Prisoner Swaps Are Nothing New

The deal to release Bowe Bergdahl is par for the course, in spite of the big deal being made about it by those who want to use it against President Obama for political purposes.

None of the men involved in the swap are members of al-Qaida. What’s more, the five detainees – who spent more than a decade at Guantanamo – were transferred under heavy restrictions that will prevent them from rejoining the battlefield, unlike hundreds of Guantanamo prisoners who were released by former President George W. Bush.

In fact, Bush released dozens of men held in secret CIA prisons. Yet prisoner swaps, even lop-sided ones, are nothing new. “[Exchanges] have long been viewed as a very human way of effectuating the goals of international law, which is to make war as humane as possible,” Steve Vladeck, a constitutional law professor at American University said in an interview. “What’s unique about this case is the fact that it’s rare to have a prisoner transfer in this sort of asymmetrical conflict.” The U.S. may be fighting enemies it views as different from those in past wars, but international law is still the same.

Prisoner exchanges for individual soldiers are not uncommon among heavily militarized U.S. allies. In 2011, Israel traded 1,027 Palestinian prisoners for a single soldier, Gilad Shalit, who was kept captive in the Gaza Strip for five years. Thousands of prisoners have been released by Israel to secure prisoner exchanges over the past three decades. And the release of prisoners convicted of terrorism was a cornerstone of the peace process in Northern Ireland.

The five former prisoners, who were once militant fighters with close ties to Taliban leaders, may have been nearing the end of their stay anyway. “There is an argument that our authority to hold them was going to expire at the end of the year,” when American forces end combat operations in Afghanistan, said Vladeck, who is co-editor-in-chief of the Just Security blog.

By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.