5.4.21
In news from Guantánamo, the US military announced yesterday that it had shut Camp 7, the secretive prison block where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other so-called “high-value detainees” have been held since their arrival at Guantánamo from CIA “black sites” in September 2006, and had moved the prisoners to Camp 5.
Modeled on a maximum security prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, Camp 5, which cost $17.5 million, opened in 2004, and its solid-walled, isolated cells were used to hold prisoners regarded as non-compliant. As the prison’s population shrank, however, it was closed — in September 2016 — and its remaining prisoners transferred to Camp 6, which opened in 2006, and includes a communal area.
Camp 7, meanwhile, which cost $17 million, was also built in 2004. Two storeys tall, it was modeled on a maximum-security prison in Bunker Hill, Indiana, and, as Carol Rosenberg explained in the New York Times yesterday, had “a modest detainee health clinic and a psychiatric ward with a padded cell, but none of the hospice or end-of-life care capacity once envisioned by Pentagon planners.”
Rosenberg added that it was “designed to keep prisoners confined to their cells except when guards move[d] an individual to showers, outdoor cages that serve[d] as recreation yards or another cell where a single captive [could] sit in a recliner, one ankle shackled to a bolt on the floor, and watch television.”
As she also explained, “By segregating the prisoners, under the watch of a special guard unit called Task Force Platinum, the intelligence agencies could strictly monitor and control their communications and prevent them from divulging what had happened to them. Defense lawyers who were eventually granted access to the men were bound by security clearances to keep their conversations classified, including in court filings that accused government agents of state-sponsored torture.”
She also explained that “Camp 7 was long one of Guantánamo’s most clandestine sites. The Pentagon refused to disclose its cost, which contractor built it and when. Reporters were not permitted to see it, lawyers were required to obtain a court order to visit and its location was considered classified, although sources pointed to it on a satellite map of the base.”
Conditions at Camp 7 were robustly criticized in a letter in February 2012, to William K. Lietzau, the senior official responsible for detainee policy at the Pentagon, which was written by lawyers for six of the “high-value detainees” — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ammar al-Baluchi, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Walid bin Attash (all accused of involvement in the 9/11 attacks), and Abu Faraj al-Libi, seized in Pakistan in May 2005, who has not been charged with a crime.
In the New York Times, Charlie Savage noted that the letter contended that “conditions at Camp 7 fall short of the minimum guarantees of humane treatment under the Geneva Conventions”, adding that the lawyers “asked for the letter to be treated as a report of a possible ‘violation of the law of war,’” which would require its allegation to be investigated.
Despite this, Camp 7 continued to be used for the “high-value detainees,” and it was not until Donald Trump’s presidency that a “plan to consolidate the prisoners was devised,’ because of Camp 7’s continuing structural failures. As Rosenberg described it, “Raw sewage sloshed through the tiers, the power sometimes went out and some cell doors would not close at the site. The situation worsened over the summer amid the coronavirus pandemic because it was difficult to bring in contractors and spare parts.”
The military described the move from Camp 7 to Camp 5 as, in Rosenberg’s words, “a consolidation of detention operations that could cut costs and reduce the troop presence” at Guantánamo, and Maj. Gregory J. McElwain, a spokesman for US Southern Command, which oversees the prison, called it a “fiscally responsible decision” whose planning “involved all relevant organizations to include the intelligence community.”
Even James Connell, one of the defense lawyers for Ammar al-Baluchi, who is normally — and completely understandably — critical of the conditions in which his client is held, said that the move “sounds like a solution to the crumbling Camp 7.”
Rosenberg proceeded to explain that “Camp 7 functioned under a 2006 memorandum of agreement between Donald H. Rumsfeld and Michael V. Hayden, the defense secretary and the CIA director at the time,” although she added that it “was not immediately known on Sunday whether a new agreement was reached or the old one was dissolved.”
What is also not known is what conditions the “high-value detainees” will be held in in Camp 5. The former “black site” prisoners were kept in isolation in their early years in Camp 7. As Rosenberg explained, “Each was allowed to speak with only one other prisoner through a tarp during recreation time, in conversations that were recorded for intelligence purposes.”
She added that their lawyers “described the conditions as mind-numbing until recent years, when the commanders permitted the prisoners to eat and pray together under strict surveillance,” and also allowed them access to “a cell where they could prepare food.”
As Rosenberg also explained, “It is unknown whether the military will emulate that communal lifestyle in the prisoners’ new surroundings,” but it is fundamentally necessary for them to do so, because the men moved to Camp 5 are either caught up in seemingly interminable pre-trial hearings in their military commission trials (because of the CIA’s obsession with trying to keep their torture secret), or are held indefinitely without charge or trial as “forever prisoners.”
And while it is obviously appropriate for Camp 7 to have been closed, and for the men to have been moved, it does nothing to address the fundamental injustice of either prosecuting them in a broken trial system that is incapable of delivering justice, as is the case with ten of them (the 9/11 five, mentioned above, plus Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi, and Hambali and two alleged accomplices), or of continuing to hold them indefinitely without charge or trial, as is the case with six others (the stateless Palestinian Abu Zubaydah, for whom the torture program was developed, in the mistaken belief that he was a senior member of al-Qaeda, Abu Faraj al-Libi, mentioned above, as well as a Somalian, a Kenyan and two Afghans).
One other man, Ali Hamza al-Bahlul, is imprisoned alone after he was given a life sentence after a military commission trial in October 2008, in which he refused to mount a defence, while another, Majid Khan, agreed to a plea deal in 2012, but is still waiting for confirmation of when, as a result, his imprisonment will come to an end.
The 22 other prisoners, held in Camp 6, are “low-value detainees.” Six of them have been approved for release by high-level government review processes, but are still held, while the 16 others are also “forever prisoners,” held indefinitely without charge or trial.
Moving the “high-value detainees” solves the immediate problem of the broken prison block in which they were living, but it does nothing to solve the bigger problem of the broken prison itself. In the review of the prison’s future that Biden administration officials have promised, with the suggestion that the prison’s closure is Biden’s aim, the six men cleared for release need to be freed, and the administration needs to accept that it cannot continue holding indefinitely men it has no intention of putting on trial, and must charge or release the 22 “forever prisoners,” including the six who are also so-called “high-value detainees.”
* * * * *
Andy Worthington is a freelance investigative journalist, activist, author, photographer (of an ongoing photo-journalism project, ‘The State of London’), film-maker and singer-songwriter (the lead singer and main songwriter for the London-based band The Four Fathers, whose music is available via Bandcamp). He is the co-founder of the Close Guantánamo campaign (and see the latest photo campaign here) and the successful We Stand With Shaker campaign of 2014-15, and the author of The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison and of two other books: Stonehenge: Celebration and Subversion and The Battle of the Beanfield. He is also the co-director (with Polly Nash) of the documentary film, “Outside the Law: Stories from Guantánamo” (available on DVD here, or here for the US, or you can watch it online here, via the production company Spectacle, for £2.55).
In 2017, Andy became very involved in housing issues. He is the narrator of the documentary film, ‘Concrete Soldiers UK’, about the destruction of council estates, and the inspiring resistance of residents, he wrote a song ‘Grenfell’, in the aftermath of the entirely preventable fire in June 2017 that killed over 70 people, and he also set up ‘No Social Cleansing in Lewisham’ as a focal point for resistance to estate destruction and the loss of community space in his home borough in south east London. For two months, from August to October 2018, he was part of the occupation of the Old Tidemill Wildlife Garden in Deptford, to prevent its destruction — and that of 16 structurally sound council flats next door — by Lewisham Council and Peabody. Although the garden was violently evicted by bailiffs on October 29, 2018, and the trees were cut down on February 27, 2019, the resistance continues.
To receive new articles in your inbox, please subscribe to Andy’s RSS feed — and he can also be found on Facebook (and here), Twitter, Flickr and YouTube. Also see the six-part definitive Guantánamo prisoner list, The Complete Guantánamo Files, the definitive Guantánamo habeas list, the full military commissions list, and the chronological list of all Andy’s articles.
Please also consider joining the Close Guantánamo campaign, and, if you appreciate Andy’s work, feel free to make a donation.
Investigative journalist, author, campaigner, commentator and public speaker. Recognized as an authority on Guantánamo and the “war on terror.” Co-founder, Close Guantánamo and We Stand With Shaker, singer/songwriter (The Four Fathers).
Email Andy Worthington
Please support Andy Worthington, independent journalist:
12 Responses
Andy Worthington says...
When I posted this on Facebook, I wrote:
Here’s my latest article, following the US military’s announcement that it has closed the secretive Camp 7 at Guantanamo, where the so-called “high-value detainees” were held, and has moved them to Camp 5 instead, where “non-compliant” lower-value prisoners used to be held until it was closed in 2016.
Camp 7 had been falling apart for years, but moving these men is no solution to Guantanamo’s larger problems: fundamentally, that the men held there should either be tried via a functional judicial system, or released.
...on April 5th, 2021 at 8:39 pm
Andy Worthington says...
Valerie Jeans wrote:
Thank you for your continuing efforts, Andy. Justice for Guantanamo detainees!
...on April 6th, 2021 at 12:00 am
Andy Worthington says...
Yes, let us hope so, Valerie. Thanks for the supportive words!
...on April 6th, 2021 at 12:01 am
Andy Worthington says...
Debra Sweet wrote:
Andy — your favorite New York Times had the classic NYT header that Guantanamo Prisoners Move. As if they picked up and decided to go elsewhere than Camp 7 after being imprisoned for years. I see the header is changed now:
‘Military Closes Failing Facility at Guantánamo Bay to Consolidate Prisoners’
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/04/us/politics/guantanamo-bay-prisoners.html
...on April 6th, 2021 at 12:03 am
Andy Worthington says...
The changed headline isn’t much better, is it, Debra? That’s why I put “high-value detainees” in my headline. “Failing Facility” doesn’t really say anything.
...on April 6th, 2021 at 12:04 am
Andy Worthington says...
Debra Sweet wrote:
Andy, It’s the same story for 19 years — GTMO is a “failure” but not really that bad in the eyes of the NYT. Have to rely on people who seek out the reality, like you …
...on April 6th, 2021 at 9:22 am
Andy Worthington says...
Thanks, Debra. It certainly says something about the carefully non-confrontational nature of the mainstream media that I’ve spent so many years dealing with the same facts as outlets like the NYT, but with punchier headlines and the use of indignant adjectives! Often the mainstream media seems to be trying primarily to defuse explosive situations that ought to make us angry.
...on April 6th, 2021 at 9:23 am
Andy Worthington says...
David Knopfler wrote:
Andy, maybe the headline should be “Biden still failing to close GTMO”
...on April 6th, 2021 at 9:23 am
Andy Worthington says...
Yes, that’s the one, David. The NYT won’t do it, but I will. I just wonder how long to give him. I do believe he’ll do something, but I’m already frustrated by the lack of urgency. Appointing an Envoy for Guantanamo Closure would enable him to free at least some of the six men already approved for release, which would send a positive message to the world. Maybe he doesn’t want to annoy the Republicans, but tiptoeing around them didn’t work well for Obama.
...on April 6th, 2021 at 9:23 am
Andy Worthington says...
Thomas Wilner wrote:
Yes — “the men held there should either be tried via a functional judicial system, or released.” This has gone on far, far too long!
...on April 6th, 2021 at 11:05 pm
Andy Worthington says...
Absolutely, Thomas – and you’ve been working on getting it shut for even longer than me!
...on April 6th, 2021 at 11:06 pm
Andy Worthington says...
Here’s a Spanish translation, via the World Can’t Wait’s Spanish website – ‘El ejército estadounidense cerró el Campamento 7, el bloque de “detenidos de alto valor” de la prisión de Guantánamo y los mueve al Campamento 5’: http://worldcantwait-la.com/worthington-ejercito-eeuu-cero-campamento7.htm
...on April 16th, 2021 at 5:13 pm