DOCSLIB.ORG

Leaving Guantanamo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leaving Guantanamo JANUARY 2012 HASC COMMITTEE PRINT 112-4 LEAVING GUANTANAMO POLICIES, PRESSURES, AND DETAINEES RETURNING TO THE FIGHT As of September 2011, the US government believed that 27 percent of former GTMO detainees were confirmed or suspected to have been engaged in terrorist or insurgent activities. SUSPECTED OR CONFIRMED Abu Sufyan al-Azdi Abdallah Saleh Ali Abdullah Zakir, ISN 8 al-Shihri, 372 al-Ajmi, ISN 220 SNAP SHOTS OF KUWAIT *Repatriated in 2007 *Repatriated in 2007 *Repatriated in 2005 *Top Taliban military AFGHANISTAN AFGHANISTAN SAUDI ARABIA SAUDI *Leader in al-Qaida in *Conducted a suicide commander in Helmand REENGAGEMENT Arabian Peninsula bombing in Iraq in 2008 province orchestrating terrorist targeting, recruiting, and attack training, planning, and preparation SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS of the COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES Rob Wittman, Chairman Virginia K. Michael Conaway Jim Cooper, Ranking Member Texas Tennessee Mo Brooks Robert E. Andrews Alabama New Jersey Todd C. Young Mark S. Critz Indiana Pennsylvania Thomas J. Rooney Colleen Hanabusa Florida Hawaii Mike Coffman Colorado ….we have been very selective in terms of returning people. One of the things we have discovered over time is that we are not particularly good at predicting which returnee will be a recidivist. Some of those that we have considered the most dangerous and who have been released or who we considered dangerous and potentially going back into the fight have not, and some that we evaluated as SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT GATES FEBRUARY 17, 2011 not being much of a danger or much of a risk Senate Armed Services Hearing: “To receive testimony on the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year we have discovered in the fight.1 2012 and the Future Years Defense Program.” 1. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, February 17, 2011, Senate Armed Services Hearing: “To receive testimony on the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2012 and the Future Years Defense Program.” “A Statement by the United States Government,” New York Times, April 24, 2011 (issued in connection with the decision by the newspaper and other organizations to publish documents obtained illegally by Wikileaks). Both the previous and the current Administrations have made every effort to act with the utmost care and diligence in transferring detainees from Guantanamo. Both Administrations have made the protection of American citizens the top priority and . we will continue to work with allies and partners around the world to mitigate threats to the U.S. and other countries . GEOFF MORRELL PENTAGON PREss SECRETARY AMBASSADOR DAN FRIED SPECIAL ENVOY FOR CLOSURE OF THE GUANTANAMO DETENTION FACILITY II LEAVING GUANTANAMO Contents 02 Executive Summary 04 Methodological and Stylistic Notes 06 Snapshots of Reengagement 10 Reengagement: The Basics 12 Definitions 14 FINDING 1: Mechanisms to reduce the GTMO population were first contemplated when the facility was established in 2002. However, procedures to accomplish this took about eight months to finalize, and were spurred by persistent concerns that some detainees should not be held. 20 FINDING 2: After the first review process began, political and diplomatic pressures to reduce the GTMO population became apparent, resulting in releases and transfers. 23 Russia 28 Foreign Prosecution 30 Pakistan 32 Saudi Rehabilitation Program 37 FINDING 3: Pressure to reduce the GTMO population accelerated in the second Bush term, before reengagement dangers became more apparent. 45 A Success Story 50 Litigation Pressures 57 FINDING 4: While the GTMO transfer and release process instituted by the Obama administration differed in some respects from what preceded it, there are sufficient continuities so that the threat of reengagement may not be lessened in the long term. 66 Conclusion and Recommendations 68 Dissenting Views 78 Appendix Classified Annex UNDER SEPARATE COVER HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE 1 Executive Summary and Introduction In March 2011, Chairman Howard P. “Buck” McKeon and Ranking Minority Member Adam Smith directed the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee to undertake an in-depth, comprehensive bipartisan investiga- tion of procedures to dispatch detainees from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility (GTMO) over the past decade. This necessarily included an examination of mechanisms intended to prevent former detainees from reengaging in terror-related activities. In conducting this study, committee staff travelled to eleven countries, interviewed nearly every senior official directly involved in these matters in both the Bush and Obama administrations, received briefings from the Department of Defense and Department of State, consulted with eighteen subject matter experts, met with two former detainees, and reviewed thousands of pages of classified and unclassified documents. Subcommittee Members convened a hearing, three Member briefings (including one that was classified), and travelled to several relevant locations. This report finds that the Bush and Obama administrations, in reaction to domestic political pressures, a desire to earn goodwill abroad, and in an attempt to advance strategic national security goals, sought to “release” or “transfer” GTMO detainees elsewhere. Those “released” were judged a sufficiently low threat that they were sent to countries with no expectation of follow up. “Transferred” detainees, because they were assessed as relatively more dangerous, were conveyed with the expectation that some process would be applied in the receiving nation to mitigate the threat they potentially posed. Despite earnest and well-meaning efforts by officials in both administrations, properly evaluating detainees and ensuring that their cases were handled appropriately by receiving countries was, and remains, a challenge. This is demonstrated by the fact that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) estimated in September 2011 that 27% of the 600 former detainees who have left GTMO were confirmed or suspected to be presently or previously reengaged in terrorist or insurgent activities. This total percentage has consistently increased. Furthermore, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence noted in 2010 that the Intelligence Community “assesses that if additional detainees are trans- ferred from GTMO, some of them will reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities.” Five of 66 detainees who left GTMO in the 20 months between February 2009 and October 2010 are confirmed (two) or suspected (three) by ODNI of involvement in terrorist or insurgent activities. Although two of the five were released pursuant to court orders, this nonetheless yields a seven and one half percent reengagement rate. Although it is difficult to compare two disparate groups of former detainees (a smaller pool which left GTMO relatively recently and a much larger pool which has been gone for a much longer period), the reengagement rate indicates that challenges remain. 2 LEAVING GUANTANAMO This report posits four findings: • Finding 1. Mechanisms to reduce the GTMO population were first contemplated when the facility was established in 2002. However, procedures to accomplish this took about eight months to finalize, and were spurred by persistent concerns that some detainees should not be held. • Finding 2. After the first review process began, political and diplomatic pressures to reduce the GTMO population arose, resulting in releases and transfers. • Finding 3. Pressures to reduce the GTMO population accelerated in the second Bush term, before reengagement dangers became fully apparent. • Finding 4. While changes in the GTMO transfer and release process instituted by the Obama admin- istration differed in some important respects from the Bush administration, there are sufficient continu- ities so that the threat of reengagement may not be lessened in the long term. In addition to chapters discussing each finding in depth, this report includes several companion articles illustrating specific issues. A classified section sets forth material which cannot be reproduced here. Three recommendations are offered: • The Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence collaborate to produce a report (in classified and unclassified versions) to congressional committees of jurisdiction assessing factors causing or contribut- ing to reengagement; including a discussion of trends, by country and region, where reengagement has occurred; • The Department of Defense and Department of State produce a report (in classified and unclassified versions) to congressional committees of jurisdiction assessing the effectiveness of agreements in each country where transfers have occurred; • Congress continue the certification requirements on GTMO transfers which are contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Pub. L. No. 112-81; 125 Stat. 1561 [2011]), at least until receiving and reviewing the specified reports; Additional action as outlined in the classified annex. HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE 3 Methodological and Stylistic Notes This study is based primarily upon 19 interviews with current and past key policy makers and staffers from the White House, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State, as well as hundreds of pages of declassified documents, and some secondary sources. A large volume of classified information provided to the committee was also evaluated. That data forms, in part,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guantanamo's Hidden History
    Guantanamo’s Hidden History Shocking statistics of starvation June 2009 1 Author: Andy Worthington Copyright © 2009 Cageprisoners All rights reserved. Cageprisoners 27 Old Gloucester Street London WC1N 3XX Telephone: 00 (44) 7973264197 Email: [email protected] 2 INTRODUCTION Today is the third anniversary of the deaths in Guantánamo of three prisoners, Ali al-Salami, Mani al-Utaybi and Yasser al-Zahrani. The anniversary comes just two weeks after the second anniversary of the death of Abdul Rahman al-Amri, the fourth prisoner to die in mysterious circumstances, and just eight days after the death of a fifth prisoner, Muhammad Salih. The authorities maintain that the men died by committing suicide, although doubts about this explanation have repeatedly been voiced by former prisoners. However, it is also significant that all five men were long-term hunger strikers. Cageprisoners is marking this sad anniversary with a brief report about the Guantánamo hunger strikers, and the dreadful toll that prolonged starvation -- and brutal force-feeding, which is the response of the US military -- exacts on prisoners held, for the most part, without charge or trial in a seemingly endless legal limbo. Force-feeding involves prisoners being strapped into a restraint chair and force-fed twice daily against their will, through an agonizing process that involves having a tube inserted into the stomach through the nose. As Clive Stafford Smith, the lawyer for several dozen Guantánamo prisoners, explained in the Los Angeles Times in 2007, with reference to Sami al-Haj, who was released in May 2008, “Medical ethics tell us that you cannot force-feed a mentally competent hunger striker, as he has the right to complain about his mistreatment, even unto death.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of the United States
    No. ________ In the Supreme Court of the United States KHALED A. F. AL ODAH, ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI DAVID J. CYNAMON THOMAS B. WILNER MATTHEW J. MACLEAN COUNSEL OF RECORD OSMAN HANDOO NEIL H. KOSLOWE PILLSBURY WINTHROP AMANDA E. SHAFER SHAW PITTMAN LLP SHERI L. SHEPHERD 2300 N Street, N.W. SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP Washington, DC 20037 801 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 202-663-8000 Washington, DC 20004 202-508-8000 GITANJALI GUTIERREZ J. WELLS DIXON GEORGE BRENT MICKUM IV SHAYANA KADIDAL SPRIGGS & HOLLINGSWORTH CENTER FOR 1350 “I” Street N.W. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS Washington, DC 20005 666 Broadway, 7th Floor 202-898-5800 New York, NY 10012 212-614-6438 Counsel for Petitioners Additional Counsel Listed on Inside Cover JOSEPH MARGULIES JOHN J. GIBBONS MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER LAWRENCE S. LUSTBERG NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY GIBBONS P.C. LAW SCHOOL One Gateway Center 357 East Chicago Avenue Newark, NJ 07102 Chicago, IL 60611 973-596-4500 312-503-0890 MARK S. SULLIVAN BAHER AZMY CHRISTOPHER G. KARAGHEUZOFF SETON HALL LAW SCHOOL JOSHUA COLANGELO-BRYAN CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 833 McCarter Highway 250 Park Avenue Newark, NJ 07102 New York, NY 10177 973-642-8700 212-415-9200 DAVID H. REMES MARC D. FALKOFF COVINGTON & BURLING COLLEGE OF LAW 1201 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. NORTHERN ILLINOIS Washington, DC 20004 UNIVERSITY 202-662-5212 DeKalb, IL 60115 815-753-0660 PAMELA CHEPIGA SCOTT SULLIVAN ANDREW MATHESON DEREK JINKS KAREN LEE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SARAH HAVENS SCHOOL OF LAW ALLEN & OVERY LLP RULE OF LAW IN WARTIME 1221 Avenue of the Americas PROGRAM New York, NY 10020 727 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic and Social Council by Its Resolutions 663 C (XXIV) of 31 July 1957 and 2076 (LXII) of 13 May 1977
    UNITED E NATIONS Economic and Social Distr. Council GENERAL E/CN.4/2006/120 27 February 2006 Original: ENGLISH COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Sixty-second session Items 10 and 11 of the provisional agenda ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS Situation of detainees at Guantánamo Bay Report of the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Leila Zerrougui; the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Leandro Despouy; the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manfred Nowak; the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Asma Jahangir; and the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Paul Hunt Summary The present joint report is submitted by five holders of mandates of special procedures of the Commission on Human Rights who have been jointly following the situation of detainees held at the United States of America Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay since June 2004. Section I provides a legal analysis common to all five mandates. Sections II to V outline the legal framework specific to each mandate, as well as the particular allegations of human rights violations which concern them. The final section contains conclusions and recommendations. GE.06-11276 (E) 170306 E/CN.4/2006/120 page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 - 5 4 I. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK .................................................... 6 - 16 5 A. Human rights and counter-terrorism measures ................ 6 - 7 5 B. The obligations of the United States of America under international law ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Airat Vakhitov, Agreed to Speak with Human Rights Watch, He Said, Because He Felt the Story of the Russian Detainees’ Experiences Back Home Had Not Yet Been Told.2
    March 2007 Volume 19, No. 2(D) The “Stamp of Guantanamo” The Story of Seven Men Betrayed by Russia’s Diplomatic Assurances to the United States Map of Russia .......................................................................................................... 1 Summary .................................................................................................................2 Recommendations to the US government............................................................4 Recommendations to the Russian government....................................................5 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 6 Background..............................................................................................................7 US Refoulement to Russia: A Violation of the Prohibition against Torture ..............10 Diplomatic Assurances...................................................................................... 11 The Risk of Torture and Ill-Treatment in Russia................................................... 14 Return to Russia.....................................................................................................19 Post-Return Abuses by Russia................................................................................21 Torture and Ill-Treatment...................................................................................22 Rasul Kudaev...............................................................................................23
    [Show full text]
  • Forensic Mental Health Evaluations in the Guantánamo Military Commissions System: an Analysis of All Detainee Cases from Inception to 2018 T ⁎ Neil Krishan Aggarwal
    International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 64 (2019) 34–39 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Law and Psychiatry journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijlawpsy Forensic mental health evaluations in the Guantánamo military commissions system: An analysis of all detainee cases from inception to 2018 T ⁎ Neil Krishan Aggarwal Clinical Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, Committee on Global Thought, Columbia University, New York State Psychiatric Institute, United States ABSTRACT Even though the Bush Administration opened the Guantánamo Bay detention facility in 2002 in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, little remains known about how forensic mental health evaluations relate to the process of detainees who are charged before military commissions. This article discusses the laws governing Guantánamo's military commissions system and mental health evaluations. Notably, the US government initially treated detaineesas“unlawful enemy combatants” who were not protected under the US Constitution and the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, allowing for the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques.” In subsequent legal documents, however, the US government has excluded evidence obtained through torture, as defined by the US Constitution and the United Nations Convention Against Torture. Using open-source document analysis, this article describes the reasons and outcomes of all forensic mental health evaluations from Guantánamo's opening to 2018. Only thirty of 779 detainees (~3.85%) have ever had charges referred against them to the military commissions, and only nine detainees (~1.16%) have ever received forensic mental health evaluations pertaining to their case.
    [Show full text]
  • Consejo Económico Y Social
    NACIONES UNIDAS E Consejo Económico Distr. GENERAL y Social E/CN.4/2006/120 27 de febrero de 2006 ESPAÑOL Original: INGLÉS COMISIÓN DE DERECHOS HUMANOS 62º período de sesiones Temas 10 y 11 del programa provisional LOS DERECHOS ECONÓMICOS, SOCIALES Y CULTURALES LOS DERECHOS CIVILES Y POLÍTICOS Situación de los detenidos en la bahía de Guantánamo Informe de la Presidenta-Relatora del Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detención Arbitraria, Leila Zerrougui; del Relator Especial sobre la independencia de los magistrados y abogados, Leandro Despouy; del Relator Especial sobre la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, Manfred Nowak; de la Relatora Especial sobre la libertad de religión o de creencias, Asma Jahangir; y del Relator Especial sobre el derecho de toda persona al disfrute del más alto nivel posible de salud física y mental, Paul Hunt GE.06-11279 (S) 230306 280306 E/CN.4/2006/120 página 2 Resumen Presentan este informe conjunto cinco titulares de mandatos de los procedimientos especiales de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos que, desde junio de 2004, han seguido conjuntamente la situación de las personas detenidas en la base naval de los Estados Unidos de América en la bahía de Guantánamo. En la sección I se lleva a cabo un análisis jurídico común a los cinco mandatos. En las secciones II a V se describe el marco jurídico específico de cada mandato y se formulan las alegaciones de violaciones de los derechos humanos de que se ocupa cada uno. En la última sección figuran las conclusiones y recomendaciones. E/CN.4/2006/120 página 3 ÍNDICE Párrafos Página INTRODUCCIÓN.........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ASD-Covert-Foreign-Money.Pdf
    overt C Foreign Covert Money Financial loopholes exploited by AUGUST 2020 authoritarians to fund political interference in democracies AUTHORS: Josh Rudolph and Thomas Morley © 2020 The Alliance for Securing Democracy Please direct inquiries to The Alliance for Securing Democracy at The German Marshall Fund of the United States 1700 18th Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 T 1 202 683 2650 E [email protected] This publication can be downloaded for free at https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/covert-foreign-money/. The views expressed in GMF publications and commentary are the views of the authors alone. Cover and map design: Kenny Nguyen Formatting design: Rachael Worthington Alliance for Securing Democracy The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), a bipartisan initiative housed at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, develops comprehensive strategies to deter, defend against, and raise the costs on authoritarian efforts to undermine and interfere in democratic institutions. ASD brings together experts on disinformation, malign finance, emerging technologies, elections integrity, economic coercion, and cybersecurity, as well as regional experts, to collaborate across traditional stovepipes and develop cross-cutting frame- works. Authors Josh Rudolph Fellow for Malign Finance Thomas Morley Research Assistant Contents Executive Summary �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Introduction and Methodology ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • Russia, Georgia and the Eu in Abkhazia and South Ossetia
    PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION: RUSSIA, GEORGIA AND THE EU IN ABKHAZIA AND SOUTH OSSETIA Iskra Kirova August 2012 Figueroa Press Los Angeles The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author and cannot be interpreted to reflect the positions of organizations that the author is affiliated with. PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION: RUSSIA, GEORGIA AND THE EU IN ABKHAZIA AND SOUTH OSSETIA Iskra Kirova Published by FIGUEROA PRESS 840 Childs Way, 3rd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90089 Phone: (213) 743-4800 Fax: (213) 743-4804 www.figueroapress.com Figueroa Press is a division of the USC Bookstore Copyright © 2012 all rights reserved Notice of Rights All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmit- ted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the author, care of Figueroa Press. Notice of Liability The information in this book is distributed on an “As is” basis, without warranty. While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, neither the author nor Figueroa nor the USC Bookstore shall have any liability to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly by any text contained in this book. Figueroa Press and the USC Bookstore are trademarks of the University of Southern California ISBN 13: 978-0-18-214016-9 ISBN 10: 0-18-214016-4 For general inquiries or to request additional copies of this paper please contact: USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School University of Southern California 3502 Watt Way, G4 Los Angeles, CA 90089-0281 Tel: (213) 821-2078; Fax: (213) 821-0774 [email protected] www.uscpublicdiplomacy.org CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy CPD Perspectives is a periodic publication by the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, and highlights scholarship intended to stimulate critical thinking about the study and practice of public diplomacy.
    [Show full text]
  • FOIA) Document Clearinghouse in the World
    This document is made available through the declassification efforts and research of John Greenewald, Jr., creator of: The Black Vault The Black Vault is the largest online Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) document clearinghouse in the world. The research efforts here are responsible for the declassification of hundreds of thousands of pages released by the U.S. Government & Military. Discover the Truth at: http://www.theblackvault.com Received Received Request ID Requester Name Organization Closed Date Final Disposition Request Description Mode Date 17-F-0001 Greenewald, John The Black Vault PAL 10/3/2016 11/4/2016 Granted/Denied in Part I respectfully request a copy of records, electronic or otherwise, of all contracts past and present, that the DOD / OSD / JS has had with the British PR firm Bell Pottinger. Bell Pottinger Private (legally BPP Communications Ltd.; informally Bell Pottinger) is a British multinational public relations and marketing company headquartered in London, United Kingdom. 17-F-0002 Palma, Bethania - PAL 10/3/2016 11/4/2016 Other Reasons - No Records Contracts with Bell Pottinger for information operations and psychological operations. (Date Range for Record Search: From 01/01/2007 To 12/31/2011) 17-F-0003 Greenewald, John The Black Vault Mail 10/3/2016 1/13/2017 Other Reasons - Not a proper FOIA I respectfully request a copy of the Intellipedia category index page for the following category: request for some other reason Nuclear Weapons Glossary 17-F-0004 Jackson, Brian - Mail 10/3/2016 - - I request a copy of any available documents related to Army Intelligence's participation in an FBI counterintelligence source operation beginning in about 1959, per David Wise book, "Cassidy's Run," under the following code names: ZYRKSEEZ SHOCKER I am also interested in obtaining Army Intelligence documents authorizing, as well as policy documents guiding, the use of an Army source in an FBI operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper
    Working Paper No. 34 / November 2012 Reviewing Member States’ Commitment to the European External Action Service Abstract Based on interviews with diplomats from a representative cross-section of nine member states and members of the EEAS itself, the research findings of this EPIN Working Paper confirm long-standing traditions and member state perceptions of cooperation with European institutions. The paper also reveals new aspects of the intergovernmental method of foreign policy shaping and making in the European Union; in particular how different national positions can positively or negatively affect the consolidation of the EEAS and the role of the EU as an international actor. As such, the Working Paper makes an original contribution to the existing literature on one of most discussed actors in the European Union’s post-Lisbon architecture in the domain of EU external action. EPIN Working Papers present analyses of key issues raised by the debate on the political integration of Europe. The European Policy Institutes Network (EPIN) is a network of think tanks and policy institutes based throughout Europe, which focuses on current EU political and policy debates (see back cover for more information). Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed are attributable only to the authors in a personal capacity and not to any of the institutions with which they are associated. ISBN: 978-94-6138-245-0 Available for free downloading from the CEPS (http://www.ceps.eu) and EPIN (http://www.epin.org) websites © Copyright 2012, EPIN & CEPS Contents Preface ............................................................................................................................................ i Steven Blockmans Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... ii Jackie West and Steven Blockmans France and the EEAS: A give-and-take relationship ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 1982
    congress owmgb m uenirdi Hmericd Service Jo JULY/AUGUST 1982 The Press & Foreign Policy On October 20, 1980, Fortune Magazine devoted tlpe activities. VISA checking and card services are pro¬ major part of six pages to a description of the revo¬ vided by Bank One of Columbus, N.A. lutionary Merrill Lynch Cash Management Account financial service that lets you control your money If you've often wished that you could use some of in these five ways: the capital invested in securities without selling them, or been irritated at seeing interest, dividends 1. Your funds are virtually never idle. Any cash is or uninvested capital sitting idly in a brokerage automatically invested to earn daily compounded account, earning little or no income—you owe it dividends at current money market rates. You may to yourself to investigate the Cash Management elect to invest in the CMA™iMoney Fund, Thx-Exempt Account financial service. Fund or Government Securities Fund. It's a major step forward in financial services and 2. While Merrill Lynch is not a bank, you have instant it's exclusively Merrill Lynch's. And now it is available access to all your invested cash at any time any¬ to anyone with investments and/or cash totaling where in the world just by writing a check. $20,000 or more 3. You have immediate access to a line of credit based upon the value of your securities. 4. You receive a special VIS/fcard that is accepted in 152 countries and is different from any you now have.
    [Show full text]
  • CTC Sentinel 2(5)
    MAY 2009 . VOL 2 . ISSUE 5 COMBATING TERRORISM CENTER AT WEST POINT CTC SENTINel OBJECTIVE . RELEVANT . RIGOROUS Contents Comparing the U.S. and Soviet FEATURE ARTICLE Experiences in Afghanistan 1 Comparing the U.S. and Soviet By Bruce Riedel Experiences in Afghanistan By Bruce Riedel REPORTS 4 Quetta: The Headquarters of the Afghan Taliban By Mukhtar A. Khan 7 Examining Saudi Arabia’s 85 Most Wanted List By Christopher Boucek 10 Revisiting Al-Qa`ida’s Anthrax Program By René Pita and Rohan Gunaratna 14 The Limits of Iranian Influence Among Gulf Shi`a By Laurence Louër 17 The Funding Methods of Bangladeshi Terrorist Groups By Paul Cochrane 20 Avoiding Suicide Terrorism in Bangladesh By Ryan Clarke and Shafqat Munir Soldiers with the 101st Division Special Troops Battalion, 101st Airborne. - Photo Courtesy of the U.S. Army 23 Recent Highlights in Terrorist Activity 28 CTC Sentinel Staff & Contacts country rarely fights the United States is fighting a Taliban- the same war twice in one led insurgency in Afghanistan that generation, especially from operates from a safe haven in Pakistan. opposite sides. Yet that Many suggest that the outcome will be Ain many ways describes the U.S. role the same for the United States as it was in Afghanistan today. In the 1980s, for the Soviet Union—ultimate defeat at the Central Intelligence Agency, the hands of the insurgency. Pakistan’s working from a safe haven in Pakistan, role as a safe haven is remarkably engineered the largest covert operation consistent in both conflicts, but focusing About the CTC Sentinel in its history to help defeat the Soviet exclusively on that similarity misses th 1 The Combating Terrorism Center is an 40 Red Army in Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]