The detention facility at Guantanamo Bay will go out of business by the year’s end. So what’s the point of the facility after that? The Cold War and the era of Fidel Castro are finished, and the Obama administration has been slowly signaling that a new relationship is possible through acts like ending the travel ban. In the Washington Post, Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations proposes we simply give the base back to Cuba — or, short of that, convert it into an "ideology free zone" to hold talks with Raul Castro’s government about the future of both the base and U.S.-Cuba relations.
Returning Guantanamo Bay to full Cuban sovereignty and control is a win for the United States: Aside from the boon to America’s credibility with the Cuban people and throughout Latin America, these first steps would probe the Cuban government’s apparent disposition to use the base as a point of contact with the United States — and gauge the regime’s willingness to move the ball forward even more.
There’s not a real military need for the base, either. It used to be a coaling station when the U.S. took it in the Spanish-American war. Indeed, when I visited Guantanamo Bay in 2005 and asked what the other purposes of the base were, my spirited public-affairs guide replied, "Whores." But even the whoring dried up — I’m not naive enough to believe it stopped — after the Cuban Revolution, and a 50 year wait to be tricking is a really poor national-security argument. One mitigating argument I can think of against giving the base back: it temporarily housed thousands of Haitian refugees in the 1990s, but no one was particularly happy about that arrangement. So on balance, the arguments against giving Guantanamo Bay back to the Cubans are
a) We might need it as a legal netherworld for the indefinite detention of war-on-terror detainees
b) We can’t look weak in front of the Soviet-backed Fidel Castro
c) It’s a really beautiful place, especially for getting rip-roaring drunk on rum-based cocktails while the Carribean spray comes in off the cliffs at sunset.
Really only argument c) applies anymore, and there are lots of nice places to get loaded.
Crossposted to The Streak.



4 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
hi spencer! i think you are overlooking the strategic value of the base at guantanamo bay. the ostensible reason we took it was to use as a coaling station, but the real reason was to control one of the two main entrances to the caribbean. there are two gates, the mona passage (between puerto rico and hispaniola), the shortest route from europe, and the windward passage (cuba and hispaniola), the shortest route from north america. taking puerto rico gave us control of the mona passage, and the lease of guantanamo gave us the windward passage. strategic requirements have changed since the days of sail, but geopolitics remain the same.
I agree that we can’t just give Guantanamo Bay back to Cuba! Perhaps we could just give Guantanamo Bay to Fulgencio Batista’s grandson, Raoul Cantero, a graduate of Harvard Law, former Florida Supreme Court judge, and partner at White & Case, as a fief? Maybe he could bring the casinos, gangsters, and tourism industry (great place to go diving!), back to Cuba? Perhaps offer Guantanamo Bay statehood? We could make Guantanamo Bay into the new Las Vegas? Only Guantanamo Bay would have water, electricity, and stable housing prices…
Best,
Onager
Where is Sam Damon?
…tourists could even go waterboarding if the surf is up.
Excellent, Spencer. Since Fidel’s era is finished we can return it to his successor.