Time for US to Give Gitmo Back to Cuba
Not just the prison, the entire base: NYT essay
By John Johnson, Newser Staff
Posted Jan 11, 2012 12:17 PM CST
A U.S. Navy personnel patrols at Gitmo in this file photo.   (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Colin Perkel)

(Newser) – With the 10th anniversary of the opening of the US prison at Guantanamo Bay upon us, Harvard lecturer Jonathan M. Hansen suggests a way to mark the occasion: Give the whole military base, prison included, back to Cuba. The US forced Cuba to lease the base to us in 1901 in the wake of its war for independence against Spain, and Guantanamo has been a sorry reminder of "America's long history of interventionist militarism" ever since, writes Hansen in the New York Times.

In fact, that early history of taking over the base and the subsequent expansion of the US presence is just as troubling as the last 10 years of scandal involving the prison. "It is a history excluded from American textbooks and neglected in the debates over terrorism, international law, and the reach of executive power," Hansen writes. But Cubans and all of Latin America know it well. President Obama should start the handover process now as a matter of principle. "It would rectify an age-old grievance and lay the groundwork for new relations with Cuba and other countries in the Western Hemisphere and around the globe." Click here for the full column.

View 1 more image
More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Time for US to Give Gitmo Back to Cuba is...
40%
5%
2%
0%
50%
3%
You Might Like
Comments
Showing 3 of 9 comments
Buckshot
Jan 12, 2012 7:25 AM CST
Time to give back all those military bases back we don't need the biggest war machine on the planet, there's your job killer right there.
MDD
Jan 12, 2012 4:02 AM CST
NO... It's time the US take over Cuba, as we should have in 1959. Cuba would have been the 51st state by now. VOTE: Ron Paul 2012!
HewHessofHay
Jan 11, 2012 10:35 PM CST
Those who think it will not happen under an Obama administration are correct, but are disingenuous when they insinuate it's due to some nefarious neo-colonialist, imperialist agenda. It's because the GOP / T-Party / Fox News crowd would raise Cain with cynical partisan claims of a "communist fellow traveler" agenda on the part of an America hating, African born, "other" in the White House. As it took a Nixon to open China and a Carter to let go of the Panama Canal, so only a McCain or a Romney (or possibly a Clinton) could do the logical, sensible, historically necessary thing in this case.