End the Nightmare at Guantanamo

Obama had his chance. Now it’s time for me to act.

If am elected US President in 2012, one of my first acts will be to free all "enemy combatants" held in Guantanamo Prison Camp. However ... there will be two conditions. Before describing those, I offer the following definition from the Wikipedia article entitled "Enemy Combatant."

From Wikipedia:

"Under the provisions of the Secretary of the Navy Memorandum Implementation of Combatant Status Review Tribunal Procedures for Enemy Combatant Detained at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base Cuba ... An enemy combatant has been defined as `an individual who was part of or supporting the Taliban or al Qaida forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces.'"

As President, I can free every single "enemy combatant" held in Guantanamo. And I can - and will - do this on my own authority. However, I impose two conditions (one optional, the other mandatory):

First, I would ask that each prisoner swear an oath of non-violence. However, since I don't believe in coercing an oath out of anybody, I would still free those who refused to swear such an oath. However, my other condition is non-negotiable: If a prisoner would not comply, I would not free him: I would insist on meeting each candidate for freedom and ask that he grasp my hand for at least 30 seconds.

That's all I ask: physical contact for 30 seconds. Then they would be freed.  Don't bother asking me "why," for I will not share the reason. But...that's all I ask.

I know, I know...I can hear the hue and cry now: "You're going to free those murderers? Have you no shame? Where's your sense of justice?" To which I reply: "Maybe it's not my sense of justice you're concerned about, but my lack of vengeance-seeking?"

It's fairly certain that many Guantanamo detainees were more or less innocent victims of circumstance, caught up in a dragnet by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, it is also fairly certain that at least some of them have made war against us or would if they had a chance.

So why would I take a chance by freeing those who might harm us in the future? I admit this is possible: At least one of these former prisoners might attack us someday in the future. But suppose that would happen. My detractors would point their fingers and say, “Ah ha!” To which I would simply respond: “Think about all of those others out there who might have been radicalized into warring against us, but decided not to because they were moved by my action to empty Gitmo. Then think about those lives those others might have taken, but chose not to.”

Unfortunately, I can’t point fingers to identify who these converts might be.

My motives lie partly in "turning the other cheek," and partly in attempting to inspire a sympathetic ripple effect. I am attempting a magnanimous gesture of good will, hoping it will be appreciated (at least) and reciprocated (at most) by our enemies. Coupled with other policies I have in mind, as detailed on this blog, some of our sworn enemies might actually come to embrace us as friends.

Also, I am contrasting my style of leadership with Bush's and Obama’s: They say they’re Christians; from what I can see, though, they surely doesn't behave that way; I say I'm not a Christian but I behave as if one. What's that sound? A wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Religious Right? If they were so "religious," they wouldn't be so "Right."

NOTE: Back on Oct. 26, 2006, I included the following paragraph while writing on this very same subject.  I still stand by my remark concerning “presidential pardon”:

By the time I'm in a position to free these prisoners, that will be in 2009, meaning: Some of these prisoners would have been held in Gitmo for seven years. My words to Dubya: "You have had time to try those you have labelled `enemy combatants,' rather than hold them indefinitely. If you do try and convict any of them, though, rest assured that I will proceed to issue them a presidential pardon, anyway."

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“We have found too many ways to put the hurt on our real and perceived enemies; now it’s time to find ways to be kind.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

The Last American in Guantanamo will be...

The Last American in Guantanamo will be...me! This presumes that I prove successful in my bid to be elected U.S. president in 2012*. I will order all U.S. military personnel out of the Guantanamo Bay enclave in Cuba, intending to be the last American to formally occupy that land. [That’s a provision in my current written contract, same as it was for the 2008 election.]

After waving goodbye to the last of our departing troops, I will turn around (alone) to face the thousands of Cubans standing, with hope in their hearts, outside the gates of this U.S. military base. I will then open these gates, allowing them to enter and enjoy that "ultimate sovereignty" over Guantanamo which the U.S. has always claimed was Cuba's. I envision many of these thousands weeping for joy and kissing the ground.

In fact, if Castro were to be present, I would like to walk up to him, shake his hand, and say, "Welcome to Guantanamo. Sorry it took so long to return it to your people." [Hmm…wouldn’t that make an interesting scenario for a campaign commercial specially scripted and staged for TV? I wonder who I could get to play Castro…wait!!! I wonder if the real life Castro would be agreeable to this. What a coup that would be!]

Abandoning Guantanamo is one of the two recognized methods for returning that land to its rightful owners. [The other method: obtaining consent from the U.S. government.] Since the U.S. president can order troop movements (in effect, "abandoning" that site) without consulting with Congress, I will proceed immediately to do just that. I will also encourage Congress to normalize relations with Cuba. That, unfortunately, the U.S. president cannot do by himself, though it is an action long overdue.

We would stun the world with this unexpected bit of do-the-right-thing. This one simple gesture, of course, cannot undo the immense harm wrought by certain parts of our foreign policy. "Certain parts," for example, inspired by greed, fear, and a compulsive need to dominate based on a haughty superiority complex. However, I believe yielding Gitmo would have an enormous ripple effect throughout the entire third world. Maybe some analysts abroad would see this gesture for what it is: A sign that the United States is losing some of its fear.

I am the only presidential candidate you will ever hear talking like this. [During the 2008 campaign, when I’d originally posted this essay, I had closed this paragraph with: “Hilary Clinton, Bill Frist, John Kerry, John McCain, and none of the other contenders will. It's not that they lack courage (I'm sure, under given circumstances, they all have lots of courage); it's not that they lack intelligence (I will stipulate that all of them are far more intelligent than I). What they lack are the vision and the wisdom which a strong Buddhist practice would provide. And I'm not shy about saying so.”]

Among my opponents [will be a] lot of career politicians who are steeped (well-marinated, one might say) in business as usual. Also among them are a lot of lawyerly types, those of wealth who feel they're entitled, and those who are just plain power-hungry. And then there's me: Steven Searle, the fighting Buddhist.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“To show my dogged determination concerning the return of Gitmo to the Cubans, I spent $444 to post an ad three times saying so in In These Times (appearing in the July, Aug, & Sept. '06 issues).”

  * Actually, I had posted a variation of this essay on-line during my 2008 bid for the presidency. Well…if at first you don’t succeed…