Analysis: Obama seeks middle ground on Guantanamo
-
-
Play Video AP – Obama defends decision to close Guantanamo
-
AP – In this photo taken Tuesday, May 12, 2009 and reviewed by the U.S. military, guards stand together preparing … WASHINGTON – In soaring rhetoric, Barack Obama ran through his logic for closing the Guantanamo Bay prison, deliberately planting himself on the middle ground between his conservative critics — led by Dick Cheney — and those to the left who accuse the new president of failing to restore American justice for all.
Obama slid easily back into his role as constitutional scholar, gliding through a long, carefully reasoned brief in the rotunda of the storied National Archives on Thursday. One of his aims appeared to be diminishing Cheney's message across town in a cramped-by-comparison conference hall at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
Plans for Obama's speech were made public only a week ago, several days after Cheney's appearance was known.
In the company of original copies of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights, Obama stood firm behind his decision — announced on the second day of his presidency — to close the Guantanamo prison, a lockup reviled in the Muslim world and a drag on U.S. relations with many of its oldest allies.
"There is also no question that Guantanamo set back the moral authority that is America's strongest currency in the world," Obama said. "Instead of building a durable framework for the struggle against al-Qaida that drew upon our deeply held values and traditions, our government was defending positions that undermined the rule of law."
The prison at the U.S. naval base in Cuba was set up by the Bush administration after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks as American forces began sweeping up prisoners in Afghanistan in late 2001. By keeping such prisoners outside the United States, the argument went, captives could be held beyond the American judicial system and their cases disposed of in the military judicial system.
But, Obama repeated Thursday: "For over seven years, we have detained hundreds of people at Guantanamo. During that time, the system of military commissions that were in place at Guantanamo succeeded in convicting a grand total of three suspected terrorists. Let me repeat that: three convictions in over seven years."
Cheney said, as if in response: "If fine speechmaking, appeals to reason, or pleas for compassion had the power to move them, the terrorists would long ago have abandoned the field. And when they see the American government caught up in arguments about interrogations or whether foreign terrorists have constitutional rights, they don't stand back in awe of our legal system and wonder whether they had misjudged us all along."
Both men appeared to have written their speeches over crystal ball forecasts of what the other would say.
Obama complained that he was weighed down by "cleaning up something that is, quite simply, a mess" left behind by the Bush White House.
Cheney begged to differ, declaring Obama was rushing to close Guantanamo with "little deliberation and no plan."
While the sitting president and the former vice president each scored points in their sequential debate, Obama walked away without having given American lawmakers the plan they wanted.
Both the House and the Senate have refused Obama's request for $80 million to begin closing down the prison, as even some of Obama's staunchest Democratic allies have demanded he first tell them what he will do with the prisoners.
There is a noisy backlash — mainly fueled by Republicans' relentless criticism of Obama's plans — against putting what are seen as dangerous terrorists in U.S. prisons.
But that did not seem to be Obama's top concern. He seemed more intent on placing himself between the Cheneyites and his critics on the left who are bitterly complaining the president is not strongly defending American legal protections.
"On one side of the spectrum, there are those who make little allowance for the unique challenges posed by terrorism, and who would almost never put national security over transparency," Obama said in a pointed return of fire toward those to his left.
"On the other end of the spectrum, there are those who embrace a view that can be summarized in two words: 'anything goes,' " Obama said.
The counter-fire on Cheney, who was never mentioned by name, was clear: "Their arguments suggest that the ends of fighting terrorism can be used to justify any means, and that the president should have blanket authority to do whatever he wants provided that it is a president with whom they agree."
While Obama sought to sway critics, the wounds opened in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, still may remain too fresh to be salved by Obama's densely crafted visions to hold sway.
EDITOR'S NOTE — Steven R. Hurst, who has covered foreign policy for 30 years, reports from the White House for The Associated Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment