In his article “Iraq and the Military Detention Debate: Firsthand Perspectives from the Other War, 2003-2010” published in the Virginia Journal of International Law, Strauss Center Distinguished Scholar and UT Law Professor Robert Chesney examines the law and policy of military detention.

View This Article

In his article “Iraq and the Military Detention Debate: Firsthand Perspectives from the Other War, 2003-2010” published in the Virginia Journal of International Law, Strauss Center Distinguished Scholar and UT Law Professor Robert Chesney examines the law and policy of military detention. He analyzes the underlying assumptions of the current U.S. detention policy debate, and his analysis draws on primary source material in the form of the After Action Reports created by U.S. military Judge Advocates as well as interviews with service members involved in capture and detention in Iraq. In order to examine the evolution and running assumptions of detention policy, Chesney divides his article into four characteristically unique time periods of U.S. involvement in Iraq and follows with an overview of the lessons learned from these experiences. He defines the four phases as the Invasion Phase, the Occupation Phase, the Mandate Phase, and the Security Agreement Phase.

Chesney refutes the assumption that detention facilities in a combat zone will continue to exist over the long term. He argues that one notable lesson from U.S. involvement in Iraq is that detention policy, rather than remaining static, goes through a cycle and adapts to changing conditions in overseas combat areas. Chesney also questions the assumption that the areas of criminal law enforcement and military detention cannot coexist. With this piece, Chesney contributes to the U.S. detention policy debate with findings that have implications for future U.S. detention policy and practice in Afghanistan.