The closing of Guantánamo
Bay was one of President
Obama’s chief promises on the campaign trail and one of the first executive
orders issued this January. The
prison camp, which houses 250 inmates on the southern coast of Cuba, will be
gradually shut down over the next year. Yet the question remains as to where
former detainees will be sent. Fifty to one hundred
detainees await federal or military trial and will be placed into the U.S.
prison system, but nearly one hundred fifty prisoners remain in international limbo. With U.S.
penitentiaries protesting the absorption of potentially dangerous prisoners and
the prisoners’ countries of origin refusing to readmit them abroad, the closing
of Gitmo
will challenge ideas of federal security and national identity.
We want to know:
How can a geographic perspective help U.S. decision makers solve the problem of what
to do with Guantánamo
prisoners?
Read more about the Guantánamo Bay conundrum:
CNN.com: “What’s next for Guantánamo Bay detainees?”
Al Jazeera English: “Guantánamo Bay: Obama’s options”
Citizen Sugar: “Guantánamo”
Image of Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, courtesy NASA.
I agree that a geographic perspective is crucial to deciding how to manage high profile international prisoners. However, when deciding what countries are ‘good’ and ‘bad’, we must maintain objectivity in our assessment.
Cameron for My Wonderful World
An international, geographic perspective can help on where not to send them. Yemen is a failed state and too close to the fight for prisoners to be out of the loop. The People’s Republic of China wants the Turkmen prisoners but handing them over is a torture/death sentence for them.
Domestically we should look for secure prisons that can take such high profile terrorists and not be exposed to a significant threat. Also, a place that could use a boost in economy (government spending to help secure the prisoners) could also be a variable.