Grappling With Gitmo

Barack Obama has said he wants to shut down Guantanamo. That’s the easy part. What matters is what he does next.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


On the campaign trail, Barack Obama frequently cited his desire to shutter the US military’s detention and interrogation facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But with the election over and Obama set to assume the presidency in January, campaign rhetoric is giving way to hard political and legal realities. Closing Guantanamo raises a host of questions, such as whether to move detainees to the United States or repatriate them to their countries of origin; how to proceed with pending criminal prosecutions; and whether prosecutors will be able to use evidence acquired through torture. The Obama team has no clear answers as yet, but a group of human rights activists and legal scholars are arguing that simply closing Guantanamo, while a good start, will not be enough. They have called for an independent, nonpartisan commission to investigate Guantanamo and the rest of the secret archipelago of US detention and interrogation facilities created after 9/11.

At a press conference on Wednesday, the Human Rights Center and the International Human Rights Law Clinic, both at the University of California-Berkeley, along with the New York City-based Center for Constitutional Rights, released a new report on Guantanamo’s human costs. “We’ve heard a lot of stories about the methods of interrogation,” said CCR executive director Vincent Warren. “But often missing from that discussion is how those interrogations have been experienced by these men and how they have taken the scars, literal and psychological, back into the world at large.” He notes that the Gitmo experience “has had a devastating effect on human beings’ ability to reconnect to their previous lives.”

Between July 2007 and July 2008, researchers from the human rights groups interviewed 112 people—62 of them former detainees now living in nine countries, the rest former US government officials, NGO representatives, detainee attorneys, and former military and civilian staff at US detention facilities around the world. Over half of the detainees interviewed reported harsh treatment, such as shackling, beatings, exposure to extreme temperatures, sexual humiliation, and desecration of the Koran. Two-thirds claimed to now suffer psychological problems resulting from their detention, and virtually all complained that they’ve been unable to find employment since their release, thanks in large part to what the report’s authors call the “Guantanamo stigma.”

Twenty-four of the former detainees interviewed said they had not been mistreated. In several cases, detainees reported developing friendly relationships with their US interrogators after their captors acknowledged in private conversations that these detainees were innocent and did not belong in detention. The detention of innocent people has been a problem in Guantanamo and elsewhere, the result of hefty bounties offered by US forces in Afghanistan for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Hundreds of innocents were caught up in dragnets, the victims of greed or personal vendettas. Of the 770 people imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002, all but 255 have been released. Just 23 detainees have been charged with crimes, and of those only 2 have been convicted.

Focusing on the experiences of former detainees not only personalizes the issue but also “begins to give us the tools to talk about transition, both in the presidential transition about policy and also with respect to interrogation techniques,” said Warren. Looking to rehabilitate the US justice system in the eyes of the international community, the report recommends the creation of a commission that would have access to classified documents, power to subpoena testimony from key witnesses, and the freedom to recommend criminal charges. “This is not a witch hunt,” said Laurel Fletcher, director of Berkeley’s International Human Rights Law Clinic. “But it is a recommendation that will lead to a serious examination of both what’s gone right and what’s gone wrong, and how to make it better. We believe that Guantanamo cannot be swept under the rug.”

Before leaving office, President Bush could issue a blanket pardon to all those involved in the application of what his administration called “enhanced interrogation techniques.” But, Fletcher contends, that would be misguided. “In order to make sure that there are enough disincentives for these types of programs to be put in place in the future, either in the next administration or in future administrations, there has to be some level of accountability,” agreed Warren.

There are no signs yet how the Obama administration will handle the thorny issue of Gitmo. “Even if President Obama on his first day in office signs an executive order to close down the facility at Guantanamo, that really is the beginning of the discussion,” said Warren. “The magnitude of the Bush policy has to be countered with the magnitude of the Obama policy.” And that means more than simply hanging up a “closed” sign at Guantanamo.

Photo by flickr user burge5000 used under a Creative Commons license.

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate