EXECUTIVE WATCH

The Obama administration announced that its task forces on detention and interrogation had requested deadline extensions to issue their reports.  The White House maintains that the promise to close Guantanamo in January is still operative.  Deborah Pearlstein believes that the extensions are not big news and concludes that this means the administration is looking for ways to avoid releasing detainees that they consider to still be dangerous.  The task force on detention did offer a preliminary report (hotlink to ABC).  Liza Goiten reviews it and finds it lacking in analysis but plentiful in advocacy.  And Glenn Greenwald links to a report by Human Rights First that shows over 90% of terrorism suspects brought to the court system are convicted.  Meanwhile, Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson appeared to take back earlier comments that Guantanamo detainees might be detained beyond January.

Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki suggested that U.S. troops could be staying in Iraq beyond 2011, which is when the Status of Forces agreement expires.  Juan Cole does not see big news in the announcement, believing that al-Maliki only meant to cover a few advisors.  Eli Lake speaks with a couple of experts, however, who agree that the statement does signal a shift in policy.

The New York Times reports that, in 2002, Bush administration officials, led by Dick Cheney, argued that the military should be used to arrest and detain terrorism suspects found in Lackawanna, NY.  Ultimately, Bush ordered the FBI to make the arrests instead.  Jack Balkin sees in the episode evidence of a desire to evade Fourth Amendment guarantees against government detention.

The latest intelligence funding bill might mandate disclosure of documentation of the intelligence gained through enhanced interrogation techniques.  The proposed bill passed out of the Senate intelligence committee, where it appears to have split Democrats.

(more…)

U.S. forces pulled out of major Iraqi cities in what CQ Politics calls a “quiet” withdrawal. Foreign Policy’s Mark Lynch says the Obama Administration should be praised for honoring the Status of Force Agreement between the two countries. Foreign Policy’s Peter Feaver fears America is compromising a decent outcome in Iraq. Fellow Foreign Policy blogger, Tom Ricks, says that there’s no decent outcome to be had, but concedes that a pulling out now might not be optimal for undoing the Bush-era damage.

Foreign Policy’s Mark Lynch examines how Arabs will judge Obama’s Guantanamo policy, concluding that his policy must be clear and bold to have a positive impact. The New York Times’ Charlie Savage illustrates why clarity and boldness have not marked Obama’s counterterrorism policies thus far, instead bearing close resemblance to the policies of President Bush. In other Gitmo commentary, the Atlantic Monthly’s Chris Good details efforts by a Guantanamo detainee to suppress evidence produced by torture and place the Obama administration in the difficult position of demonstrating why the evidence is still legitimate. In another case, the New York Times reports that lawyers want to visit black sites run by the CIA before they are decommissioned to see if they were tainted by harsh conditions and torture.

The New York Times’ Roger Cohen says if President Obama engages with Iran, he “betrays millions of Iranians who have defrauded and have risked their lives to have their votes count.” The National Review’s Andy McCarthy agrees, with his characteristic rhetorical flourish.

The Washington Independent’s Spencer Ackerman slams Secretary of Defense Bob Gates’s recent statement on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as incoherent, while The Weekly Standard’s Michael Goldfarb says it’s reasonable. Relatedly, Lt. Dan Choi lost his first administrative challenge after being dismissed under DADT.

ProPublica’s Dafna Linzer notes that President Obama appeared to back away from issuing an executive order establishing indefinite detention. Left-leaning commentators were angered by rumors of an impending executive order, including Obsidian Wings’ Hilzoy, who said that it would undermine America’s basic respect for the rule of law. Liza Goitein writes for Balkinization about why the issue is so divisive. Benjamin Wittes and Jack Goldsmith pen a guest column for the Washington Post explaining why the President should collaborate more with Congress on national security matters. Volokh Conspiracy’s Jonathan Adler agrees with their analysis.

The Obama administration comes up with a way to avoid a fight with Congress over the Uighurs detained at Guantanamo – send them to Palau.  Or to Bermuda.  The Telegraph reports that the UK was not consulted.  Thomas Joscelyn sees a resultant fracture developing in the US-UK relationship.  Scott Horton sees friction between the allies resulting from the UK Law Lords’ declaration that detainees are entitled to view all the evidence against them.  And Slate reports on what happens to detainees that are shipped to other countries.

The Obama administration also transferred three detainees to Saudi Arabia.  The Weekly Standard’s Thomas Joscelyn critically notes that one of them is a convicted murderer (in Bosnia).

Meanwhile, Sen. Joe Lieberman calls Guantanamo a “humane” facility and urges the President to keep it open.  A Guantanamo detainee allegedly commits suicide. but the AP is skeptical of the government’s story.  Christopher Hitchens calls Guantanamo a “state-sponsored madrasah,” where the guards are humane but the worst detainees force the others to live the lifestyle of a radical Muslim.

Reports claim that the White House has  abandoned plans to transfer detainees into the United States.  Contrarily, Rep. John Boehner claims that the “first step in the Democrats’ plan to import terrorists into America” has been put in motion.  His evidence: “[A] Tanzanian national held at Guantanamo since September 2006, arrived at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which has housed several suspected terrorists during their prosecutions in the federal court for the Southern District of New York.”  In Iraq, a detainee suspected of killing 5 Americans is released as part of a peace deal.  And White House press spokesman Robert Gibbs refuses to speculate on whether detainees found not guilty by federal courts would be released.

A Senate Judiciary subcommittee holds a hearing on the implications of long-term detention.  Dan Froomkin and Glenn Greenwald are both optimistic that the Obama administration will be forced to more clearly state whether it supports the Bush administration’s policies or not.

Senators Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman proposed an amendment to the latest war spending bill to exclude photos of detainee abuse from being accessible under the Freedom of Information act.  Greg Sargent reports that Nancy Pelosi and other House liberals and libertarians will not allow the amendment into the final bill.  Michael Goldfarb reports that, in the interim, President Obama may use an executive order to prevent the release of the photographs in the event of an unfavorable court ruling.  Slate helpfully explains what happens when the CIA tells a judge that documents cannot be released.

Judge Jeffrey White refuses to dismiss Jose Padilla’s suit against John Yoo.  Separately, UK cops allegedly waterboard drug suspects.  The New York Times reports that all Bush DOJ officials involved in a 2005 debate about waterboarding agreed that it was legal.  Debate erupts about the role of James Comey, with Scott Horton and Glenn Greenwald accusing the Times of reporting only selected e-mails.

President Obama appoints a special master, or “compensation czar,” to oversee compensation for executives at companies receiving federal assistance.  Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner rushes to clarify the guidelines for the new office .  Meanwhile, the “transparency czar” struggles to provide transparency to the federal assistance programs and urges that “stress tests” be rerun.  And Rep. Darrell Issa goes originalist on the Treasury Secretary, arguing that the modern office of the Treasury Secretary goes far beyond Alexander Hamilton’s worst nightmares. (more…)

President Barack Obama delivered an address from Cairo directed at the “Muslim World” entitled “A New Beginning.” Opinio Juris’s Roger Alford favorably compares the address to Woodrow Wilson’s famous speeches and distills the message to seven key issues. The New Republic’s William Galston concurs, pointing out that Obama has a knack for seizing the moment.  Mouin Rabbani is more skeptical, labeling the speech a “Ctrl+Alt+Del” operation in which American Middle East policy is merely “being rebooted into the same decrepit operating system … it’s the same wars, same autocratic friends and discredited allies, same objective of hegemony and domination.” The New Republic’s Michael Crowley similarly catalogues parallels with President Bush’s language, but maintains that Obama’s speech will have a far greater impact. Harper’s Scott Horton, however, is surprised by the strong criticism that Obama had for all major players in the region, though Afghan Haseeb Humayoon sensed a lack of boldness in Obama’s tone and substance on promoting democracy and human rights. The president’s line that Iran should articulate “not what it is against, but what future it wants to build” resonates with Iranian Taj Bahkhsh. Palestinian journalist Daoud Kuttab notes that the speech was eloquent and set lofty expectations, but says that failure to follow through with actions “will be much worse than had they not been made in the first place.”

The reaction among commentators on Israel has been mixed. David Newman applauds the speech and says it is time for Israel to stop merely speaking of peace and start implementing it by dismantling settlements. James Kirchick finds it “deeply unsettling” that Obama saved his harshest words for Israel. Daniel Gordis thinks Obama split the difference between ideological extremes and assumed positions “virtually identical to those of Israel’s political center.”

(more…)