GUANTÁNAMO

Can Guantánamo’s terrorists learn to change?

 

charlesberger@cfr.org

It appears about a third of the current Guantánamo detainees will be released in the near future and shipped off to some sort of a rehabilitation center in Yemen. In the State of the Union address, President Obama reiterated his administration’s policy to close the detention center, and the Department of Defense has cleared approximately 55 Yemeni detainees for release.

However, Congress placed limits on repatriation, one of which effectively requires Yemen to establish a formal rehabilitation center for returning detainees. Establishing a rehabilitation center in Yemen is sound policy and, if done effectively, will reduce the significant risk of these detainees re-engaging in terrorist activity. In Yemen, plans are in the works for such a center, based largely on a similar center in Saudi Arabia. However, few details have been made public.

There has been considerable debate on the Saudi center’s efforts to “deradicalize” former terrorists. Supporters of deradicalization view it as the strategy to counter violent extremism both at home and abroad. Some critics have questioned the effectiveness of deradicalization; others question its morality, likening it to the brainwashing in the literary and cinema classic A Clockwork Orange.

Simply put, deradicalization is a process to change individuals’ political or religious beliefs through dialogue as a means to convince them to abandon terrorism.

It is not mind control — the detainee still maintains free will. Some detainees may consciously choose to abandon terrorism. Others may not. Still others may feign a change of heart in order to be released.

While the jury is still out on the effectiveness of deradicalization, rehabilitation is not limited to this single approach. Terrorism rehabilitation programs have taken various forms in Pakistan, Indonesia, Colombia and Northern Ireland with positive results.

These approaches have been used in a variety of settings, such as prisons, halfway houses, military detention centers, and even non-custodial settings. These efforts have included various combinations of approaches including deradicalization, demobilization, parole and post-release monitoring.

The objective of any risk mitigation program should be to prevent the individual from re-engaging in terrorism, whether or not the subject truly has a change of heart.

Demobilization is a system of incentives and disincentives designed to convince subjects to abandon violence. However, unlike deradicalization, demobilization does not necessarily aim to change the detainee’s belief system.

In addition to deradicalization and demobilization, parole regimes set various conditions for release, including the threat of reincarceration. Post-release monitoring (such as mandatory meetings with police officers and clandestine surveillance) is also an effective deterrent to re-engaging in terrorism.

Deradicalization, demobilization, parole and post-release monitoring are not mutually exclusive and can be used simultaneously.

While reducing the recidivism risk to zero is impossible, the most promising risk-mitigation program would include deradicalization, demobilization, strict post-release parole, and a rigorous post-release monitoring regime.

The objective of the rehabilitation should be to transition the detainees from long-term detention at Guantánamo into Yemeni society, making the halfway house model the most apt.

The center should be staffed with religious, psychological and social-services experts from outside of government.

As in the Saudi center, religious scholars should use dialogue in an effort to deradicalize detainees.

As part of the demobilization effort, the center should provide financial payments, family counseling, mental-health services, basic education, and job assistance.

Post-release, Yemen must closely monitor the detainees with physical surveillance, home visits and meetings with security services. As a form of group demobilization, the detainees’ tribal elders could be incentivized to enforce parole agreements by acknowledging the parolees’ obligation not to commit terrorist acts or join militant groups.

While it is in the interests of the United States to repatriate the Yemeni detainees who have been cleared for release, it must do so in a manner that does not strengthen al Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula.

Beyond relying on deradicalization alone, the most promising strategy to reduce the risk of recidivism is to combine multiple risk-reduction approaches effectively utilized by other countries.

Charles E. Berger is an Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and is currently on sabbatical at the Council on Foreign Relations as the National Intelligence Fellow. These are his views and do not necessarily reflect those of the FBI.

Read more Other Views stories from the Miami Herald

  •  
DE LA O

    A JUDGE’S VIEW

    Judge has faith in the law, and in human potential

    I am a circuit judge in Miami-Dade County serving in the criminal division. Every day, I make decisions about whether to release defendants who are awaiting trial and whose families rely on them for basic needs; whether to grant requests by victims of domestic violence to remove stay-away orders that keep their families apart; and whether to sentence convicted defendants to prison, house arrest or probation.

  •  
MCT

    JUDICIAL ELECTIONS

    There’s got to be a better way to seat judges

    When I think of the traits that are essential for someone to be a good judge, I immediately identify characteristics such as legal ability and understanding of legal principles, courtroom experience, record and reputation, temperament and community involvement. As a Miami-Dade County voter, and as someone who has served on several endorsement panels for various organizations, I have serious concerns about the quality of the candidates that are running for this very important post. I also have reservations about the election process through which we are selecting the members of our lower courts.

  •  
Jack Orr cast the only vote in the Florida Legislature in support of school integration.

    JOHN B. ORR

    A man of vision, principle — and flaws

    It was 1956, and the Florida Legislature was considering a bill to get around the U.S. Supreme Court ruling barring racial segregation in schools. Only one of the 90 House members voted against the bill — a young lawyer from Miami named Jack Orr.

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category