Failing to close GITMO

[Colonel Hogan]

Excellent article in Saturday's Washington Post giving a blow-by-blow account of how the Obama administration failed in its efforts to close the terrorist detention facility in Guantanamo Bay.

Far more than just a treatise on GITMO, however, the article may provide the best look so far at how President Obama has perfected that age-old political maneuver known as "dropping the ball."

This account of the unraveling of Obama’s pledge to close Guantanamo is based on interviews with more than 30 current and former administration officials, as well as members of Congress and their staff, members of the George W. Bush administration, and activists. Many of them would speak about internal or sensitive deliberations only on the condition of anonymity.

The one theme that repeatedly emerged in interviews was a belief that the White House never pressed hard enough on what was supposed to be a signature goal. Although the closure of Guantanamo Bay was announced in an executive order, which Obama signed on Jan. 22, 2009, the fanfare never translated into the kind of political push necessary to sustain the policy.

“Vulnerable senators weren’t going out on a limb and risk being Willie Hortonized on Gitmo when the White House, with the most to lose, wasn’t even twisting arms,” said a senior Democratic aide whose boss was one of 50 Democrats to vote in 2009 against funding to close Guantanamo. “They weren’t breathing down our necks pushing the vote or demanding unified action.”

“The one thing we could never figure out is who was in charge of it,” said a senior Republican staffer on Capitol Hill, whose boss, a senator, was initially supportive of the goal of closing Guantanamo. “Everybody seemed to have a piece of it, but nobody was in charge of it.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/guantanamo-bay-how-the-white-house-lost-the-fight-to-close-it/2011/04/14/AFea3TZE_print.html

 

[Wok]

Hogan, I am not an expert on Guantanamo, and the policies surrounding it. Anyway, a friend and I were discussing about the promise to close the facility down. During the campaign, Obama did not know the dirty details. Once he became President, more than likely concluded it was not so easy after all.

 

[KRCummings]

I find his supporters to be huge hypocrites for having hissy fits over Bush and Gitmo but not Obama.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

I find his supporters to be huge hypocrites for having hissy fits over Bush and Gitmo but not Obama.

I think the perception is that the only ones left there are the ones who deserve to be there.

 

[KRCummings]

I think the perception is that the only ones left there are the ones who deserve to be there.

That wasn't even part of the equation before though. It had to be closed no matter what. Suddenly that don't matter so much.

 

[garbage can]

Hogan, I am not an expert on Guantanamo, and the policies surrounding it. Anyway, a friend and I were discussing about the promise to close the facility down. During the campaign, Obama did not know the dirty details. Once he became President, more than likely concluded it was not so easy after all.

Wok, I didn't know the dirty details either, perhaps you could remind me.

 

[KRCummings]

Wok, I didn't know the dirty details either, perhaps you could remind me.

For fucks sake, did you even read his post?

 

[Sonny Limatina]

That wasn't even part of the equation before though. It had to be closed no matter what. Suddenly that don't matter so much.

Right, but for two reasons, both of which seem muddier now (whether or not they are). 1) we were lumping EVERYONE in together, regardless of guilt or innocence, and 2) we were denying them trials or tribunals to fight it out. And we didn't help things with 3) those Abu Graib pictures.

I think the sense is that we released all the innocent ones and are trying to get the rest to court.

I also think Obama would only have helped himself by shutting the place down no matter what. Even it meant moving them one prison over, it would have been the smart move.

 

[garbage can]

For fucks sake, did you even read his post?

Yeah, Congeniality, I read the post. WHAT WERE THE DIRTY DETAILS? smart ass.

 

[eyer]

"Although the closure of Guantanamo Bay was announced in an executive order, which Obama signed on Jan. 22, 2009, the fanfare never translated into the kind of political push necessary to sustain the policy."

"political push necessary to sustain the policy."?

"political push"?

"policy"?

The friggin' president issued an "executive order"...

As it was written...

...so Gitmo should've been closed.

President Obama flip-flopped his own executive order !

The dude is wasting his talent aiming for a second term...

...he should run for cook-in-chief at IHOP.
'
'
'
'

 

[Wrong Element]

I find his supporters to be huge hypocrites for having hissy fits over Bush and Gitmo but not Obama.

Speaking as someone who mentioned Guantanamo only once on this board during the entire time Bush was President, I'd be more disappointed in Obama if I still had any hopes that he would put up a fight on anything where there's the slightest possibility a Republican or a talk radio pest would say "Boo!"

 

[unregistered]

 

[KRCummings]

Yeah, Congeniality, I read the post. WHAT WERE THE DIRTY DETAILS? smart ass.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gWQaU40PH24/TKkfDOICkvI/AAAAAAAAJb4/F80vP7IiSI8/s1600/eternal-facepalm-eternal-facepalm-facepalm-captain-pickard-demotivational-poster-1242264259.jpg

 

[Peregrinator]

“The one thing we could never figure out is who was in charge of it,” said a senior Republican staffer on Capitol Hill, whose boss, a senator, was initially supportive of the goal of closing Guantanamo. “Everybody seemed to have a piece of it, but nobody was in charge of it.”

What in the fucking fuck?

 

[Wok]

Not having all of the facts is a fairly good reason to keep his big fucking mouth shut, don't you think?

Yes, I would say so.

 

[Wok]

Yeah, Congeniality, I read the post. WHAT WERE THE DIRTY DETAILS? smart ass.

I am not the President.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Right, but for two reasons, both of which seem muddier now (whether or not they are). 1) we were lumping EVERYONE in together, regardless of guilt or innocence, and 2) we were denying them trials or tribunals to fight it out. And we didn't help things with 3) those Abu Graib pictures.

I think the sense is that we released all the innocent ones and are trying to get the rest to court.

I also think Obama would only have helped himself by shutting the place down no matter what. Even it meant moving them one prison over, it would have been the smart move.

Making an ad hoc "non-Gitmo" just to house everybody that was in "real" Gitmo in order to close it in face-saving name only instead of verity woulda made shit worse, I reckon.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

Making an ad hoc "non-Gitmo" just to house everybody that was in "real" Gitmo in order to close it in face-saving name only instead of verity woulda made shit worse, I reckon.

I have to disagree. Of all the reasons not to have closed Bat Guano, "we just didn't follow through" is the absolute worst. "If we could have done it and kept you safe, we would have," is better, and "We did what we said we would, we closed it, and kept you safe by keeping all these baddies behind bars while they waited for fair trials" would have been a far better still, imo.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

I am not the President.

If this is true, someone around here owes me an explanation.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

That wasn't even part of the equation before though. It had to be closed no matter what. Suddenly that don't matter so much.

Exactly right, and this was the second legal miscalculation that compounded the harm of the first one committed by Bush. (see below)

Right, but for two reasons, both of which seem muddier now (whether or not they are). 1) we were lumping EVERYONE in together, regardless of guilt or innocence, and 2) we were denying them trials or tribunals to fight it out. And we didn't help things with 3) those Abu Graib pictures.

I think the sense is that we released all the innocent ones and are trying to get the rest to court.

I also think Obama would only have helped himself by shutting the place down no matter what. Even it meant moving them one prison over, it would have been the smart move.

Everyone forgets the reason for Gitmo in the first place. It was to establish a "war prison" outside American soil to take advantage of the legal precedent established by Johnson v. Eisentrager a post-World War II Supreme Court decision that denied habeas corpus rights to war prisoners based on their detention on foreign soil where habeas did not reach.

But even as John Yoo was writing his infamous legal opinion, he was also cautioning Bush that the 60-year-old precedent might not hold up in the early years of the next millennium. Bush made the mistake of hearing what he wanted to hear from the bulk of Yoo's opinion.

Technically, it is not completely true that Bush was denying trials and tribunals for the detainees. The Combat Status Review Tribunals were established for the purpose of determining how prosecutable each detainee would likely be under a full-scale military tribunal system. But in addition to the Bush administration's foot dragging, the legal complications stemming from the Supreme Court's rebuke of the CSRT's and the shit-canning of the Eisentrager precedent kept sending Bush's military prosecution model back to the drawing board. He never really got it off the ground, as a result.

Along comes Obama who makes the second mistake of believing he can dispose of the military model altogether and prosecute any and all detainees in civilian criminal courts. And, as KRC points out, he was apparently enamored with that vision to the exclusion of whatever difficulties providing full procedural due process to these detainees might cause the Justice Department for their chances of conviction, including satisfying the demand of presenting evidence that would literally consist of or compromise classified military or intelligence information.

But all that is the debate surrounding the policy of establishing or closing Gitmo. The thrust of the Post article was how ineffectual Obama was at implementing a policy that he had long ago declared and had touted as one of his most important.

And my premise is that the process the article describes is far more telling than the impact it had on the single policy at issue.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

What in the fucking fuck?

It was a classical management failure. Merely speaking thy will does not get something done. Someone usually has to actually make it happen.

 

[Peregrinator]

It was a classical management failure. Merely speaking thy will does not get something done. Someone usually has to actually make it happen.

At first I thought it meant they couldn't figure out who was in charge of Gitmo. Now I see they couldn't figure out who was in charge of closing it.

Um, couldn't they just tell whoever is in charge of running it, "Close that?"

 

[Colonel Hogan]

At first I thought it meant they couldn't figure out who was in charge of Gitmo. Now I see they couldn't figure out who was in charge of closing it.

Um, couldn't they just tell whoever is in charge of running it, "Close that?"

In a word, no. You just don't turn the sign around like you do in the front window of the local cafe. You have to do something with the tenants under your charge. Nobody overseas wanted them. And nobody in Congress wanted them either. The operative phrase was, "not in my back yard." And this is just the issue of what to do with them in the interim while awaiting trial. It doesn't begin to address the problems obtaining convictions under civilian criminal procedural rules vs. the military. The acquittal of Ahmed Ghailani on 284 counts of murder and God knows what else sent a signal of just what sort of risks civilian prosecutions could run.

 

[phrodeau]

“The one thing we could never figure out is who was in charge of it,” said a senior Republican staffer on Capitol Hill, whose boss, a senator, was initially supportive of the goal of closing Guantanamo. “Everybody seemed to have a piece of it, but nobody was in charge of it.”

Why am I not surprised?

 

[Wok]

If this is true, someone around here owes me an explanation.

I would like one. However, GITMO files have been leaked. Maybe something can be gleaned from that.