FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Non-Closure of Guantánamo

by BINOY KAMPMARK

Guantánamo’s resplendent carceral facilities remain a classic example of double realities, the co-existence of totemic impulses and the reflex of taboo.  On the one hand, it has become an institutional reminder of the extensive, vague and indefinite “war” on terror, a foolish, reactive statement to calamity.  On the other, it has assumed the most negative connotations, a rebuke to law, extra-legal subversions and a mockery of the legal system.  To close it, however, would be deemed a violation.  To keep it open similarly remains a violation of principle.

The Obama administration promised to close it but caved in under pressure from Congress and pro-camp advocates.  As with so many matters, the power of the budget spoke volumes.  Furthermore, these detainees, kept wrongfully in many instances without a tissue of evidence against their name, might well have a crack at the United States once they leave.  Ever was there a disgruntled person made a criminal by a prison.  Governments from other countries similarly baulked – why should they receive such damaged cargo?

In the initial years, the Obama administration released 71 men from the facility, of whom 40 were repatriated to 17 third countries.  The momentum dramatically stopped, with the State Department envoy responsible for handling repatriations removed.

The very basis of incarceration without charge or conviction has demonstrated the gravest issue of legal exceptionalism in U.S. policy and jurisprudence.  The detainees, many kept in the facility for eleven-and-a-half years have become the refuse of a legal system that refuses to either expunge them or incorporate them as subjects of law.  They are, for all intents and purposes, non-subjects, creatures of juridical purgatory.  The absurdity of this is made apparent by the fact that a detainee like Sabry Mohammed has been cleared for release by a Justice Department list from 2010, yet remains in detention.

Released, yet imprisoned; imprisoned yet uncharged.  A legal cul-de-sac has been reached.  “We should be wiser,” urges Obama.  “We should have more experience in how we prosecute terrorists.  This is a lingering problem that is not going to get better.  It is going to get worse.”

Obama himself acknowledges that the facility is also providing something else – an incentive to attack the United States, a distinctly different sort of light on the hill.  The base has become something of a “recruitment tool” for extremists and more than just a public relations eye sore.

The high drama of Guantánamo has reached another level with accelerated use on the part of the inmates of hunger strikes.  Allegations have been made of a particularly unsavoury aspect the authorities have been noted to do – mistreat Qur’ans in the possession of the inmates. This is merely the tip of a particularly vast iceberg of abuse. The war of the stomach, used for political ends, is now in full swing.

Figures vary, but it seems that at least 100 prisoners have embarked on this act of ceremonial starvation, a number that has grown over the last few months.  The authorities, alarmed, have force fed 23, deploying a 40-strong medical force to administer treatment to the protesters.   Pardiss Kebriaei, senior attorney for Sabry Mohammed, described the determination of his client to force the issue.  “He told me, ‘I don’t want to not eat, I don’t want to starve myself. I don’t want to die, I want to see my family, but I have been pushed too far” (CBS News, May 1).

A petition by former prosecutor Col. Morris Davis to close the Bay facilities is red hot with signatures, reaching 75,000 within 24 hours.  “There is something fundamentally wrong with a system where not being charged with a war crime keeps you locked away indefinitely and a war crime conviction is your ticket home.” This is the great brutal absurdity – the necessity to be convicted in order to be freed.

Individuals such as Buck McKeon, Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee support what has become the necessary absurdity.  While it might be not merely moronic but unjust to detain the released and only release the guilty, he protested that Obama “has offered no alternative plan regarding detainees there, nor a plan for future terrorist captures” (Al Jazeera, May 1).

This has been an unwanted spectacle for the Obama administration, bringing what seems to be a calculated gesture of empathy from the President.  The fact that the closure itself seems unlikely doesn’t detract from the pathos – he is performing a role as commander-in-chief, and fears that reputations will be turned to mud.  Terrorist recruits are readying ideologies and weapons.  It is a pity that, for all its tear-jerking qualities, the promise to close the base won’t have much effect. Purgatories are, by their nature, intractable and, for the sake of the Guantánamo facility, irresistible.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Weekend Edition
February 12-14, 2016
Andrew Levine
What Next in the War on Clintonism?
Jeffrey St. Clair
A Comedy of Terrors: When in Doubt, Bomb Syria
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh – Anthony A. Gabb
Financial Oligarchy vs. Feudal Aristocracy
Paul Street
When Plan A Meets Plan B: Talking Politics and Revolution with the Green Party’s Jill Stein
Rob Urie
The (Political) Season of Our Discontent
Pepe Escobar
It Takes a Greek to Save Europa
Gerald Sussman
Why Hillary Clinton Spells Democratic Party Defeat
Carol Norris
What Do Hillary’s Women Want? A Psychologist on the Clinton Campaign’s Women’s Club Strategy
Robert Fantina
The U.S. Election: Any Good News for Palestine?
Linda Pentz Gunter
Radioactive Handouts: the Nuclear Subsidies Buried Inside Obama’s “Clean” Energy Budget
Michael Welton
Lenin, Putin and Me
Manuel García, Jr.
Fire in the Hole: Bernie and the Cracks in the Neo-Liberal Lid
Thomas Stephens
The Flint River Lead Poisoning Catastrophe in Historical Perspective
David Rosen
When Trump Confronted a Transgender Beauty
Will Parrish
Cap and Clear-Cut
Victor Grossman
Coming Cutthroats and Parting Pirates
Ben Terrall
Raw Deals: Challenging the Sharing Economy
David Yearsley
Beyoncé’s Super Bowl Formation: Form-Fitting Uniforms of Revolution and Commerce
David Mattson
Divvying Up the Dead: Grizzly Bears in a Post-ESA World
Matthew Stevenson
Confessions of a Primary Insider
Jeff Mackler
Friedrichs v. U.S. Public Employee Unions
Franklin Lamb
Notes From Tehran: Trump, the Iranian Elections and the End of Sanctions
Pete Dolack
More Unemployment and Less Security
Christopher Brauchli
The Cruzifiction of Michael Wayne Haley
Bill Quigley
Law on the Margins: a Profile of Social Justice Lawyer Chaumtoli Huq
Uri Avnery
A Lady With a Smile
Katja Kipping
The Opposite of Transparency: What I Didn’t Read in the TIPP Reading Room
B. R. Gowani
Hellish Woman: ISIS’s Granny Endorses Hillary
Kent Paterson
The Futures of Whales and Humans in Mexico
James Heddle
Why the Current Nuclear Showdown in California Should Matter to You
Michael Howard
Hollywood’s Grotesque Animal Abuse
Steven Gorelick
Branding Tradition: a Bittersweet Tale of Capitalism at Work
Nozomi Hayase
Assange’s UN Victory and Redemption of the West
Patrick Bond
World Bank Punches South Africa’s Poor, by Ignoring the Rich
Mel Gurtov
Is US-Russia Engagement Still Possible?
Dan Bacher
Governor Jerry Brown Receives Cold, Dead Fish Award Four Years In A Row
Wolfgang Lieberknecht
Fighting and Protecting Refugees
Jennifer Matsui
Doglegs, An Unforgettable Film
Soud Sharabani
Israeli Myths: An Interview with Ramzy Baroud
Terry Simons
Bernie? Why Not?
Missy Comley Beattie
When Thoughtful People Think Illogically
Christy Rodgers
Everywhere is War: Luke Mogelson’s These Heroic, Happy Dead: Stories
Ron Jacobs
Springsteen: Rockin’ the House in Albany, NY
Barbara Nimri Aziz
“The Martian”: This Heroism is for Chinese Viewers Too
Charles R. Larson
No Brainers: When Hitler Took Cocaine and Lenin Lost His Brain
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail