AMERICAN Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel has told Congress last month's prisoner swap with the Taliban may have been the "last, best" chance to secure the release of Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl.
He said mediators had indicated time was slipping away to get the only US soldier held captive in Afghanistan out safely.
Mr Hagel, the first Obama administration official to testify publicly about the controversial deal, told the House Armed Services Committee Qatari officials warned in the days before the exchange that a leak would sabotage the deal.
The transfer of five detainees from Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, to Qatar was legal and advanced national interests, he added.
Republicans and some Democrats have criticised the administration for not informing Congress in advance, with some accusing the president of breaking a law requiring 30-day notification of any Guantanamo prisoner release.
Other questions centre on whether Sgt Bergdahl deserted and whether America gave up too much for his freedom. Administration officials have told Congress four of the five Taliban officials will likely rejoin the fight.
"We could have done a better job of keeping you informed," Mr Hagel said.
However, he said the "extraordinary situation" combined time-sensitive concerns over Sgt Bergdahl's health and safety and persistent fears the Taliban may have been negotiating in bad faith.
Mr Hagel added: "We grew increasingly concerned any delay, or any leaks, could derail the deal and further endanger Sgt. Bergdahl. We were told by the Qataris a leak would end the negotiations for Bergdahl's release.
"We also knew he would be extremely vulnerable during any movement, and our military personnel conducting the hand-off would be exposed to a possible ambush or other deadly scenarios in very dangerous territory."
Howard McKeon, the committee's Republican chairman, said the agreement with the Taliban could fuel further kidnappings of US personnel.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article