The battle to close Guantánamo
President Bush clearly wants out of a programme that brought international scorn, but shutting the camp poses legal and practical problems
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Saturday June 24, 2006
The Guardian
On January 10 2002, a US military cargo plane landed at a US naval base in southeastern Cuba after a 27-hour flight from Afghanistan with 20 men aboard, shackled, handcuffed and blinded by blacked-out safety goggles. They were the first captives of the war on terror - "the worst of the worst", US military officials said. Their arrival in Guantánamo Bay founded a prison regime that has been condemned around the world - and that now, four years on, could be on the verge of closure. More than 750 inmates have passed through the steel mesh cages since the Bush administration decided to establish an offshore prison that would be beyond the reach of the US constitution and international law, where inmates would be subjected to open-ended interrogation and tried before military tribunals without the protection of the Geneva convention.
[...]
So far, the process of repatriating prisoners has been painfully slow, say detainee lawyers. In part, countries are nervous about taking back prisoners whom the US has labelled dangerous terrorists. They are also frustrated with the stonewalling of US military officials when asked for evidence of links to al-Qaida. But the host countries may also see America's eagerness to rid itself of Guantánamo as a bargaining opportunity. Some of the prisoners are citizens of countries where torture is routine. If they return home carrying the stigma of Guantánamo, their lives could be in danger. America has indicated it will not take any of the detainees - even those it admits are innocent.
European countries also appear unwilling. It took the US authorities nearly two and a half years to find a safe haven for five entirely innocent Chinese Muslims it had been holding at Guantánamo. The men were finally released last month in Albania. Human rights activists foresee similar problems for Libyans.
If they are to be brought to trial, in what court? It is highly unlikely that, after years of resistance, the administration would support trials of the Guantánamo detainees in US courts. "They have tied both hands behind their back by holding them there, because it rendered everything they have said inadmissible in a US court," said John Sifton of Human Rights Watch.
It may allow them to be tried before military courts under rules set down by US military law and in compliance with the Geneva convention, but - given Guantánamo's history - those may not be seen as legitimate by other countries, said Clive Stafford Smith, who represents a Moroccan detainee.
But if Guantánamo does close, what then? Over the last few years, America has moved its detention centres in the war on terror even further offshore to Poland and Romania, as well as to other secret locations where some 30 high-level al-Qaida prisoners are believed to be held. Closing Guantánamo will not bring those detainees closer to a courtroom, or spare them from possible abuse. "They want to shut it down so they can create hundreds of small Guantánamo Bays that will not attract attention or serve as such a symbol," said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University. "The president has not said he wants to stop the policies that created it ... there is no indication the administration wants to comply with domestic or international law in the treatment of detainees."
Mr. Walter Hinteler. I am obliged to inform you that, The Guardian, a notorious Socialistic British Paper ...
happened? Terrorism didn't start on 9/11, but that is another story. It is the duty of newspapers to write articles that may not always agree with the current asinine administration of the US. 
