IN THE NEWS
What can we make of the US military's decision to release Abdallah Tabarak, the former bodyguard of Osama bin Laden, from Guantanamo Bay. Tabarak is an interesting figure, in no small part because of his relative's affiliations with Al Qaeda. Why this particular prisoner, when there are others without a distinct role in Al Qaeda, still in indefinite imprisonment? I can think of at least a few reasons:
- Officials in the Moroccan government genuinely convinced their American counterparts that they would have more success with Tabarak.
- The Moroccans have their own reasons to interrogate Tabarak. In 2003, Al Qaeda bombed, within a few minutes of each other, several targets in Casablanca. The terrorists behind the Madrid bombings also used Morocco as a base and transit point.
- Tabarak is being used as bait. Since he has relative freedom now, intelligence agencies may be closely monitoring him to see if he contacts any of his former compatriots. (Of course, Tabarak must know that he is under surveillance.)
- Tabarak was never as important as the phrase Osama bin Laden's bodyguard implies. Every terrorist organization employs people--some may know the group's real activities, others may not--in a variety of minor support roles. Not every one is worthy of elevation to Bond villain status.
- Tabarak struck a deal, exchanging something of value for his freedom.
- The interrogators at Guantanamo Bay ran out of reasons to hold Tabarak.
Of course, none of these motives are mutually exclusive, so there's undoubtedly some mix of them at play. The Moroccan government has its reasons for asking for Tabarak; the US government has its reasons for letting him go.
Comments