Guantanamo: Terrorism of the State and Double Standards

Published in La Jornada
(Mexico) on 17 April 2013
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Sarah Nissen. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
The hunger strike taking place in the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in which more than 100 inmates are participating, according to defense lawyers — while prison authorities insist there are around 40 that are fasting — has already exceeded two months and is continuing amid signs of deteriorating health and an increase of desperation among prisoners.

Last Sunday, the New York Times published a letter signed by the Yemeni prisoner Samir Naji al Hasan Moqbel, in which he claims to have lost 15 kilograms (33 pounds) since the start of the fast, Feb. 10, and reports inhumane practices by the prison staff against the protest participants, who are force-fed through tubes.

Significantly, one day before the publication, a confrontation occurred between Guantanamo guards and prisoners in which the former used non-lethal weapons against the latter with the pretext of safeguarding the health and security of the detainees.

The degrading and inhumane treatment of those who are subjected to it renders Guantanamo a space where justice is absolutely denied. It serves as an embarrassing example of the criminal network driven by the White House in the time of George W. Bush to kidnap, incarcerate and torture presumed terrorists, or citizens of the Arab and Muslim world that could be considered as such by Washington.

You should remember that the majority of the prisoners on this site have not only been faced with extremely cruel treatment for a decade, but have also endured the denial of practically all of their human rights while being placed in a position of legal limbo: They have neither been judged nor received sentencing from any legal authority, and haven't been recognized as members of an opposing military force, for which at the very least they would be guaranteed the statute and the rights reserved to prisoners of war.

To this date, and despite the fact that Obama’s own administration has signaled that 87 of the 166 prisoners of Guantanamo don’t represent any threat against the security of the United States and ought to be freed, Washington has decided not to conform to that diagnostic and to keep them in captivity. It also appears that Obama’s promise to close Guantanamo, made during his first presidential campaign, has succumbed to the pressures and real power of the industrial-military complex and the ultraconservative groups of the neighboring nation.

These facts indicate a political, legal and moral degradation from which the superpower has not been able to recuperate, while undermining the moral authority of Washington to condemn terrorist acts like the one that occurred last Monday during the Boston Marathon.

After all, the United States government itself, with the supposed aim of combating terrorism, has been a habitual promoter of actions that fit the category of terrorism of the state: the military bombing of Iraq and Afghanistan, the bombing of innocent civilians with unmanned planes — claiming the lives of 175 children in Afghanistan, Yemen and Pakistan since 2004 — and the persistence of the kidnapping of innocents, 166 of which languish in the concentration camp of Guantanamo, against all ethics and outside any legal framework.


La huelga de hambre que se lleva a cabo en la prisión militar estadunidense de la bahía de Guantánamo, Cuba, y en la que según abogados defensores participan más de un centenar de internos –las autoridades carcelarias sostienen que los presos en ayuno son alrededor de 40–, ha superado ya dos meses, en medio de signos de deterioro en la salud y aumento en la desesperación de los reos.
El domingo pasado el diario estadunidense The New York Times publicó una carta firmada por el preso yemení Samir Naji al Hasan Moqbel, en la que afirma haber bajado 15 kilos desde el inicio del ayuno, el 10 de febrero, y denuncia prácticas inhumanas del personal carcelario contra los participantes en la protesta, los cuales son alimentados a la fuerza mediante tubos.
Significativamente, un día antes de dicha publicación se produjo un enfrentamiento entre custodios y presos de Guantánamo en el que los primeros utilizaron balas no letales contra los segundos con el pretexto de salvaguardarla salud y la seguridad de los detenidos.
Los tratos degradantes e inhumanos a los que son sometidos los internos hacen recordar el carácter de Guantánamo como un espacio de negación rotunda de la legalidad, y como ejemplo vergonzoso de la red criminal montada por la Casa Blanca en tiempos de George W. Bush para secuestrar, encarcelar y torturar a presuntos terroristas o ciudadanos del mundo árabe y musulmán que pudieran ser considerados como tales por Washington.
Debe recordarse que la mayoría de los cautivos en ese sitio no sólo han debido enfrentar durante más de una década un trato en extremo cruel, sino también han padecido la negación de prácticamente todos sus derechos humanos y su colocación en una suerte de limbo jurídico: sin ser juzgados y sin recibir sentencia de autoridad judicial alguna, y sin ser reconocidos como integrantes de una fuerza militar enemiga, lo que al menos les habría garantizado el estatuto y los derechos reservados a los prisioneros de guerra.
A la fecha, y pese a que la propia administración de Obama ha señalado que 87 de los 166 presos de Guantánamo no representan amenaza alguna contra la seguridad de Estados Unidos y cuentan con el visto bueno para ser liberados, Washington ha decidido no actuar de conformidad con ese diagnóstico y mantenerlos en cautiverio. Otro tanto ocurre con la promesa de cierre de Guantánamo, formulada por Barack Obama durante su primera campaña presidencial, la cual ha sucumbido ante las presiones y el poder fáctico del complejo industrial-militar y de grupos ultraconservadores de la nación vecina.
Tales hechos, indicativos de una degradación política, legal y moral de la que la superpotencia no ha podido recuperarse, socavan la autoridad moral de Washington para condenar actos de terrorismo como el ocurrido el pasado lunes durante el maratón de Boston.
A fin de cuentas, el propio gobierno estadunidense, con el supuesto fin decombatir el terrorismo, ha sido promotor consuetudinario de acciones que encajan en la categoría de terrorismo de Estado, como el arrasamiento militar de Irak y Afganistán, el bombardeo de civiles inocentes con aviones no tripulados –que han cobrado la vida de 175 niños en Afganistán, Yemen y Pakistán desde 2004– y, desde luego, la persistencia de los secuestros de inocentes, 166 de los cuales languidecen, en contra de toda ética y de cualquier marco legal, en el campo de concentración de Guantánamo.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Palestine: Ceasefire Not Peace: How Netanyahu and AIPAC Outsourced Israel’s War to Trump

Australia: Donald Trump Is Not the Only Moving Part When It Comes to Global Trade

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Topics

Poland: Jędrzej Bielecki: Trump’s Pyrrhic Victory*

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

Germany: Big Tech Wants a Say in EU Law: More Might for the Mighty

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Spain: Global Aid without the US

Spain: Not a Good Time for Solidarity

Related Articles

Cuba: Summit between Wars and Other Disruptions

Germany: LA Protests: Why Are So Many Mexican Flags Flying in the US?

Mexico: US Pushes for Submission

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Afghanistan: Defeat? Strategic Withdrawal? Maneuver?