is progress.

[Courtney Massengale]

When a government makes concessions that affect its populace in efforts to support another government, then THAT is appeasement. In this case, I believe it would only be appeasement if the Iraqi government made a decision counter to what they believe is best for their populace in favor of what the US believes is best.

This seems to be a rather simplistic view that the only two stake holders are the US and Iraq and that any action by the GoI is a reflection of the relationship between the two.

Who do you think is out there lobbying for disproportionate representation of Sunnis in the GoI? It sure isn't the Iraqis... they've made that choice rather clear twice through free and democratic elections.

Oh wait, that must make the choice invalid since we're the ones who gave them the ability to choose their own representation. What a horrible predicament - we can't use voting or representation to find out what kind of government the people want since we don't have any right to impose a mechanism to form a government.

The only honorable thing to do would be to leave and allow another nation to impose its will since we don't have that mechanism spelled out in our founding documents.

[Mark Eichenlaub]

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...?from=storylhs
I wasn't aware that the ones demanding Dr. Germ's release was al Qaeda...

[davidbfpo]

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...?from=storylhs
I wasn't aware that the ones demanding Dr. Germ's release was al Qaeda...

Mark,

I'd be very wary of citing a press story from 2004 as a good indicator of AQ interest in 2009, especially as Al-Zaqawi the cited spokesman is history.

davidbfpo