Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Sunday Morning

Detainee Status Debated at White House

Aired January 27, 2002 - 09:03   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The status of the Afghan war detainees is now being debated at the White House. The Bush Administration is disputing published reports that suggest Secretary of State Colin Powell wants detainees reclassified as prisoners of war, but a senior administration official is telling CNN the State Department is recommending President Bush consider entitling the fighters to greater protection of those rights. This is all stuff we've been telling you.

It's worth repeating because this is an issue which is obviously on a lot of people's minds. I'm joined now this morning by CNN White House Correspondent Major Garrett, and by phone, CNN's John Zarrella in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and our Military Analyst, Retired Major General Don Shepperd in Washington.

John Zarrella, let's begin with you. I understand you have a piece of news for us.

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Miles. I think we had fascinating insights given to us this morning. We met just a few minutes ago with Saif Il Uslam (ph), a Navy lieutenant. He is one of three Muslim clerics in the United States Navy, originally from Bangladesh, and he arrived here about four days ago, and he has been meeting with all of the detainees, sort of a spiritual advisor, leading them in prayer.

And some fascinating insights from him, the things that are not confidential, as to what they're interested in finding out. They want more books to read, mostly religious books. One book called the Hadif (ph), which is a book of prophet sayings. They would like to get that book.

Primarily what they want to know is what's going to happen to them. That is the question they've been asking the cleric the most, and of course, he says he does not have answers for them and he tells them that. They want to know about their families.

Some of the detainees have even asked about Pakistan and India, because they told him they heard that the countries have gone to war or are going to war and wanted to know the status of that, apparently because they have family in those countries.

So, interesting insights from him. He says he believes, this is Saif Il Uslam the Navy lieutenant cleric, he said that he believes that the detainees are being treated humanely, Miles. They're not the greatest creature comforts, but he says it's not his job or the military's job to provide that. But, in fact, he says they are being treated humanely in his interpretation. Miles.

O'BRIEN: All right, let's get to some of the e-mail questions, which have been streaming in all morning, lots of good ones as a matter of fact. This one comes from Gary Primeau.

"The people being held in Cuba are certainly not POWs, as they were not in military uniforms and were engaged in terrorist activities. These terrorist activities were directed at both foreign nationals and their own citizens. What are we to do? Put them up in hotels?"

Don Shepperd, the question of uniforms comes up. Is that really a significant issue, when it comes to dealing with Geneva Convention protocols?

MAJOR GENERAL DON SHEPPERD, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: It's just one of the factors, Miles, to decide whether or not these people can be declared as POWs. To be declared as POWs, it has to be a declared war, and there are other requirements that have to be met, such as the one uniform, chain of command, et cetera.

The important thing is that we decide what status they are going to be held in and then apply those particular rules to that status, Miles.

O'BRIEN: All right. Let's take a phone call now. This one comes from Bob in Virginia. Bob, you're on the line.

BOB IN VIRGINIA: Good morning, Miles.

O'BRIEN: Good morning.

BOB IN VIRGINIA: General, my question is for you. Given the detainess are in Guantanamo Bay, is there any way that - they're talking about elevation of status to POW. Why would we elevate their status to POW status, or even higher, when they will not tell us any information about where al Qaeda or any other terrorists are? If that was the case, would we be able, as a military, to make a deal with them? If they gave us information, we would elevate their status to POW or some other status?

SHEPPERD: Well, you're got several questions wrapped into one there, but that's very important. If they are POWs, they don't have to give us information on al Qaeda, and there seems to be general agreement within everyone in the administration, that these are not POWs, but whether or not Geneva Conventions apply, and whether or not they are unlawful detainees or not.

And therefore, once you decide what they are, you have to apply the rules of international law to those. If they're not POWs, you can interrogate them and you can use the information. If they go to military tribunals and other ways, other rules of evidence apply, so it's real important we sort this out. O'BRIEN: You know, we did look up the Geneva Conventions this morning. Article 17, let's put it up on the screen here. This is the Catch 22, which the General's referring to, Bob.

"Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information."

So if, in fact, these detainees were afforded the Geneva Convention protocols, that's all they'd have to give is name, rank, and serial number. So you see the Catch 22 there. Let's go back to an e-mail here. This one comes from Leon Schuman.

"As a highly moral country, we should be committed to treating prisoners of any kind in a civilized manner. If indeed we are mistreating the prisoners, I would be very embarrassed as a U.S. citizen."

Major Garret, this is the real rub from the perception standpoint for the Bush Administration, isn't it?

MAJOR GARRETT, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Miles, and you can see it manifesting itself in this internal disagreement, or at least what appears to be a disagreement between the Secretary of State Colin Powell, and some of the President's other advisers.

Now General Shepperd knows, and will probably back me up on this. As a policy is being formulated, and the White House policy on how to deal with these detainees is being formulated right now, a lot of paperwork is generated, a lot of memos arrive, some in final draft status, some in just draft status, and the White House can always say, "well, that was a draft memo. It doesn't really represent exact administration policy, or even the precise policy of that particular part of the government."

And that's where the administration is right now, saying, well Secretary of State Powell didn't really say in all final instances they should all be POWs, with all the Geneva Convention protections afforded to them. What he is saying, however, though is we might consider Geneva Convention protections for some of the detainees if, in fact, their cases warrant it.

He wants to keep that question open and on the table, because right now the President is about to decide exactly what kind of classification all these detainees are going to be given, and once that classification is so announced, that the administration must follow through with whatever international law dictates, and that's why all the churning is going on here at the White House now, exactly what are the classifications going to be and how is international law going to be applied.

There's a little bit of infighting going on right now, and it all goes to the international perception and the international law itself, which sometimes can be different. You can treat prisoners humanely in application of international law, but if it looks bad, then you have a diplomatic problem.

No mystery exactly why the Secretary of State, who deals with diplomats all around the world, is feeling that pressure more than let's say the Defense Secretary.

O'BRIEN: Yes, I guess the Geneva Conventions are not the kinds of things like a buffet, where you just take what you like out of it. You got to take it lock, stock and barrel. Let's go to Daniel who's on the line with us this morning from Toronto. Daniel.

DANIEL FROM TORONTO: Yes, good morning.

O'BRIEN: Good morning to you, sir.

DANIEL FROM TORONTO: My question is this, shouldn't the Afghan detainees be considered prisoners of war and the non-Afghans be considered something else, because they are - they were fighting for their government which was the Taliban at the time?

O'BRIEN: Let's send it down to John Zarrella in Guantanamo for that. Is that a difference with the distinction, John, al Qaeda versus Taliban?

ZARRELLA: I think that's certainly one of the arguments, although some of what we hear is of course that the only way to determine - you're talking about uniforms. Did they wear uniforms? Well, no. Even the Taliban fighters, for the most part, the only distinguishing characteristics they may have had was the black headdress that they wore, but beyond that, it's very difficult.

I'm sure the general would echo that it's been, it's certainly been very difficult to determine who friend or foe is over there, and who's exactly, you know, playing on which team. So differentiating between al Qaeda and Taliban may not always be the easiest thing either. Miles.

O'BRIEN: All right. Let's go to the e-mail now. This one comes from Kathy and Paul Oppenheim.

"If one of our soldiers was captured in Afghanistan, we would expect that they would treat that soldier according to the Geneva Convention. Shouldn't we consider the potential duplicity in our actions with these prisoners in Cuba, and how it might affect future reciprocity in the middle east?"

Very good question, Kathy and Paul. Don Shepperd, if in fact U.S. forces are ever held over there, it seems unlikely right now, but if in fact al Qaeda pockets were able to hold someone, clearly the U.S. would demand Geneva Convention status.

SHEPPERD: Yes, there or anywhere else that our people are captured or interned. That's why this issue is so very, very important. It is important that the United States decide the status and comply with international law, so that when our people are affected, our citizens and also our soldiers, that they be allowed to receive the same treatment wherever they are. And so, we got to treat people the same way that we expect to be treated, and this is an important question, right on the money.

O'BRIEN: All right. Let's take a phone call. This one comes from Ohio, Sarah you're on the line. What's your question?

SARAH FROM OHIO: Hi, I just have one question. I'm just wondering, is it not clear what these people want to do? Do people in America not see what's going in in the Middle East, in Israel with their brothers doing the exact same thing. These people are nothing less than suicide bombers, who are not able to complete what they want to do. All they're trying to do is actually get rid of America as a country. Why would we show compassion on these people?

O'BRIEN: Major Garrett.

GARRETT: Well, that would not exactly describe what President Bush and some of his more hawkish advisers have said on the subject. But it would come pretty close. Many of the administration say, look this is a completely different kind of war.

Not only do these detainees not fly any particular flag, wear any uniform, but they have sworn an allegiance to commit acts of terrorism, not only against the United States but against U.S. interests around the globe.

Any potential site is a legitimate target as far as they're concerned if, in fact, they can hit it. And if they communicate, if they can in any way transmit information back and forth, even in detention, that raises a possible risk.

So what the U.S. needs to do, not only to protect its interests so the argument goes, and the interest of its allies, is to give them slightly less comfortable, slightly less hospitable conditions to make sure they understand, and more importantly the world understands, the United States is going to take this issue very, very seriously.

So, perception works on both sides of this, Miles. Yes, perception on the humane side of the equation, but also perception on the side, look we're going to deal toughly with these people because they are bad actors, and we're never going to forget that. So it cuts both ways.

O'BRIEN: All right. We don't have much time, but this next question, which comes via e-mail, points out that sometimes we forget the basics every now and again, to explain to folks why things are happening. This one comes from somebody who has the e-mail handle of bombjack@optionline.net.

"Why are the prisoners in Cuba anyway? Why not somewhere in America?"

John Zarrella.

ZARRELLA: Well it's a real good question, and one of them is because Cuba may have a military base on it, but it's not U.S. soil, which was one of the reasons, of course, as we all remember that the Cuban refugees during the '94 rafters crisis were brought here, why Haitians have been brought here, because then your status does not get elevated.

Once you reach U.S. soil things change as far as your status in the United States and the U.S. justice system, et cetera, et cetera. So keeping them isolated here for those reasons, as well as the reason that this location is so tremendously isolated.

There is no way for these people to escape, to get anywhere other than through a minefield to communist, to the Cuban side, and Castro has already said he'd send them right back, or, to try and swim, but where in shark-infested water. So, it serves dual purposes and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has now really become a tremendous central focal point for the world to look at, a new elevated status, that it hasn't had in a lot of years. Miles.

O'BRIEN: All right, CNN's John Zarrella at the place they call GITMO, Major Garrett, north lawn of the White House, Don Shepperd, retired Major General U.S. Air Force in our Washington Bureau, thank you all three for fielding an excellent batch of e-mail questions and phone calls. We appreciate those. Thank you for participating, and we will look forward to further grilling of our esteemed guests in the future.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com