Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Guantanamo

1. Guantanamo Bay Military Prison: Narratives and Numbers

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
The Guantánamo Bay Data Project serves as a central source of information on the Guantánamo Bay Military Prison. This project provides a comprehensive picture of the prison, centering the lives of the boys and men detained at the naval base. It depicts the global impact Guantánamo has had on the lives of hundreds of Muslims, their families, and communities as a whole. Many discussions of the U.S. Guantánamo base focus solely on the role, legal rationale, costs, and management of the U.S. government. However, this project seeks to highlight the trauma inflicted upon those held at the prison and the larger ‘war on terror’ apparatus that has wielded Islamophobia to justify the 780 Muslim boys and men, many of whom were subject to . This resource provides visualized demographic data on every single person who has been imprisoned at Guantánamo, including age, country of origin, country of repatriation, “non-enemy combatant” status, and listed mental illnesses. We also provide an overview of the history, laws, and policies of the naval prison, a more in-depth discussion of the aggregated data, the status of those who remain imprisoned, and future plans for the prison.
Topic:
Torture, Prisons/Penal Systems, War on Terror, and Guantanamo Bay
Political Geography:
North America, United States of America, and Guantanamo

2. Factsheet: Legal Challenges to Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
U.S. legislation and case law have both upheld and challenged the legal authority of the Guantánamo Bay military prison. This includes the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, as well as Supreme Court cases such as Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) and Boumediene v. Bush (2008). Serious legal issues have arisen around the legal rights and protections of those imprisoned, including the right to habeas corpus and the right to be tried under the U.S. legal system (as opposed to U.S. military tribunals). Attorneys for those imprisoned at Guantánamo Bay military prison have been subjected to surveillance and interference by the U.S. government, and the U.S. government tightly controls the release of information about the military prison and those imprisoned there.
Topic:
Human Rights, Law, Guantanamo Bay, and Habeas Corpus
Political Geography:
Cuba, United States of America, and Guantanamo

3. Factsheet: Torture at Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
A majority of those imprisoned at the Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp were subjected to various forms of physical and psychological abuse—techniques that were developed by two American psychologists contracted by the CIA to develop its torture program. The torture included but was not limited to waterboarding, sexual harassment and abuse, physical abuse, and sleep deprivation. Those formerly imprisoned still experience physical and psychological distress and trauma as a result of their treatment in Guantánamo Bay. A 2014 U.S. Senate intelligence report found the torture program was ineffective in its stated goal of obtaining military intelligence.
Topic:
Human Rights, Torture, Trauma, and Guantanamo Bay
Political Geography:
Cuba, United States of America, and Guantanamo

4. Re-embracing the Wartime Detention Mission

Author:
Ryan J. Vogel
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
President Donald Trump has made clear his intent to utilize wartime detention in the fight against al-Qaeda and ISIS. As former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Rule of Law and Detainee Policy, William Lietzau, and I have argued elsewhere, this could be a positive development in the United States’ evolving approach to the war against al-Qaeda, ISIS, and their associates, so long as it is coupled with a commitment to continuing key detention policies and humane treatment standards developed over the past fifteen years. In recent years, the United States has largely avoided adding to the detainee population at Guantanamo (GTMO) – mainly in reaction to some of the more infamous excesses from the first couple of years after the attacks on September 11, 2001. But failing to capture new enemy fighters has come with an operational and humanitarian cost. The United States should take the opportunity that comes with political transition to re-embrace the wartime detention mission.
Topic:
Government, Human Rights, Law, Prisons/Penal Systems, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Middle East, Global Focus, United States of America, and Guantanamo

5. How to Close Guantanamo

Author:
Human Rights First
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Human Rights First
Abstract:
President Obama should provide sustained leadership to increase the momentum to transfer prisoners out of Guantanamo and close the facility.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Prisons/Penal Systems, and Counter-terrorism
Political Geography:
United States, Cuba, North America, Washington, D.C., and Guantanamo

6. Guantanamo’s Last Year

Author:
Ken Gude
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
With one year left in his administration, President Barack Obama remains committed to closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay during his time in office. Congress has prohibited, at least for now, one aspect of the president’s preferred pathway to close the prison—transferring some detainees into the United States for trial or continued law of war detention. Much of this debate has focused on the question of whether President Obama will use executive action to override the congressional transfer ban. Doing so would be impractical and extremely unwise. The Obama administration should state publicly that it will not use executive action to bring large numbers of Guantanamo detainees into the United States in defiance of congressional statute. A better strategy would be to pursue alternative options for closing Guantanamo that, even given current statutory constraints, remain entirely in the control of the executive branch. Amid disappointment at the failure to close Guantanamo, it is easy to forget that President Obama originally believed it was feasible to identify, categorize, prosecute, and transfer all 242 detainees in just one year—the same amount of time he has left for the remaining 91 detainees. While congressional resistance is a new obstacle not present at the time of President Obama’s original pledge, moving the majority of detainees out of Guantanamo is now mostly about the implementation of policies and decisions already made, a much more manageable challenge than the one that Obama faced in 2009. If that goal is to be achieved, however, President Obama must command a greater level of urgency throughout his administration and especially at the Pentagon. The risk is not simply a failure that becomes a stain on the president’s legacy; rather, the much more serious risk is that the next administration could resume sending detainees to Guantanamo, which is on the wish list of many conservatives. The latter would do irreparable harm to American national security—and be a colossal waste of money. Holding a detainee at Guantanamo now costs $4 million per year per detainee, compared with less than $100,000 per inmate in the highest security prison in the United States. And while it is fair to say that the salience of Guantanamo as a recruiting tool for terrorist groups has faded during the Obama administration’s efforts to close it, it is not gone. Hostages held by the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, are not dressed in Guantanamo-like orange jumpsuits by accident. And if new detainees were to be sent to Guantanamo by the next administration, the prison would roar back to prominence in terrorist propaganda and be an enormous self-inflicted wound on the country. We cannot afford to risk this possibility. Guantanamo must be closed during the Obama administration. This can be achieved by completing the following steps: Hold Periodic Review Board hearings for all eligible detainees by July 1, 2016. Accelerate transfers of those detainees designated for transfer or release. Order the Department of Justice to review detainee cases for prosecution and potential plea bargain in federal court. Pursue agreements with countries to prosecute under their laws any Guantanamo detainees accused of serious crimes. Engage the Afghan government to seek an agreement to transfer back to Afghan custody any remaining law of war detainees captured in connection with the war in Afghanistan. Some of these options may not represent the best or preferred method for the Obama administration to close Guantanamo, but this is a feasible and realistic path to close the prison in one year. Some of these choices will be difficult, but when measured against the possibility that Guantanamo could be back in the business of accepting new detainees in 2017, those difficulties should not be disqualifying. A reinvigorated effort from the Obama administration is urgently needed to make 2016 Guantanamo’s last year.
Topic:
Terrorism, Prisons/Penal Systems, Counter-terrorism, and Detention
Political Geography:
Caribbean, North America, United States of America, and Guantanamo

7. The Applicability of International and Domestic Immigration Law to Relocated Guantanamo Detainees

Author:
Sarah Weiner
Publication Date:
11-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Legal Challenges, Yale Law School
Abstract:
The physical relocation of detainees from Guantanamo to the United States would not meaningfully alter U.S. obligations under domestic immigration law or international law concerning refoulement. Domestic immigration law would not affect U.S. authority to bring aliens into the United States and to detain those aliens under the laws of war. Detainees would not enter the United States as immigrants, but rather would remain legally “at the border” during their detention. If a detainee secures his release from law-of-war detention, then the United States would be prohibited from transferring the former detainee to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. This obligation applies equally to detainees held at Guantanamo and in the United States. If the United States could not find a suitable country to accept the former detainee, then the United States may have the authority to hold the alien indefinitely in immigration detention, provided that his custody meets statutory requirements. This authority is constitutionally untested and potentially inconsistent with obligations under international law, but these concerns would apply equally to both Guantanamo- and U.S.-located former detainees.
Topic:
Law, Prisons/Penal Systems, War on Terror, and Detention
Political Geography:
North America, United States of America, and Guantanamo