During a significant announcement on Wednesday, the President, Donald Trump, revealed his intentions of detaining unauthorized immigrants at Guantanamo Bay’s detention center situated on the US naval base in Cuba. The President articulated that the basis of his decision is to prevent the immigrants from returning, hence the selection of Guantanamo as their location. The current tally of beds the center holds, according to Trump, is 30,000. This, coupled with the migration detention initiative, is aimed at doubling the center’s volume instantaneously.
However, different sets of information present a discrepancy concerning the capacity of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. It is well-known that apart from a high-security prison housing terrorism suspects, the center includes a separate holding facility for migrants. Yet, both these known facilities combined do not seem to have the capability to hold 30,000 individuals.
Estimations provided by the Global Detention Project assert that the Migrant Operations Center in Guantanamo Bay has a capacity of accommodating merely around 130 individuals. The New York Times has reported that since 2002, the total number of prisoners that have been detained at Guantanamo amounts to 780. This number starkly contrasts with the President’s claim.
Guantanamo’s operations under the governance of the United States have been tarnished with a history of controversies. Multiple accounts have emerged from individuals held in the Migrant Operations Center describing the inhabitable conditions. Some of the major issues raised have been about open sewage and compromised drinking water.
Besides the humanitarian issues, Guantanamo is notorious as the location where terror suspects have been confined indefinitely without formal charges or legal processes. There have been claims of inhumane treatment including torturous practices and brutalities. These factors have raised questions and concerns regarding Trump’s plan to house unauthorized immigrants in Guantanamo.
The public reaction to this announcement was captured in innumerable online comments. One concerned netizen voiced, ‘Guantanamo Bay’s operations were not agreeable to me before, and with this new proposal, I find them completely unacceptable.’
Another commentator, known online as Onekool, expressed incredulity, ‘I recall the time when our debates were about the suitability of sending the globally feared terrorists to Guantanamo, and now the proposition is just random unverified immigrants. Even rigid Republicans of the Bush era would have disapproved of this.’
The detractors argued against the logic of the plan as well. An online user, NitWhittler pointed out the inconsistencies, ‘The notion of deporting 20 million unauthorized immigrants was floated by Trump. So, if 30,000 are sent to Guantanamo, where will the remaining 19,970,000 immigrants go? Housing them at Guantanamo will still cost US tax dollars, which contradicts the very concept of deportation. It is essentially a harsh displacement that inflicts familial separations, while the cost of lodging and feeding them remains.’
The ethical aspect of the plan was not left unaddressed. ‘In my view, it’s ethically incorrect to force immigrants into camps’, stated DestructicusDawn.
An online comment drew parallels with history, warning, ‘A similar situation arose previously when the immigrants were the targets, and nothing was done as we weren’t immigrants… It didn’t result well last time.’
Addressing the blanket labelling of immigrants, one remark read, ‘Wrongfully lumping all unauthorized immigrants together is unjust. People say these immigrants are here to harm innocent children while completely ignoring that most are escaping from life-threatening situations in their homelands.’
Reflections from a veteran captured the heartbreak, ‘The rapid decline we’re seeing is mindboggling. As a military veteran, it’s excruciating to witness. I’ve never felt a greater sense of helplessness.’
InuMiroLover, an online user, questioned the equivalence of punishments, ‘It seems unreasonable to house immigrants, who might have slightly overstayed their visas but pose no threat, alongside criminals convicted of planning terror attacks.’
From an international perspective, Live_Avocado4777 shared, ‘As an outsider, we believe you chose a capricious leader, backed by fanatical support and representatives who seemed to have been waiting for this precise opportunity. Where are the Democrats in all of this?’
Another heartfelt sentiment echoed, ‘The inhumane treatment of unauthorized immigrants cuts me deep. History has revealed time and again that this is how genocides originate. I ardently hope that my parallels prove incorrect.’