Follow us on social

google cta
Why won’t Biden close Gitmo?

Why won’t Biden close Gitmo?

The prison camp is still hobbling along 22 years after the first War on Terror detainees arrived

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Today marks 22 years since the first set of detainees arrived at Guantanamo Bay, a U.S. military base in Cuba. The camp, in the George W. Bush administration’s telling, fell outside of the normal jurisdiction of federal courts and was thus free from pesky concerns like treating detainees humanely or charging them with crimes.

“Gitmo” quickly became a by-word for the worst excesses of the Global War on Terror, including torture and indefinite detention. By 2005, the New York Times editorial board had already called on Bush to shut it down, arguing that such a move “would pay instant dividends around the world.”

Yet all these years later, the military prison remains open, at a cost of roughly $445 million per year. Following promises to close Guantanamo, President Joe Biden has only released 10 detainees. This despite the fact that a United Nations rapporteur alleged just last year that detainees still face “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment,” and most of the 30 people currently held there have already been cleared for release. This includes the first known victim of CIA waterboarding, who has been detained for over 21 years without charge.

“More than half of those who remain are men the United States itself does not believe need to be detained,” wrote the Center for Constitutional Rights in a statement. “The fact that they continue to languish after two decades is a cruelty that could end tomorrow.”

Roughly 800 people have been detained at the prison at some point over the last two decades. At its May 2003 peak, the facility held 680 detainees.

For CCR, Biden’s inability or unwillingness to close the camp undermines his calls for Israel to avoid repeating Washington’s post-9/11 excesses in its response to last year’s Hamas attack.

“While his warning may have been apt, his use of the past tense was not,” the group argued. “The prison at Guantánamo Bay is one of those mistakes, willfully perpetuated by the Biden administration each day it remains open.”

Even retired Maj. Gen. Michael Lehnert, who led the camp’s opening, now argues that it must be shut down. “To me, the existence of Guantanamo is anathema to everything that we represent, and it needs to be closed for that reason,” Lehnert told AP News in 2021.

So why hasn’t Biden shuttered the camp? The administration, to the extent that it’s weighed in at all since taking office, blames congressional Republicans, who have long opposed closing the facility. But, for Scott Roehm of the Center for Victims of Torture, it’s “largely been a lack of courage and a lack of priority.”

“It's hard to imagine that the State Department couldn't find a single country in the world willing to receive some of these cleared-for-release men,” Roehm told NPR. “And so it appears they're continuing to languish at Guantanamo because that's what senior-most administration officials chose to do.”

Of the 30 remaining prisoners, 10 have been charged with war crimes and one convicted. CCR says the Biden administration should seek plea deals in these cases and double down on its efforts to transfer the rest to other countries.

“The Biden administration needs no new authority or ideas,” argues CCR. “All it needs is the political will and a willingness to do the work.”


Activists call on Biden to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay during a January 2023 protest. (Phil Pasquini/ Shutterstock)

google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.