GUANTANAMO BAY

TIME TO CLOSE GUANTANAMO BAY

[The following essay was written by a former Jamaican Councillor, a chancellor's scholar  and a former Editor-in-Chief of The UMass Times who is an alumnus of the University of Massachusetts Boston.  The course was titled: "Reading The Newspaper."  This past week, following Tuesday's inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America and by executive order, President Obama signed the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.]


Wilmot Max Ramsay
Prof. Kathleen Hartford
Political Science G245
Fall 2003
(UMass Boston)


                         [Time to close Guantanamo Bay]

     The U. S. Government ought to be commended for establishing 'military tribunals' to ensure the continued protection of the United States of America and her dependents.  This view is a patriotic one.  However, it must be borne in mind that in the case of the more than 660 captives held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba no charges to date have been brought against these prisoners and as such their fate is uncertain, unknown and unclear.  They are therefore held indefinitely.

     It is as though the U. S. Government has taken a position to detain these individuals, all males, certainly NOT for what they have done but rather what they MIGHT do.

     In just saying that they are suspects is not good enough as these prisoners have been held well in excess of 18 months.

     "Why are the men still without trial, still without rights?"  The matter of "self-defense" is being advanced as a U. S. Government position but The New York Times, in an Editorial states: "in the war on terrorism, ... normal rules cannot apply."

     Another reason presented for the current treatment of these "detainees" -- [alleged] members of Taliban and Al Qaeda cells -- is the issue of "legality" as they "are not combatants in traditional or legal terms, and are therefore not eligible for the protections due to prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions."

     Therefore, from an international relations point of view, this current situation, as it exists between the U. S. Government and these foreign nationals, could fester and later damage government connections that might exist between Washington, D. C. and other international capitals.

     An Oxford University professor, Sir Adam Roberts, who is deemed an expert, "on the law of war" says that the U. S. is not "obliged" to accommodate the captives as prisoners of war (POWs). ...  "'The U. S. has paid a huge price in international opinion.'"  He continues, "'In Britain, people see Guantanamo [Bay] as a symbol of American defiance of international norms.'"

     Even a noted conservative columnist, William Safire, who goes back to the Nixon White House, questions the "No Jury" rule.  He says that "There is none in a court-martial either, but at least the Uniform Code of Military Justice allows the accused a say in the composition of the panel of judges....  In doing justice, nothing beats a jury of one's peers."

     From Safire we also glean that there would be "No civilian review," [of the process.]  The prisoners, therefore, who are held outside the boundaries of the U. S. -- all "non-citizens" -- would not have access to American "federal courts," that is, the American "federal' judicial system.

     William Safire in his article argues that since the U. S. Government "decided not to use terrorist tribunals" in trying the "20th hijacker" or the "shoe bomber" he wishes (he hopes) "that last year's (2001) notion of circumventing the civil courts ... will quietly be shelved."

     This modification is anticipated as it will serve to reaffirm America's 'trust' within the world community.

     With the aforementioned, I would have to agree with the Sir Adam Robertses and the William Safires and The New York Times.

     No one should be held without being charged for so long and without a trial.

     Bring the cases to trial or if the U. S. is not sure of their guilt then set them loose -- free.

     Enough time has passed for the U. S. Government to gather and collate the necessary wrong doings of these men.

     Let's face it, had the shoe been on the other foot, say these men were all Americans, the U. S. Government, no doubt, would have secured their release long ago.

EDITOR'S NOTE: The quoted references are not currently available.


(Copyright @ HERITAGE RESERVES, Sunday, January 25, 2009)