SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to his plight or the plight of countless others who have been wrongfully detained and subjected to abuse.
On May 11, Saeed Bakhouche, a survivor of Guantánamo Bay, was abruptly sentenced to three years in prison and fined $2,000, taken immediately to jail from the courtroom.
An anonymous source said: "We were all stunned by the court's decision. Here's a man who spent over 21 years in Guantánamo, barely had eight months of freedom, homeless and unable to feed himself, and yet the court sends him to what is essentially another Guantánamo, if not worse."
The sentence came only two days after the United Nations experts warned that Bakhouche, 57 years old, would face terrorism charges in Algeria, not receive a fair trial, and risked renewed arbitrary detention.
From Guantánamo to Algeria, the road to justice has been littered with obstacles, with individuals like Bakhouche caught in the crossfire of geopolitical maneuvering and security theater.
The courtroom drama marked yet another chapter in the harrowing saga of Bakhouche, a man whose life has been entangled in the complex web of post-9/11 counterterrorism measures. As the gavel struck, sentencing him to three years behind bars, it was a stark reminder of the injustices that continue to plague him even after his release from Guantánamo Bay.
Bakhouche's journey from the confines of Guantánamo to the courtroom in Algeria has been marred by a litany of human rights violations, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by international observers. The recent warning issued by U.N. experts underscores the gravity of the situation, highlighting the inherent flaws in the legal proceedings against him.
In April 2022, Bakhouche was cleared for release from the notorious prison in U.S. Naval Station Guantánamo Bay after enduring over two decades of arbitrary detention and torture. His transfer to Algeria in April 2023 was accompanied by assurances of humane treatment, yet the reality has been anything but humane.
The decision to return him to his home country came with assurances from the U.S. State Department regarding his treatment upon arrival. Bakhouch's lawyer, H. Candace Gorman, was led to believe that her client would be treated humanely, with access to legal representation and support to reintegrate into society.
However, upon his arrival in Algeria, he was quickly thrown into a bewildering ordeal of imprisonment, intense interrogations, and legal limbo, resembling a nightmarish scenario of Guantánamo. Deprived of legal representation and held incommunicado, he found himself caught in a complex legal situation where the principle of innocence until proven guilty appeared to have vanished.
The charges leveled against Bakhouche under Algeria's Penal Code reek of political opportunism, a thinly veiled attempt to scapegoat a man who has already suffered immeasurable trauma at the hands of the U.S. government. His prosecution flies in the face of fundamental principles of justice and fair trial, raising serious concerns about the integrity of the legal process.
The U.N. experts' assertion that Bakhouche faces the risk of renewed arbitrary detention further underscores the urgent need for international scrutiny and intervention. His plight serves as a stark reminder of the enduring legacy of Guantánamo, where justice has often taken a backseat to political expediency.
Bakhouche's case is not an isolated one; it is emblematic of a larger pattern of abuse and impunity that has characterized the so-called "war on terror." From Guantánamo to Algeria, the road to justice has been littered with obstacles, with individuals like Bakhouche caught in the crossfire of geopolitical maneuvering and security theater.
Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, the former U.N. special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights, recently highlighted ongoing concerns regarding the U.S. government's handling of detainees released from Guantánamo. In her comprehensive report published in June 2023, Ní Aoláin detailed numerous rights violations stemming from the transfer of detainees to foreign countries.
Among various violations, Ní Aoláin revealed instances of torture, arbitrary detention, and disappearances among released prisoners. Shockingly, in 30% of documented cases, recipient countries deprived these individuals of proper legal status.
The U.N. report underscored the United States' involvement in these problematic transfers, emphasizing a clear legal and moral obligation for the U.S. government. It must use diplomatic and legal resources to ensure these men are relocated, providing proper assurance and support to the recipient countries.
As the Biden administration seeks to extricate itself from the dilemma of Guantánamo, it must reckon with the human cost of its actions. Bakhouche and others like him are not mere statistics; they are individuals whose lives have been irreparably altered by the machinery of state-sanctioned violence.
The recent sentencing of Bakhouche serves as a grim reminder of the urgent need for accountability and justice. It is not enough to simply close the doors of Guantánamo; we must also reckon with the legacy of injustice it has left behind. Anything less would be a betrayal of the principles we claim to uphold.
In the pursuit of justice for Bakhouche and others like him, the international community must remain vigilant. We cannot allow the shadows of Guantánamo to continue to darken the lives of innocent individuals who have already suffered far too much.
As Bakhouche begins his journey behind bars once again, in Guantánamo 2.0 this time, let us not forget the injustices that have brought him to this point. His story stands as a testament to the depravity of both the U.S. and Algerian governments, subjecting him to abuse and torture, and it is a call to action for all those who believe in the sanctity of justice and the dignity of every individual.
In closing, let us heed the words of the U.N. experts who have sounded the alarm on Bakhouche's case. Let us demand accountability, transparency, and above all, justice for those who have been failed by the very systems meant to protect them. Only then can we truly begin to heal the wounds inflicted by Guantánamo and its legacy of injustice.
Saeed Bakhouche's case underscores the urgent need for action and accountability in the pursuit of justice. It is a stark reminder of the human cost of unchecked power and the devastating impact of prolonged detention without charge or trial. We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to his plight or the plight of countless others who have been wrongfully detained and subjected to abuse.
We must demand transparency, accountability, and fair treatment for all detainees, regardless of their circumstances. We must advocate for Bakhouche's immediate release and call for reforms to ensure that such injustices never occur again. Only through collective action and unwavering commitment to human rights can we bring about meaningful change and ensure that justice prevails.
This article was first published by Cage International.
An evocative exhibition at the E.U. parliament, which ran from April 2 to 5, transcended the physical confines of the military prison, offering a poignant glimpse into the lives of those ensnared within its walls.
From the distant shores of Guantánamo Bay to the heart of the European Parliament in Brussels, a powerful exhibition titled "Guantánamo: Art in Captivity" emerges, shattering the silence that has long shrouded the infamous U.S. military prison. The exhibit, which relayed poignant stories from the men detained, demonstrated the power of art to bring to life the haunting images of the pain and suffering they endured.
Attending and presenting at the exhibit, I embraced my identity as detainee 441—a prisoner classified as the worst of the worst, but who, nevertheless and against all odds, was welcomed in the European Union parliament for the second time to tell a different story of Guantánamo—the men's stories. Our story.
Guantánamo is present for the second time at the E.U. parliament; the first time was last year where two Irish Members of European Parliament (MEPs) Clare Daly and Mick Wallace hosted a special conference about Guantánamo. The gathering's importance cannot be overstated, and it was described as the "most significant gathering on Guantánamo," it underscored the gravity of the ongoing human rights struggle. It provided a platform for former prisoners, 9/11 family victims, former camp staff, the former United Nations special rapporteur to Guantánamo, lawyers, activists, and advocates to raise their voices against atrocities committed in the name of justice.
Even when we were isolated from the rest of the world and had nothing in our cages, using apple stems as pencils and Styrofoam cups and clamshells as our paper, we drew flowers.
At its core were firsthand accounts of Guantánamo's horrors. Former prisoners and military personnel, including ex-Army captain and Muslim chaplain James Yee, shared tales of detention, torture, and resilience. Their stories reminded us of the human toll of indefinite detention and the urgent need for justice and accountability.
In the European Parliament, a resounding message echoed: We won't rest until Guantánamo is closed and every individual's rights are honored. This wasn't just a gathering; it symbolized the enduring human spirit's commitment to justice. May its impact inspire future generations to fight for what's right and just.
As voices filled the chamber, a collective call to action emerged. Attendees were urged to confront Guantánamo's reality and demand accountability for its crimes. Through powerful testimonies, they highlighted the plight of detainees and the need to hold perpetrators accountable.
The "Close Guantánamo!" event was a rallying cry for those who believe in every human being's dignity and worth. It reminded us that silence equals complicity and urged us to continue demanding justice until Guantánamo is closed and justice prevails for all.
Art was always present at Guantánamo, even in the opening days of 2002 when the U.S. government sent its first prisoners to Camp X-Ray. Even when we were isolated from the rest of the world and had nothing in our cages, using apple stems as pencils and Styrofoam cups and clamshells as our paper, we drew flowers. Later, we used toilet paper, powdered tea, and soap to draw and write poetry.
Of course, any form of artistic expression, particularly when we organically found ways to create beauty out of the ugliness of the prison, was always against the camp rules. Camp administrators, guards, and interrogators routinely confiscated our work and punished us. They punished us for singing and dancing, too. They feared that the we, the monsters they constructed us to be, were sending each other secret messages, instead of finding ways to cope with the brutality of detention and torture. Artistic expression made us feel human in a place that was designed to strip us of our dignity.
Before 2010, it was customary for art to be integrated into interrogation sessions within the chambers. Artwork produced during these sessions was routinely confiscated, repurposed as evidence, and classified accordingly. An illustrative example is a painting by Suliman, created during an interrogation session in 2007, serving as proof to interrogators of his artistic abilities. The painting bore multiple red stamps denoting its classification as "SECRET." Suliman inscribed his full name, the date, and signed it in Arabic.
In 2010, after former U.S. President Barack Obama ordered a complete review of Guantánamo, living conditions improved. For the first time since opening, we were allowed to attend art classes. Of course, we weren't free by any means and in order for us to attend these classes, we had to endure humiliating searches, and thereafter we were shackled and chained to desks and chairs while in the classroom. Even though we only had a few minutes in class and the supplies were limited, these classes provided us with a place where we could express ourselves outside the confines of a system that criminalized us and treated us as irredeemable.
We could draw and paint the world outside we missed most—the beautiful blue sky, the sea, flowers, and nature. We painted our pain, our fear, our hope, our dreams. After eight years of indefinite and arbitrary detention, we felt connected again to our lost humanity. Each brushstroke colored in a piece of who we once were.
During the Obama administration, we were allowed to send our artwork to our lawyers and families. The journey of artwork out of Guantánamo was similar to ours, and it was not spared from the violence that is Guantánamo.
Each painting we created had to go through a rigorous process of review and censorship by multiple agencies and departments in order to leave the prison. Some of our artwork disappeared, some was redacted and silenced, and some made it out of the military prison. Was that ship a message? Was the art communicating an imminent threat? Anything suspicious lead to immediate disappearance (a death sentence). If artworks survived the scrutiny of the censors, they were registered, numbered, and stamped. But that didn't mean the artwork wouldn't be confiscated or taken later. Suffice it to say that the stamp on the back of the art continues to be reminder of the violence we endured, and which many still endure, at Guantánamo .
Moreover, like Guantánamo prisoners, some art died at Guantánamo. Some art is still held there waiting to be released.
At one point, even the U.S. government created an art gallery at the camp to exhibit our artwork for visitors and the media. While art helped to make us human again, the camp administration used what we created to construct the illusion that we were treated humanely.
I was one of the prisoners who made it out of Guantánamo—more fortunate than many who continue to languish behind bars. My journey to this point—standing in front of the E.U. parliament as a free man without shackles, chains, and no guards dragging me around for sport—was long and arduous. While I stood in my orange shirt looking at each painting for the first time after I was released in 2016, the memories of the place that tortured and detained me flashed through my mind, tears blurring my vision as I reconnected with my paintings. It was not just feelings of anguish however that filled my memories, but resilience as well—the resilience that I knew then would get me here now.
"It's nice to see you again my sweethearts. I'm glad we made it in one piece. I've missed you."
These are all things I said to my paintings, which could never be reduced to a piece of paper, but are testaments to our struggle for survival amid unimaginable cruelty.
This evocative exhibition, which ran from April 2 to 5, transcended the physical confines of the military prison, offering a poignant glimpse into the lives of those ensnared within its walls. Each stroke of the brush is a testament to the artists' resilience, a silent plea for justice. Each painting is proof of survival, while also being an act of resistance. We entrusted our secrets, tears, and hope to art from Guantánamo.
While the U.S. government suppressed our voices by banning and threatening to burn our artwork in 2017, courageous MEPs like Stelios Kouloglou, Daly, Wallace have breathed life into our creations, challenging these oppressive measures and amplifying our cries for justice. It's my honor to curate this exhibition. "Art from Guantánamo" marks a historic moment—a beacon of hope illuminating the darkness of secrecy and isolation.
The artwork on display varies from poignant portraits that capture the depth of human experience to haunting landscapes that echo the desolation of confinement. Each piece narrates a story of shattered dreams, stifled aspirations, and voices yearning to be heard.
These creations narrate stories of dreams that were imprisoned and aspirations stifled. They serve as a stark reminder of the human cost of policies shrouded in secrecy, urging us to confront uncomfortable truths and demand accountability.
As visitors navigated the exhibition, they were confronted with uncomfortable truths—the human consequences of policies enacted in the name of national security. The art became a call to action, urging a demand for accountability and the upholding of fundamental principles of human rights.
Among the collective voices, four names resonate with enduring resilience—Khalid Qassim, Moath Al-Alwi ,Tawfiq Al-Bihani, and Ammar al-Baluchi. These artists, imprisoned in Guantánamo for over two decades despite three of them have been cleared for release, continue to defy injustice through their art, their spirits unbroken by the passage of time. Their art, bleeding from behind bars, epitomizes the unwavering spirit of resilience in the face of injustice.
Among the attendees of the exhibition were Guantánamo lawyers Alka Pradhan and Navy Lieutenant Jennifer Joseph, who represent several of the prisoners. During a panel discussion, Pradhan shed light on the legal complexities surrounding Guantánamo, remarking, "It is deeply moving to witness the resilience and humanity of men who have endured unimaginable suffering. This exhibition serves as a poignant reminder of the ongoing crisis at Guantánamo and underscores the urgent need for global unity to put an end to this atrocity."
The impact of "Art from Guantánamo" transcended the walls of the exhibition space. It served as a call to carry these stories forward, to advocate for justice and freedom beyond. Let us amplify the voices of those who seek justice and speak of resilience despite their confinement. May this exhibition ignite conversations that spark action—a collective demand for the closure of Guantánamo and a renewed commitment to accountability.
This is a unique opportunity to witness firsthand the enduring human spirit in the face of unimaginable hardship. Together, let us ensure that these stories are heard and that the fight for justice continues.
Today, 30 individuals remain imprisoned in Guantánamo, 16 of whom have been cleared for release. However, despite efforts to address the situation, reports of abuse in the prison persist. Last month, detainees in Guantánamo went on a hunger strike to protest the mistreatment and abuse they endure, yet the U.S. government continues to suppress such reports, denying journalists access to the prison for accurate reporting.
During her visit to Guantánamo last year, the former U.N. Special Rapporteur Fionnuala Ní Aoláin expressed significant concerns regarding the treatment of prisoners. Her report highlights alarming issues such as the ongoing detention of individuals without trial, limited access to healthcare, and the potential use of torture methods, including prolonged periods of solitary confinement. Additionally, she emphasized the absence of proper legal procedures, drawing attention to the prolonged imprisonment of individuals without formal trials.
Guantánamo symbolizes injustice, torture, and abuse of power. It is where humanity and beauty are sentenced to death. However, the “Art from Guantánamo" exhibit in the European Parliament conveys a different message—one of survival. This is why we must heed the call to action for justice and accountability that is deeply embedded in each of the paintings. Now that many of us have borne witness to the men's powerful stories, we must ensure that they are never again silenced and in doing so, commit ourselves to the pursuit of justice, dignity, and freedom for all.
For 22 years, through four different administrations, that prison camp in Cuba has held individuals captured in the war on terror in a way that defies any imaginable principles of due process, human rights, or the rule of law.
Last weekend my father, Larry Greenberg, passed away at the age of 93. Several days later, I received an email from the French film director Phillippe Diaz who sent me a link to his soon-to-be-released I am Gitmo, a feature movie about the now-infamous Guantánamo Bay detention facility. As I was soon to discover, those two disparate events in my life spoke to one another with cosmic overtones.
Mind you, I’ve been covering Guantánamo since former President George W. Bush and his team, having responded to the 9/11 attacks by launching their disastrous “Global War on Terror,” set up that offshore prison to house people American forces had captured. Previewing Diaz’s movie, I was surprised at how it unnerved me. After so many years of exposure to the grim realities of that prison, somehow his film touched me anew. There were moments that made me sob, moments when I turned down the sound so as not to hear more anguished cries of pain from detainees being tortured, and moments that made me curious about the identities of the people in the film. Although the names of certain officials are mentioned, the central characters are the detainees and individual interrogators, as well as defense attorneys and guards, all of whom interacted at Guantánamo’s prison camp over the course of its two-plus decades of existence.
Isn’t it finally time to highlight the grave mistake of Guantánamo?
While viewing it, I was reminded of a question that Tom Engelhardt, founder and editor of TomDispatch, has frequently asked me: “What is it about Guantánamo that’s so captivated you over the years?” Why is it, he wanted to know, that year after year, as its story of injustice unfolded in a never-ending cycle of trials that failed to start, prisoners cleared for release but still held in captivity, and successive administrations whose officials simply shrugged in defeat when it came to closing the nightmarish institution, it continues to haunt me so? “Would you be willing,” he asked, “to reflect on that for TomDispatch?” As it turned out, the death of my dad somehow helped me grasp a way to answer that question with previously unattainable clarity.
As a start, in response to his question, let me say that, despite my own continued immersion in news about the prison camp, I’m struck that, in the American mainstream, there hasn’t been more headline-making outrage over the never-ending reality of what came to be known as Gitmo. From the moment it began in January 2002 and a photo appeared of shackled men bent over in the dirt beside the open-air cages that would hold them, wearing distinctive orange jumpsuits, its horrid destiny should have been apparent. The Pentagon Public Affairs Office published that immediately iconic image with the hope, according to spokesperson Torie Clarke, that it would “allay some of our critics” (who were already accusing the U.S. of operating outside of the Geneva Conventions).
Rather than allay them, it caught the path of cruelty and lawlessness on which the United States would continue for so many endless years. In April 2004, the world would see images of prisoners in American custody at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, naked, hooded, cuffed, sexually humiliated, and abused. Later reports would reveal the existence of what came to be known as “black sites,” operated by the CIA, in countries around the world, where detainees were tortured using what officials of the Bush administration called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”
For 22 years now, through four different administrations, that prison camp in Cuba, distinctly offshore of any conception of American justice, has held individuals captured in the war on terror in a way that defies any imaginable principles of due process, human rights, or the rule of law. Of the nearly 780 prisoners kept there, only 18 were ever actually charged with a crime and of the eight military court convictions, four were overturned while two remain on appeal.
A large number of those captured were originally sold to the Americans for bounty or simply picked up randomly in places in countries like Afghanistan known to be inhabited by terrorists and so assumed, with little or no hard evidence, to be terrorists themselves. They were then, of course, denied access to lawyers. And as I was reminded recently on a trip to England where I met with a couple of released detainees, those who survived Gitmo still suffer, physically and psychologically, from their treatment at American hands. Nor have they found justice or any remedy for the lasting harms caused by their captivity. And while the post-9/11 war on terror moment has largely faded into the past (though the American military is still fighting it in distant lands), that prison camp has yet to be shut down.
A second and more timely answer right now to Tom Engelhardt’s question is that my unwavering revulsion to the existence of Guantánamo has stemmed from a worldview that distinctly marked my father and many in his generation—men and women who came of age in the 1940s and early 1950s, whose first moments of adulthood coincided with the postwar emergence of the United States as a global superpower that touted itself as a guardian of civil rights, human rights, and justice. The opposition to fascism in World War II, the support for international covenants protecting civilians, a growing commitment at home to civil liberties and civil rights—those were their ideological guideposts. And despite the contradictions, the hypocrisy, and the failure that lurked just behind the foundational tenets of that belief system, many like my father continued to have faith in the honorable destiny of the United States whose institutions were robust and its motives honorable.
To be sure, there was deep denial involved in his generation’s sugar-coated version of the American experience. The revelation of the Phoenix Program in Vietnam; decisions to overthrow elected governments in Guatemala, Iran, and elsewhere; the profound and systemic domestic racism of the country as described in Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow; even the dirty dealings of the Nixon White House during Watergate; and, in this century, the official lying that set the stage for the disastrous Iraq War all should have dampened their rose-colored assessment of American democracy. Still, in so many ways he and many of his compatriots held fast to their belief in the power of this country to eternally return to its best self.
Philippe Diaz’s film about Gitmo (which I encourage readers to catch when it premieres at the end of April) should remind at least a few of us of the importance of living up to the image of the country my father and others in his generation embraced.
True to his belief in the American dream, my father took me to see movies and plays at our local college that amplified a worldview that he, like so many of his generation, embodied. I was often the youngest attendee at those films with stars like Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind, an ode to free speech; Gregory Peck in To Kill a Mockingbird, with its portrayal of the evils of racism; and Henry Fonda in Twelve Angry Men, whose message doubled down on the tenet that the accused are always innocent until proven guilty. And let’s not forget Judgement at Nuremberg, the dramatization of the post-World War Two war crimes tribunals, led by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, a series of trials in which Nazi leaders were convicted of committing genocide.
Those films, crying out for fairness, equality, and an end to racism, gave voice to champions of democracy, and energy to my father’s generation’s firm embrace of American possibilities.
A third answer, also underscored by my recent personal encounter with life’s fleetingness, is my growing fear, as an historian, that Guantánamo will simply be forgotten. In a sense, in the world of Donald Trump, collapsing bridges, and blazing wars in distant lands, it already seems largely forgotten. Although 22 years later it’s still home to 30 detainees from the war on terror, Guantánamo attracts little attention these days. If it weren’t for the invaluable work of Carol Rosenberg at The New York Times, who has reported on Gitmo since Day One in January 2002, as well as a handful of other dedicated reporters including John Ryan at Lawdragon, few could know anything about what’s going on there now. As sociology professor Lisa Hajjar points out, “Media coverage at Guantánamo has become a rarity.” While the press pool for the hearings of the military commissions that are still ongoing there averaged about 30 reporters until perhaps 2013, it’s now been whittled down to, at most, “about four per trip,” according to Hajjar.
Gitmo media coverage (and so public attention) has essentially disappeared—hardly a surprise given the current globally crushing issues of war and deprivation, injustice and extralegal policies, not to speak of the mad discomfort of election 2024 here in America. Guantánamo, whose last inmate arrived in 2008 and whose viable path to closure has remained blocked year after year (no matter that three presidents—George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden—each declared his desire to shut it down), persists, its deviations from the law unresolved.
As it happens, flagging interest in Guantánamo has coincided with an eerie larger cultural phenomenon—a turn away from history and memory.
Guantánamo has been relegated to the past, a distant chapter in the ever-diminishing war on terror and no matter that it continues to function in the present moment.
In the world of social media and the immediate moment, a malady of forgetfulness about past events should be a cause of concern. In fact, Mother Jones Washington bureau chief David Corn recently published a striking piece on the phenomena. Citing an Atlantic article by psychiatrists George Makari and Richard Friedman, Corn noted that, while forgetting can help people get on with their lives after a traumatic experience, it can also prevent trauma survivors from learning the lessons of the past. Rather than confront the impact of what’s occurred, it’s become all too common to simply brush it all under the rug, which, of course, has its own grim consequences. “As clinical psychiatrists,” they write, “we see the effects of such emotional turmoil every day, and we know that when it’s not properly processed, it can result in a general sense of unhappiness and anger—exactly the negative emotional state that might lead a nation to misperceive its fortunes.” In other words, events like the 9/11 attacks and what followed from them, the Covid-19 pandemic, or even the events of January 6, 2021, as Corn’s psychiatrists point out, can bring such pain that forgetting becomes “useful,” even at times seemingly “healthful.”
Not surprisingly, an increasing forgetfulness about traumatic events is echoed on an even broader scale in a contemporary trend toward the abandonment of history, presumably in favor of the present and its megaphone, the social media universe. As historian Daniel Bessner has pointed out, this country is now undergoing a profound reconsideration of the very purpose and importance of the historical record. Across the country, universities are reducing the size of their history faculties, while the number of undergraduates majoring in history and related fields in 2018-2019 had already declined by more than a third since 2012.
No wonder Guantánamo has been relegated to the past, a distant chapter in the ever-diminishing war on terror and no matter that it continues to function in the present moment. For example, two death penalty cases are currently in pretrial hearings there. One involves the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, a Navy destroyer, which resulted in the deaths of 17 American sailors. As the intrepid Carol Rosenberg points out, the case has been in pretrial hearings since 2011. The other involves four defendants accused of conspiring in the attacks of September 11. A fifth defendant, Ramzi bin al Shibh, was recently removed from the case, having been found incompetent to stand trial due to the post-traumatic stress disorder that resulted from his torture at American hands. As for the remaining defendants, originally charged in 2008 and then again in 2011, no trial date has yet been set. The ever-elusive timetable for those prosecutions tells you everything. Evidence tainted by torture has made such a trial impossible.
It’s hard to fathom how my father’s generation, stubbornly rose-colored in their vision of the country, swallowed the blatant failures of the post-9/11 years. My sense is that many of them, like my dad, just shook their heads, certain that the true spirit of American democracy would ultimately prevail and the wrongs of indefinite detention, torture, and judicial incapacity would be righted. Still, as the country spiraled into January 6 and its aftermath, the reality of America’s lost grip on its own promises of justice, morality, lawfulness, and accountability actually began to sink in. At least it did with my dad, who expressed clear and present fears of a country succumbing to the specter of his childhood, fascism, the very antithesis of the America he aspired to.
Philippe Diaz’s film about Gitmo (which I encourage readers to catch when it premieres at the end of April) should remind at least a few of us of the importance of living up to the image of the country my father and others in his generation embraced. Isn’t it finally time to highlight the grave mistake of Guantánamo? Isn’t it finally time to close that shameful prison, distinctly offshore of American justice, and reckon with its wrongs, rather than letting it disappear into the haze of forgotten history, its momentous violations unresolved.
In 2005, in his confirmation hearings for attorney general, George W. Bush’s longtime legal counsel Alberto Gonzales maintained that the ideals and laws codified in the Geneva Conventions were “quaint and obsolete.” That phrase, consigning notions of justice and accountability to the dustbin of history, encapsulated this country’s post-9/11 strategy of evading the law in the name of “security.” And as long as Guantánamo remains open, that strategy remains in place.
Wouldn’t it be nice if, rather than letting Gonzalez etch in stone an epitaph for the ideals my father and his generation so revered, we could find hope in a future where their trust in the rule of law and in a government of responsible citizens who put country above personal fortune, law above fear, and peace above war might prevail? As we lay my dad’s generation to rest, shouldn’t we take some consolation in the possibility that their spirit may still help us find our way out of today’s distinctly disturbing and unnerving times?