The Ankara Center for Crisis and Policy Studies (ANKASAM) presents its interview with Assoc. Prof. Vincent Keating, an International Politics expert from the University of Southern Denmark, to assess the impact of the reopening of Guantanamo Bay on migration policies, its human rights implications, and international reactions.
1. What do you think about the impact of reopening Guantanamo Bay on immigration policies? What could be the long-term consequences of this decision?
Trump’s election campaign promised a crackdown on immigration, continuing similar policies from his first term as president[i]. But the Trump administration’s use of Guantanamo Bay as a facility for detaining irregular migrants[ii] to be deported to is new, and can be seen in two ways. First, we might consider it from a practical point of view. To fulfill its election promises, the Trump administration will need to detain and repatriate millions of people. This logistical challenge requires creating or repurposing sites[iii] for internment and processing. The Trump administration anticipates that the facility at Guantanamo Bay alone could be used to hold up to 30,000 migrants[iv]. It should be mentioned that Guantanamo Bay had previously been used for [v]after the 1991 military coup in Haiti and the 1994 civil unrest in Cuba[vi], so in one way, this policy is nothing new.
But the decision to use Guantanamo Bay as a detention facility also carries symbolic weight, evoking a darker past. Guantanamo Bay was a primary detention site during the George W. Bush administration’s War on Terror. On January 11, 2002, the first detainees were transferred to the camp, often clad in orange jumpsuits[vii] if deemed ‘non-compliant.’ By mid-2004, over 600 detainees were held there, and the base increasingly became a symbol of opposition to the Bush administration’s treatment of captives, generating countless lawsuits and open criticism from some of its closest allies[viii].
Over 20 years later, we seem to be starting another grim chapter for Guantanamo Bay, since the Trump administration appears to be deliberately echoing the language used by the Bush administration to justify its controversial policies. Except instead of talking about suspected terrorists, the Trump administration is using this language to talk about irregular migrants. I believe that this suggests at least an indifference, if not an intent, to deprive these irregular migrants of certain rights in two ways.
The first problem concerns of how Guantanamo Bay under the Bush administration turned into what many called a ‘legal black hole[ix].’ The suspected terrorists detained by the Bush administration were initially not even given the right to habeas corpus, or the ability to go before a judge to challenge the legality of their detention – a right inherited from the English legal tradition dating back to 1166 – and it would take until 2008 for the Supreme Court of the United States to rule that this right had to be observed.
The Trump administration has proposed similar conditions, but instead of capturing terrorist suspects abroad and bringing them to Guantanamo, they will be the first administration to detain irregular migrants at Guantanamo Bay who had already resided on U.S. soil. It is unclear what, if any, legal protections these migrants will receive once transferred. This uncertainty has led the American Civil Liberties Union to file a lawsuit, arguing that the detainees have a right to legal representation[x].
The second problem concerns the mistreatment of some of the prisoners[xi] held at Guantanamo Bay under the Bush administration. Interrogators[xii] beat them, denied them food and water, and deprived them of sleep for long periods. Some prisoners were found in the fetal position after urinating or defecating on themselves. This mistreatment was not the result of a few ‘bad apples,’ but rather the institutionalization of systematic discrimination[xiii] towards suspected terrorists that resulted in human rights abuses at Guantanamo Bay, at US controlled prisons overseas, and at CIA black sites in allied countries[xiv] where prisoners were kidnapped, rendered without due process to an allied country, detained without access to courts, and often tortured.
Despite this known history, the Trump administration seems to be deliberately echoing language that suggests indifference or intent to deprive migrants of their rights. Trump has stated that he will only send the “worst criminal illegal aliens”[xv]to Guantanamo, echoing the Bush administration’s language about housing the “worst of the worst” [xvi]terrorists. Recent reports also indicate that migrants at the base are being held by military guards, deepening this troubling image. Likewise, some of the irregular migrants already sent to Guantanamo Bay do not seem to have the profile[xvii] of “the worst of the worst,” in a very similar fashion to how the Bush administration held innocent people at Guantanamo while calling them the worst form of terrorist.
While there is a practical angle for the Trump administration in achieving their policy goals, the choice of using Guantanamo Bay as a detention site is likely not just about reducing irregular migration. It also serves as a symbol that reinforces a worldview where rights are granted to those deemed deserving — “hardworking Americans” — and withheld from others at the administration’s discretion. In other words, reopening Guantanamo Bay for this purpose likely sets the stage for a justification that, like suspected terrorists after 9/11, irregular migrants should not have the protections of basic human rights and can be treated as the Trump administration pleases.
2. What kind of debates might arise regarding the reopening of Guantanamo Bay from an immigration policy perspective? How should the public and international organizations approach this issue?
We live in a much more ideologically fragmented world now than we did in 2002 when Guantanamo Bay was used to detain suspected terrorists. Back then, the Bush administration tried to justify its use of torture on detainees through the euphemism of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques,’ and directly argued that suspected terrorists should be detained without trials as ‘unlawful enemy combatants,’ appealing to a changed security environment. However, very few other states agreed with this argument[xviii], especially after the revelations of torture at Abu Ghraib. This global opposition helped to delegitimize such conduct and put the Bush administration on the defensive, eventually resulting in the revocation of many programs after Barack Obama became president.
Even after Trump made several comments suggesting that torture could be used again in his first term, I thought there might still be enough residual global solidarity[xix] against these types of human rights abuses to successfully push back if Trump implemented these musings. It would take the pressure of allies to ensure that an even more emboldened president kept the basic human right commitments that the United States not only signed, but often advocated for.
Today, with the widespread rise of populist and nationalist ideologies that prioritize the protection of an ‘us’ over ‘them,’ it is likely harder to assemble meaningful international opposition to potential abuses. These ideologies tend to favor rights differentiated by identity or citizenship rather than universal human rights, supported by deeper international ties between far-right political movements in Russia, Europe, and the United States[xx]. We can see this in how targeted killing against those considered to be terrorists has been accepted for over a decade by most members of the international community,[xxi] who would otherwise strongly object to state representatives being killed in a similar way – showing that individual humans are not being treated as having equal rights in this respect.
This means that an empowered Trump administration is likely going to experience less international resistance to any poor treatment of irregular migrants, especially if the migrants’ states have little power or leverage. What this means is that this battle to preserve these rights needs to primarily be fought domestically. Human rights organizations need to find a way to humanize the plight of these irregular migrants, to show that they are people who deserve respectful treatment – even if they are being legally deported. We need to find a way to engage with those who may have bought into Trump’s rhetoric about migrants in the last election, to convince them that everyone deserves basic rights such as habeas corpus, due process, and freedom from torture. Even those that they still may want deported from their country.
[i] “Trump Has Promised Another Immigration Crackdown. Here’s a Primer on His First.”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/us/trump-immigration-policies.html, (Access Date:27.02.2025).
[ii] “See Where Trump Is Expanding Immigrant Detention at Guantánamo”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/05/us/politics/immigrant-detention-guantanamo.html, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[iii] “Pentagon Allows ICE to Use Colorado Military Base to Detain Migrants”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/28/us/politics/ice-deportations-colorado-base.html, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[iv] “Guantanamo could be used to hold up to 30,000 migrants”, Abc News, https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/guantanamo-hold-30000-migrants/story?id=118243755, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[v] “In America; Guantanamo’s Kids”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/10/opinion/in-america-guantanamo-s-kids.html, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[vi] “U.S. To Send Cubans Rescued At Sea To Guantanamo”, Washingtonpost, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/08/19/us-to-send-cubans-rescued-at-sea-to-guantanamo/5e3cd1d0-1a74-44ad-aa48-534e4e4fd949/, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[vii] “One of first prisoners held at Guantanamo by US sent back to Tunisia”, Bbc, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crrw87wlzgxo, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[viii] “Contesting the International Illegitimacy of Torture: The Bush Administration’s Failure to Legitimate its Preferences within International Society”, SDU, https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/en/publications/contesting-the-international-illegitimacy-of-torture-the-bush-adm (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[ix] “Guantanamo Bay: The Legal Black Hole”, Jstor, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3663134, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[x] “U.S. Claims Immigrants Held at Guantanamo Are “Worst of the Worst.” Their Families Say They’re Being Unfairly Targeted.”, Propublica, https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-administration-migrants-guantanamo-bay, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xi] “US Human Rights Conduct and International Legitimacy The Constrained Hegemony of George W. Bush”, SDU, https://findresearcher.sdu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/141275551/Chapter_3_Open_Access.pdf, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xii] “For First Time in Public, a Detainee Describes Torture at C.I.A. Black Sites”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/us/politics/guantanamo-detainee-torture.html, (Access Date:27.02.2025).
[xiii] “A Guide to the Memos on Torture”, The New York Times, https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/ref/international/24MEMO-GUIDE.html?_r=1, (Access Date:27.02.2025).
[xiv] “Trump says the U.S. will send the ‘worst criminal illegal aliens’ to Guantánamo Bay”, Npr, https://www.npr.org/2025/01/30/g-s1-45454/trump-says-u-s-will-send-worst-criminal-illegal-aliens-to-guantanamo-bay, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xv] “Pete Hegseth confirms ‘worst of the worst’ criminal migrants will be sent to Guantanamo Bay”, Fox News, https://www.foxnews.com/media/hegseth-confirms-worst-worst-criminal-migrants-sent-gitmo-all-options-table (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xvi] “Conservative Soft Power: Liberal soft power bias and the ‘hidden’ attraction of Russia”, SDU, https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/en/publications/conservative-soft-power-liberal-soft-power-bias-and-the-hidden-at, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xvii] “Will Donald Trump bring back torture? Foreign leaders might need to step up to stop him”, The conversation, https://theconversation.com/will-donald-trump-bring-back-torture-foreign-leaders-might-need-to-step-up-to-stop-him-70932, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xviii] “The anti-torture norm and cooperation in the CIA black site Programme”, SDU, https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/en/publications/the-anti-torture-norm-and-cooperation-in-the-cia-black-site-progr, (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xix] “Guantánamo Bay files: ‘The worst of the worst’ – in pictures”, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-bay-worst-in-pictures (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xx] “Relatives and records cast doubt on Guantánamo migrants being ‘worst of the worst’”, Washingtonpost, https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2025/02/16/trump-guantanamo-migrants-deportations-venezuela/ (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
[xxi] “Contesting the International Illegitimacy of Torture: The Bush Administration’s Failure to Legitimate its Preferences within International Society”, a.g.e., (Access Date: 27.02.2025).
