Guantanamo's Big Comeback
For years a cultural debate has been taking place about the ethics of jailing people without trial, but in no way has this translated into concrete changes to the reality at Guantanamo.
Guantanamo this, Guantanamo that. The infamous detention camp in Cuba is trendy once again, thanks to the hunger strike that 30 detainees took part in this February. Currently, 100 out of 166 people imprisoned there are on strike; they are being force-fed, despite protests from the American Medical Association. For over a year no one new has arrived at this prison, which costs $150 million a year — or $900,000 per head — to keep running. That is, of course, if you don't count the 40 extra medical staff whose job it is to push pipes through the prisoners' noses down into their stomachs.
Of these 166 people, 86 have been acquitted. For some time now, they have been waiting to be transported home. Aside from the more or less obvious bureaucratic and legal problems that are endlessly slowing this process down, the U.S. government has another issue with most of these people: They are from Yemen, so it’s scared to let them go; it's better to keep them a bit longer and let the situation in Yemen calm down. Of the 166 prisoners, only three have been sentenced, and another six are currently being prosecuted. The rest are in limbo.
As we know, Obama made closing Guantanamo a priority in his electoral campaign. He repeated this promise in 2009 on his second day as president.
Thousands of outraged people worldwide agree that the detention camp is an extremely dysfunctional tool for fighting terrorism and that it probably produces more future enemies to the U.S. than it is able to hold.
Despite the fact that journalists are giving Obama step by step instructions on how to shut down Guantanamo, he limits himself to expressing sympathy, saying, “Obviously the Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can.”
On May 2, Slate magazine published excerpts from the memoirs of Mohamedou Ould Slahi, who has been in the prison for 11 years. These simple 500-page notes require no commentary. But "at Guantanamo, it seems, the less you have done, the more trapped you are," writes Amy Davidson for the New Yorker. The system of release, transfer, interrogation and decision-making does not follow any logic whatsoever. Everything — including Mohamedou Ould Slahi's release — happens at random.
Guantanamo has been talked about for nearly 11 years. The debate comes in waves: From time to time there are demonstrations in front of the White House, and then everybody goes home.
Everybody except those — at least — 86 people, who theoretically should have been home a long time ago, but who have been imprisoned in an unreal Kafkaesque world.
In the media and at universities, a cultural debate has been taking place about the ethics of jailing people without trial, but in no way has this translated into concrete changes to the reality at Guantanamo. It's no surprise that these people would rather die than wander somewhere between life and death.
In an April 25 letter to U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Jeremy Lazarus, president of the American Medical Association, points out that “the force-feeding of detainees violates core ethical values of the medical profession.” The U.N. condemns force-feeding as torture. “Hacktivist” group Anonymous announced mass protests from May 17 to 19: "We will shut down Guantanamo," the hacktivists say, calling for general mobilization.
Once again, Guantanamo has been on front pages for a week. How long will it be able to stay there? On May 7 a conference was held in Washington, D.C. on the topic of drones. It is a topic that is competing for the attention of those who are preoccupied with theoretical issues such as the violation of human rights — and a topic that has been overshadowing the problem of the camp in Cuba for a while now. The conference, organized by the "New America Foundation," was given an amusing, lighthearted name: “The Drone Next Door.” Baked goods were served; new technologies were discussed. In the end, issues such as drone use or Guantanamo are merely small sources of debate for well-fed American kids who have come to the capital to study at the most prestigious colleges in the country. Let them practice their rhetoric. At the same time, another think tank, Freedom House, published its yearly report on freedom of the press. In the top position were Norway and Sweden, with the U.S. coming in 23rd.*
How will we discuss Guantanamo in 50 years? If the role of the U.S. in the international arena undergoes changes — that is, if the empire slowly but surely falls — then it will probably need to account for Guantanamo. Impunity is the privilege of winners. For now, all we have are sporadic bursts of outrage, helplessness and sometimes just pure disbelief.
* Editor’s Note: The U.S. was ranked 23rd along with Barbados, Costa Rica and Jamaica.
Guantanamo this, Guantanamo that. The infamous detention camp in Cuba is trendy once again, thanks to the hunger strike that 30 detainees took part in this February. Currently, 100 out of 166 people imprisoned there are on strike; they are being force-fed, despite protests from the American Medical Association. For over a year no one new has arrived at this prison, which costs $150 million a year — or $900,000 per head — to keep running. That is, of course, if you don't count the 40 extra medical staff whose job it is to push pipes through the prisoners' noses down into their stomachs.
Of these 166 people, 86 have been acquitted. For some time now, they have been waiting to be transported home. Aside from the more or less obvious bureaucratic and legal problems that are endlessly slowing this process down, the U.S. government has another issue with most of these people: They are from Yemen, so it’s scared to let them go; it's better to keep them a bit longer and let the situation in Yemen calm down. Of the 166 prisoners, only three have been sentenced, and another six are currently being prosecuted. The rest are in limbo.
As we know, Obama made closing Guantanamo a priority in his electoral campaign. He repeated this promise in 2009 on his second day as president.
Thousands of outraged people worldwide agree that the detention camp is an extremely dysfunctional tool for fighting terrorism and that it probably produces more future enemies to the U.S. than it is able to hold.
Despite the fact that journalists are giving Obama step by step instructions on how to shut down Guantanamo, he limits himself to expressing sympathy, saying, “Obviously the Pentagon is trying to manage the situation as best as they can.”
On May 2, Slate magazine published excerpts from the memoirs of Mohamedou Ould Slahi, who has been in the prison for 11 years. These simple 500-page notes require no commentary. But "at Guantanamo, it seems, the less you have done, the more trapped you are," writes Amy Davidson for the New Yorker. The system of release, transfer, interrogation and decision-making does not follow any logic whatsoever. Everything — including Mohamedou Ould Slahi's release — happens at random.
Guantanamo has been talked about for nearly 11 years. The debate comes in waves: From time to time there are demonstrations in front of the White House, and then everybody goes home.
Everybody except those — at least — 86 people, who theoretically should have been home a long time ago, but who have been imprisoned in an unreal Kafkaesque world.
In the media and at universities, a cultural debate has been taking place about the ethics of jailing people without trial, but in no way has this translated into concrete changes to the reality at Guantanamo. It's no surprise that these people would rather die than wander somewhere between life and death.
In an April 25 letter to U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Jeremy Lazarus, president of the American Medical Association, points out that “the force-feeding of detainees violates core ethical values of the medical profession.” The U.N. condemns force-feeding as torture. “Hacktivist” group Anonymous announced mass protests from May 17 to 19: "We will shut down Guantanamo," the hacktivists say, calling for general mobilization.
Once again, Guantanamo has been on front pages for a week. How long will it be able to stay there? On May 7 a conference was held in Washington, D.C. on the topic of drones. It is a topic that is competing for the attention of those who are preoccupied with theoretical issues such as the violation of human rights — and a topic that has been overshadowing the problem of the camp in Cuba for a while now. The conference, organized by the "New America Foundation," was given an amusing, lighthearted name: “The Drone Next Door.” Baked goods were served; new technologies were discussed. In the end, issues such as drone use or Guantanamo are merely small sources of debate for well-fed American kids who have come to the capital to study at the most prestigious colleges in the country. Let them practice their rhetoric. At the same time, another think tank, Freedom House, published its yearly report on freedom of the press. In the top position were Norway and Sweden, with the U.S. coming in 23rd.*
How will we discuss Guantanamo in 50 years? If the role of the U.S. in the international arena undergoes changes — that is, if the empire slowly but surely falls — then it will probably need to account for Guantanamo. Impunity is the privilege of winners. For now, all we have are sporadic bursts of outrage, helplessness and sometimes just pure disbelief.
* Editor’s Note: The U.S. was ranked 23rd along with Barbados, Costa Rica and Jamaica.