Maclean's ^ | May 1, 2013 | Luiza Ch. Savage
Obama said at a press conference on Tuesday that he is recommitting to his
failed promise to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo. There has been much
confusion over who is responsible for his failure to do so — the president or
Congress? The Pentagon has asked for $200 million to build permanent structures
to replace deteriorating facilities there, suggesting that while the politicians
debate, the once-temporary facility could be made permanent.
Here are five things to know about what is happening:
1. Detainees are on hunger strike
Obama renewed his call to close the prison amid a detainee hunger strike. The
specific spark that set it off in February is disputed, but both detainee
lawyers and U.S. military officials agree on its underlying cause: growing
desperation and hopelessness among the detainees – many of whom have been held
for over 11 years without trials, and over half of whom have been designated for
transfer for more than three years – that they will never be allowed to go home.
2. Most can never get trials
The most difficult problem is what to do with those detainees who are deemed
to dangerous to release but not feasible to prosecute. It is not possible to
give the vast majority of the detainees trials. They are being held essentially
as Prisoners of War because the government believes they were simply part of
al-Qaeda or the Taliban and the U.S. continues to be at war with those
organizations. But most of them are not linked to any specific terrorist attack
– i.e. a crime for which they could be prosecuted. Moreover, for a variety of
reasons, vaguer charges like providing material support for terrorism do not
apply to most of them.
3. Some detainees were designated for release in 2009 but are still
there
Most of the focus right now is on 86 of the 166 Guantanamo prisoners. This is
the group that has been designated for transfer to other countries if certain
security conditions can be met. They are not “cleared” – unlike some other
former Guantanamo prisoners, they did not win a court order finding that they
were not part of al-Qaeda or the Taliban at all and so must be released. Rather,
a group of U.S. government national security agencies unanimously found in 2009
that they were low level enough that they could potentially transferred away if
the receiving country could provide credible security assurances that it would
keep an eye on them and prevent them from “returning to terrorism.” The outward
trickle of this group stopped after January 2011 when Congress restricted
transfers to countries with troubled security.
4. Obama’s plan would bring them to the U.S. for more indefinite detention
without trial
Defenders of the Obama administration blame Congress for the failure to shut
down Guantanamo because Congress blocked the president’s plan. But Obama’s plan
for emptying the prison was not to release all the detainees who could not
receive trials. Instead, he wanted to bring all the remaining detainees to a
“Supermax” prison inside the U.S., where they would continue to be held
indefinitely without trial as wartime detainees. Congress forbid the transfer of
any more detainees onto U.S. soil. But even if Obama persuaded them to lift that
restriction, the underlying issues of perpetual confinement without trial that
are driving the current hunger strike would still persist.
5. Obama has been sitting on his hands
Obama could have been doing more to winnow the population at Guantanamo than
he has been. Although Congress essentially halted all transfers of low-level
detainees to countries with troubled security throughout 2011, since January
2012 lawmakers gave the Pentagon the power to waive most of the security
restrictions on a case-by-case basis and transfer detainees anyway. The Obama
administration has not used that authority. Obama himself banned any further
repatriations to Yemen – where 56 of the 86 low-level detainees designated for
transfer are from – even before Congress imposed its restrictions. Earlier this
year, the administration reassigned and did not replace, the high level diplomat
whose job had been to negotiate detainee transfers. Essentially the
administration has had a stated policy that it wants to close Guantanamo but has
for some time not been doing anything to implement that policy. Yesterday, Obama
said he would “review” what could be done administratively and try again to
persuade Congress to facilitate closing the prison.
Below are the president’s remarks:
Q: Mr. President, as you’re probably aware, there’s a growing hunger
strike on Guantanamo Bay among prisoners there. Is it any surprise really that
they would prefer death rather than have no end in sight to their confinement?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it is not a surprise to me that we've got
problems in Guantanamo, which is why when I was campaigning in 2007 and 2008,
and when I was elected in 2008, I said we need to close Guantanamo. I continue
to believe that we've got to close Guantanamo.
Well, I think it is critical for us to understand that Guantanamo is not
necessary to keep America safe. It is expensive. It is inefficient. It hurts us
in terms of our international standing. It lessens cooperation with our allies
on counter-terrorism efforts. It is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs
to be closed.
Now, Congress determined that they would not let us close it — and despite
the fact that there are a number of the folks who are currently in Guantanamo
who the courts have said could be returned to their country of origin or
potentially a third country.
I’m going to go back at this. I've asked my team to review everything that’s
currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively.
And I’m going to reengage with Congress to try to make the case that this is not
something that’s in the best interest of the American people. And it’s not
sustainable.
The notion that we’re going to continue to keep over a hundred individuals in
a no-man’s land in perpetuity, even at a time when we've wound down the war in
Iraq, we’re winding down the war in Afghanistan, we’re having success defeating
al Qaeda core, we've kept the pressure up on all these transnational terrorist
networks, when we've transferred detention authority in Afghanistan — the idea
that we would still maintain forever a group of individuals who have not been
tried, that is contrary to who we are, it is contrary to our interests, and it
needs to stop.
Now, it’s a hard case to make because I think for a lot of Americans the
notion is out of sight, out of mind. And it’s easy to demagogue the issue.
That’s what happened the first time this came up. I’m going to go back at it
because I think it’s important.
Q: Meanwhile we continue to force-feed these folks...
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t want these individuals to die. Obviously, the
Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can. But I think all
of us should reflect on why exactly are we doing this? Why are we doing this?
We've got a whole bunch of individuals who have been tried who are currently in
maximum security prisons around the country. Nothing has happened to them.
Justice has been served. It’s been done in a way that’s consistent with our
Constitution, consistent with due process, consistent with rule of law,
consistent with our traditions.
The individual who attempted to bomb Times Square — in prison, serving a life
sentence. The individual who tried to bomb a plane in Detroit — in prison,
serving a life sentence. A Somali who was part of Al-Shabaab, who we captured —
in prison. So we can handle this.
And I understand that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, with the traumas
that had taken place, why, for a lot of Americans, the notion was somehow that
we had to create a special facility like Guantanamo and we couldn't handle this
in a normal, conventional fashion. I understand that reaction. But we’re now
over a decade out. We should be wiser. We should have more experience in how we
prosecute terrorists.
And this is a lingering problem that is not going to get better. It’s going
to get worse. It’s going to fester. And so I’m going to, as I said before,
examine every option that we have administratively to try to deal with this
issue, but ultimately we’re also going to need some help from Congress, and I’m
going to ask some folks over there who care about fighting terrorism but also
care about who we are as a people to step up and help me on it.
DIOGENES invites you to pull up a chair on this fine day and read posts from around the world. The writing may lean to the right...but that's the way Diogenes wants it! You may leave your opinion, but Diogenes rarely changes his! WELCOME!
-
The Dems went down to Georgia They was looking for a seat to steal They were in a bind, 'cause they were way behind They were willing t...
-
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-ryan-idUSKCN12S2BO ^ U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan on Friday re...