Feinstein: Let’s house Gitmo detainees in California

A large advantage of Gitmo not often mentioned is that its remote location greatly reduces the chances of outside groups trying to free those incarcerated there. After all, to just physically get there, you have to either come by air, boat, or Cuba.

Air or boat means it will be most unlikely that someone wanting to mount a prison raid will have the mass of force necessary to get the job done, considering the defenses there and the number of prisoners to free, for it would have to be a true amphibious invasion and thus most likely beyond the power projection capabilities of those who would like to attempt such a thing.

The same goes with trying to do a prison raid in via Cuba–the border between the base and Cuba is well patrolled and guarded, and Cuba is aware of the diplomatic problems that would result if a well-organized and equipped attack on Gitmo was made from their soil.

Detainees in a maximum security prison somewhere in the Mojave Desert or Central Valley of California, on the other hand, could start someone (of a favorable disposition to the detainees) to thinking about freeing them, if they were so inclined.

If the detainees are moved to California, regardless of where, they will be only a few hours away from a major urban center, and thus they will be at a location that is much more accessible than a distant location in the Caribbean whose only land neighbor is a tightly controlled dictatorship, and whose sea approaches are monitored.

This greatly simplifies the job of gathering the force needed for a prison raid, as it can be done under the cover of an urban environment and be virtually indistinguishable from normal civilian traffic on the day it makes its move–up to the point it drives onto the prison grounds. Not so with Gitmo. At Gitmo, there is no local civilian population that the would-be rescuers can blend in with, and the air and sea approaches are already well-monitored.

The security forces at such a CONUS prison, though they would be more than adequate for keeping prisoners in, would be much less robust than Gitmo for keeping armed force out. After all, part of the force size at Gitmo is because it is next to Cuba. Thus, a CONUS prison once again offers detainees “rescuers” a much better chance of freeing their comrades.

Likewise, once a major jail break is attempted by outside forces, it will be much easier for the perpetrators and freed detainees to melt back into the population. At Gitmo, the only escapes routes are to Cuba–which may not offer a safe haven–and by sea or air to another location. If by sea, it is unlikely to succeed, due to the slow speed of boats (even at 30-50 kts). If by air, it can be tracked.

Finally, the search for escaped detainees and their “rescuers” in a CONUS escape scenario will naturally be hampered by claims of racial profiling, etc., doing damage to the national fabric beyond whatever harm the “rescuers” and escapees themselves did after the escape.

Gitmo thus, in this sense, is like Alcatraz. And since Alcatraz is now a museum, perhaps we should keep the one we have, and not worry about moving the prisoners.

For the real problem with Gitmo is not the location. It is the idea that there are those who will be indefinitely detained because their geopolitical desires amount to being in a state of war with the US, that they have acted on those desires, and that it is unlikely that this war will ever be resolved in a time we are used to with other wars (i.e., 5-10 years). Thus, we hold people who may not (or may) have committed a “crime”–but who are overwhelmingly US enemies nonetheless. With the criminal, the assumption is that once released the same crime will not be repeated again–if nothing else, simply because the criminal has been held so long that the aging process has removed the natural ability and desire to be a menace to society. History proves that the same cannot be said with those who are pursuing geopolitical aims. They will fight to their dying breath, because they believe in a cause.

I can understand the trouble some of good faith on the left have with holding people indefinitely–for it gives me a twinge also–but on the other hand it should be a reminder that outside the US border, the rest of the world truly is “Indian Country”, that time-honored principles of statecraft as used by nations throughout history still apply (regardless whether or not we choose to so apply), and that the only way to get to a world where no Gitmos are necessary is to make sure that those worthy of Gitmos today are in one–or dead. If we do the job right, our descendants can live in a world where they never have to ask hard questions about their principles in order to defend themselves, because there will be no need to–but the cost for that world is that we have to, in order to build that world for them. But asking the question does not automatically mean we stop what we are doing–but only that we are constantly monitoring who we wish to be and who we are. And I would hope that one of the things we wish for ourselves, and others around the word, to be, is alive, and not just morally pure(to the point of immorality).

Because, you see, in times past these people being detained today simply would have been killed at a certain point, for it would have been obvious that upon release they would still undermine the power that released them–and then kill their benefactors if they ever succeeded in achieving power.

Today, we do not kill upon capture, or upon useful information being extracted, but we hold instead, and may in fact one day–in the distant future–actually release them. Sounds like progress to me, and if not absolute perfection, it is a reasonable compromise.

For the real problem with the detaining of detainees at Gitmo is not Gitmo, nor the detention, but the detainees. They caused the problem, they do not appear able to reconcile themselves to the world order as is, and thus should be happy to be alive, since they fought and lost, and deserved to lose.

Alive they are, so why are we not all happy?

Horatius on September 28, 2009 at 2:34 PM