• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Detainee Interrogations: Key to Killing Osama bin Laden

    Even though it has been several years since any new detainees have been transferred to Guantanamo Bay, the intelligence extracted from them is still proving its worth—in major and surprising ways.

    Buried in the flood of information on the extraordinary operation to locate and kill Osama bin Laden is the critical role of strategic interrogations of detainees, including those at Guantanamo. According to a number of published reports, Gitmo detainees provided key pieces of information that ultimately lead to the location and death of Osama bin Laden.

    Those reports are confirmed, in large part, by the government. A senior official who briefed the press early this morning explained that “detainees in the post-9/11 period flagged for us individuals who may have been providing direct support to bin Laden and his deputy, [Ayman al-] Zawahiri, after their escape from Afghanistan.”

    He continued: “One courier in particular had our constant attention. Detainees gave us his nom de guerre, or his nickname, and identified him as both a protégé of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of September 11, and a trusted assistant of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, the former number three of al-Qaeda who was captured in 2005.” The United States obtained this information four years ago, the official stated.

    One more crucial fact: According to the “detainees” (note the plural), this individual was “one of the few al-Qaeda couriers trusted by bin Laden.”

    Think about that: This lead was developed during the Bush Administration, most likely from al-Qaeda associates picked up and transferred to Guantanamo and subject to interrogations that critics have repeatedly deemed to be pointless in terms of intelligence value. Whether these detainees remain at Guantanamo is an open question.

    Even at this early point in the news cycle, it is reasonably clear that detainees at Guantanamo (and perhaps elsewhere, such as those formerly in CIA custody and now at Guantanamo) who agreed to long-term lawful strategic interrogation gave the critical nuggets of information that put in motion a series of events that led to bin Laden’s death.

    For years, we have heard that strategic interrogation of detainees at Guantanamo was worthless, that the information is (at best) stale and almost certainly of dubious reliability. The most strident call such interrogations illegal.

    Even some senior intelligence officials in the Department of Defense were often dismissive of the value of intelligence gleaned at Guantanamo.

    Could there be any clearer proof that those critics are just plain wrong?

    Intelligence-gathering and analysis has been the backbone of our many known (and unknown) counterterrorism successes since 9/11. A key part of that has been the role of real-time tactical interrogations and long-term strategic interrogation.

    The information gleaned from those interrogations is fed into a vast and interconnected intelligence network that has resulted in remarkable achievements in “connecting the dots,” sometimes over a period of years, to disable plots and kill or capture terrorists.

    That intelligence has enabled the U.S., under the leadership of both Presidents Bush and Obama, to stay on the offensive while remaining vigilant to the very real threats that confront the nation every day. Yesterday, once again, proves the value of a long-term, lawful terrorist interrogation program.

    Charles D. “Cully” Stimson is a Senior Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs (2006–2007). While in office, Stimson oversaw the re-writing of the Army Field Manual on Interrogations and the movement of the CIA high-value detainees to Guantanamo.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    7 Responses to Detainee Interrogations: Key to Killing Osama bin Laden

    1. Chad, DC says:

      This post includes no analysis about how many false leads we obtained from interrogation methods, what the costs of pursuing those leads were, which methods, specifically, led to the reliable information, or what alternate ways of gaining this information could have been used. I would have hoped an organization like Heritage would understand that even if you get a desired outcome from a strategy, it does not mean you could not have obtained a similar or even better outcome with less cost from another technique or strategy. The notion of "opportunity cost" is generally treated with more appreciation on this site.

      As such, it proves nothing about the effectiveness of any individual interrogation techniques, and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous at best.

      So, in a word, yes, there could be "clearer proof that those critics are just plain wrong." Any actual "proof" would be much clearer than the conjecture offered above. If anything, I'd say that the fact that it took us a decade to find the most sought-after man in the world indicates that at least some of the techniques we used were inefficient.

    2. Lou, PA says:

      The problem with ANY interrogation is always the separation of the "wheat" from the "chaff." It appears, that in this particular case some "wheat" was produced via the interrogation route. But we must also keep in mind that there are many means of intelligence-gathering, ranging from those of a classified nature to the plethora of "open source" intelligence that is available to anyone who bothers to take the time to find and read it. Ben Ladin's elimination was probably due to a combination of all types of intelligence sources, and keeping the Pakistanis out of the loop until it was a fait accompli.

    3. Pingback: Republicans say torture led U.S. to bin Laden. Facts say otherwise. - Online Political Blog

    4. Pingback: Morning Bell: Winning the Long War on Terror | The Foundry

    5. Pingback: The Death of Osama Bin Laden | Terrorism

    6. Pingback: The Self-Serving Hypocrisy of the Left, Suffers New Rash of Bush Derangement With Osama Defeat

    7. Pingback: Jim Talent, distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation and former U.S. Senator explains What Bin Laden’s Death Tells Us About Hard Power? | Tennesseans Watching Federal & State Government

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×