If U.S. Intelligence indicates that the Taliban had full knowledge of Bin Laden’s activities, it would be pointless to comply with a demand for evidence. Also, there may be merit to the U.S. claim that the evidence they have collected must be protected, since it could divulge the source of their Intelligence.
The above may or may not be true. I am just suggesting that the situation may not be as simplistic as the Taliban genuinely wanting evidence of Bin Laden’s guilt produced and the U.S.,in defiance of internation law, refusing to hand over any substantial evidence. So speculate away, but be aware that what you imagine may not coincide with reality.
uglybeech, I see your point and have wondered how to solve this problem myself.
The reason we have not provided the asked for evidence is because it compromises our intelligence sources, and provides the terrorists organizations with exact knowledge of how to AVOID our detection in the future.
Some of this evidence, I understand, was gathered using top-secret technological developments that we are not ready to share with bin Laden and/or certain governments. Other evidence will have come from spies in various countries around the world, possibly even within bin Laden’s organization. Revealing the information would also expose the source, in the least case voiding any further usefulness to us, and in the worst case guaranteeing their deaths.
Please keep this in mind - no one expects the Taliban to look at the new evidence and say “Oh, I see” and hand bin Laden over. They know this plays well with the democratic countries (see your OP), but the U.N. has already declared that the evidence provided from the previous WTC bombing is sufficient for bin Laden’s arrest, and the Taliban has refused to hand him over.
The Taliban are playing on our sense of ‘fair play’, when what they really are trying to find out is just how much we know about bin Laden’s group, their own possible involvement, and how we got that information so a way around it can be found.
Of course we wouldn’t. And this might get your goat but I don’t think the Taliban is in any position to make any legitimate demands. So while someone like the UNited States, England, or Canada can make legitimate demands about handing over citizens Afghanistan cannot.
The evidence linking bin Laden to the WTC bombings is irrelevant. We don’t need any evidence linking him to the bombings, since he is already under indictment for the first WTC bombing and the Embassy bombings. Any other country in the world would have already handed him over to us, based on those indictments. The UK would, Brazil would, Canada would, Germany would, everyone would. Except the Taliban regime. They refused.
Until the WTC bombings, there wasn’t much done about it, since the only way to force the Taliban to hand him over was to declare war, and no one was willing to do that, even to get a mass murdering terrorist.
But, after the WTC bombings, we ARE willing to go to war to get our hands on Osama bin Ladin. That’s the difference.
So this talk of evidence is simply beside the point.
I don’t think this legal issue has much relevance, given the situation. Anyway :
Since there has already been an UN resolution asking the Talibans to hand BL over, there is no legal issue.
Also the Talibans aren’t a sovereign government, since they aren’t recognized internationally. A decision from the former president Rabbani would probably have more legal weight. IMHO, the Talibans have no more legitimacy, from an international law point of view, than, say, ETA has in Spain.