Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Guantanamo
A feminist perspective on U.S. human
rights violations
The Play
guantanamo 209
spring 2006, and the British government has refused to take any responsi-
bility for them, despite several having lived in Britain for ten or twenty years,
and several have small children in Britain who are U.K. citizens (Brittain
2005). The play ran in two London theaters, one (New Ambassadors The-
atre) in the mainstream West End, until September 2004. It was then put
on in New York City for four months. It has also been in theaters in other
U.S. cities: Washington D.C.; Chicago, Illinois; San Francisco, California;
and Tucson, Arizona. The play has been on tour in Sweden (in translation),
Italy, New Zealand, Poland, and Germany, and it is under consideration in
other theaters in various countries. Hundreds of community hall readings
have been done in the United States, Canada, the U.K., Sweden, Italy, New
Zealand, and Pakistan, where readings have been done by non-actors as
well as professionals. The most touching feedback we have had was from
a secondary school in Lahore, Pakistan, where the young actors had a huge
local success and wrote to the authors to say how proud they were to be part
of what they saw as a struggle for justice across the world.
The play’s characters are British, but they have widely differing original
backgrounds: Iraq, Palestine, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Jamaica. In the
cases of two Caribbean prisoners, the families are not Muslim, in fact some
family members are devout Catholics.
In the cases of the Muslim families, the members who agreed to be inter-
viewed were invariably men, fathers or brothers. The women rarely emerged
during an interview, although sometimes they sat silently or sent in tea. The
interviews were arranged through their lawyers, and in every case where
there was no male family member to consult, the family refused to give any
interviews. There is only one woman in the play, a lawyer, Gareth Pierce.
Guantanamo is an apt symbol of a male-dominated, militarized culture of
ostentatious demonstration of U.S. power, which cannot be questioned,
and a society that believes this model should be accepted throughout the
world.
guantanamo 211
the horror and impotence of months of not even knowing where he was.
Two Egyptian refugees, Ahmed Agiza and Mohamed Al-Zery, were ar-
rested in Sweden at the request of the United States and flown shackled and
blindfolded in a private CIA jet to Cairo. Mr. Agiza’s mother visited him in
prison, where he still is, and she has spoken out about what has happened
to him. His wife was granted political asylum in Sweden in 2004, but she is
deeply traumatized with the fear that another brutal upheaval could hit her
family at any time. Mr. Al-Zery remains under house arrest in Egypt.
Only in the past two years has it emerged that kidnapping was a common
pattern in the U.S. war on terror. It has also come out that many of those
taken prisoner, such as Mr. Arar or the Algerian martial arts champion
with a Bosnian passport Mustafa Ait Idir, have never been anything other
than law-abiding citizens. Mr. Idir was one of six Algerians living in Bosnia
who were first held for three months by the Bosnians at the request of the
United States but then released on the orders of the Bosnian Supreme Court
in January 2002. As they left prison, they were handcuffed and forced into
waiting unmarked cars by men who one of the group later claimed were
Americans wearing Bosnian uniforms over their own attire. These newly
released prisoners were flown to Guantanamo. The wife of one of the men,
Hadj Boudella, expressed perfectly the sensation many describe after hear-
ing their husband’s pleas of innocence dismissed. Nadja Dizdarevic wrote
to her husband’s U.S. lawyers, “I am so shocked by this information that
it seems as if my blood froze in my veins, I can’t breathe and I wish I was
dead” (Mayer 2005). The Algerians found themselves among men who
were simply sold to the Americans directly or through the Pakistani police.
For instance, Fawzi al Odah was a student in the university in Kuwait. With
friends he had the habit of spending Ramadan in impoverished remote ar-
eas on the Pakistan/Afghan border, teaching village children. He was sold,
with four others, to Pakistani officials by tribal elders (Gutman, Dickey, and
Yousafzai 2002). They all ended up in Guantanamo and Fawzi is still there
despite numerous efforts by the Kuwaiti government to get him released
(as some Saudi men and some Kuwaitis were). Mr. Odah’s mother is very
active along with her husband, a former fighter pilot, in efforts to bring
their son’s plight to world attention and to press her government for more
action.2
Our play tells the stories of three men in Guantanamo, an aid worker and
two businessmen, who were kidnapped by U.S. forces in Pakistan and in the
guantanamo 213
Rasul v. Bush, after losing in the U.S. District Court and the appeal to the cir-
cuit court. The Supreme Court ruled in their favor—that the federal courts
had the authority to review the detentions. The New York Times called it the
most important civil rights case in half a century. But the White House and
the Pentagon then began a remarkable politicization of U.S. law to avoid
compliance.
After the Supreme Court ruling in June 2004 that prisoners in Guanta-
namo—all foreigners—did have the right to hearings in U.S. civil courts,
some dramatic developments were expected. But it has so far gotten the
prisoners nowhere near any federal court. The U.S. government response
has merely been to organize another layer of meaningless hearings by a
military board inside Guantanamo—Status Review Tribunals—and some
access to a handful of detainees by American civilian lawyers who accepted
to be bound by such draconian gag orders that they could not even tell the
detainees’ families how their health was.
As one of these lawyers, Michael Ratner of CCR, put it, “The government
has us tied up in knots over issues concerning access to our clients, gag
orders, and the like. In addition they have asked that all the federal cases be
dismissed because first, our clients have no rights and second, even if they
do have a right to minimal due process, the Status Review Tribunals frauds
are sufficient hearings that obligate the federal court at most to review their
findings” (Personal telephone interview). The military commissions and
status review tribunals that Pentagon lawyers created have been roundly and
publicly criticized by some of the same military lawyers who were to partici-
pate in them, as well as by numerous civil rights lawyers.
Torture
A now infamous memo of 25 January 2002 from the then White House legal
counsel, now attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, spells out the evasion of
the Geneva Conventions for Taliban and Al Qaeda, and it lays the basis for
what has happened at Guantanamo: torture and its inevitable consequences
(Ratner and Ray 2004). The ex-prisoners have testified to the Guantanamo
routine of false confessions, false witnessing against others, a cats’ cradle
of bad information corroborated by men prepared to say anything to end
torture (Rasul, Iqbal, and Ahmed 2004). In August 2004 the CCR presented
the 115-page dossier prepared in the offices of the British solicitor Gareth
guantanamo 215
It is a well-known pattern in authoritarian states. In Chile under the
Augusto Pinochet dictatorship, for instance, when many of the militants de-
tained and tortured were women, some of the political prisoners said later
that among the torturers “the women were the worst.”
And to continue with the Chile parallel, Fermin Cabal’s play Tejas Verdes con-
tains the memorable character of the woman military doctor who oversaw
the prisoners and when called to an enquiry into the horrors of the torture
center years later and when questioned about the practices said, “Do you
really think these things are possible? That the army of a civilised country
could behave in this way?” President George W. Bush attempted similarly to
dismiss these kinds of accusations of brutality when the Abu Ghraib pho-
tographs flashed around the world, by saying that those responsible were
just a few bad apples. But his attempt to shrug off a wide responsibility has
failed in the light of the twelve hundred pages of official documents now
published that show the decisions made at the highest levels (Greenberg
and Dratel 2005).
The impact of torture on both the victim and the perpetrator is well
known from such classic testimony as that of the Algerian students tortured
in Paris by the French in 1959 (La Gangrene, 1959), and in English (Silvers
1960), and in the French journalist Henri Alleg’s experience with the French
military in Algeria recounted in La Question (Alleg 1958). In 1973, an Amnes-
ty International report stated: “Cancer is an apt metaphor for torture and its
spread through the social organism. The act of torture can not be separated
from the rest of society . . . to give in to the use of torture is to invite its
spread and the eventual debasement of the whole society. . . . Torture is the
ultimate human corruption” (Amnesty International 1973.)
However, it is not only torture but also the demonization of an enemy
that undermines societies. A generation of American youth came back from
Vietnam brutalized and uneasy about their place in society after what they
had done—as dozens of books and films have recounted. And in Israel
today increasing numbers of young men are refusniks who will not do their
military service in the Occupied Palestinian Territories because they have
seen enough of how Arabs are treated as less than human, and they prefer a
clean conscience and a prison sentence.
Heroic Endurance
It is in the hidden role of the wives and mothers and sisters of Guantanamo
prisoners that feminism can find some deeply inspiring expression. For
instance, Sharon, Kathleen, and Jeanette are the sisters of three British
men held in Guantanamo for two years and now released, whose families
were originally from Africa and the Caribbean. None had the educational
or cultural background that would have given them easy political or media
experience. But after an initial period of shocked silence, all were notice-
ably empowered by their dissidence and refusal to accept the authorities’
briefings to them that nothing could be done. Inside their families, at their
work, and in relation to officials, they are stronger, more confident women
than before the heavy blow of their brothers’ incarceration in Guantanamo.
The same phenomenon of empowerment for some of the grieving moth-
ers is true for families in other places with more traditionalist cultures, such
as Kuwait. For instance, the mother of Fawzi al Odeh has lobbied to the top
of the Kuwaiti government and traveled to London attempting to see the
foreign office on behalf of her son.
And Mrs. el Banna, Palestinian wife of Jamil el Banna, who was kid-
napped by the Americans in Gambia and is still in Guantanamo despite
even the interrogators telling him, “We know you are innocent,” is one of a
number of women who have impressively held large families of children to-
gether in incredibly difficult circumstances. Mrs. el Banna, a schoolteacher
in Jordan before her marriage, is from a devout Palestinian family. In ten
years as a refugee in London, she learned English well enough to negoti-
ate the bureaucracy of an alien culture but maintained a modest lifestyle
completely unaffected by the consumerism and brashness of contemporary
guantanamo 217
British culture. She has five children, the last one born while her husband
was in Guantanamo. The oldest boy, still only ten years of age, fasted with
her in Ramadan, and the smallest girl watches Palestinian children’s videos
in the mornings when the others are at school. To spend time in her house
is to be transported into the female culture of resistance to Israeli occupa-
tion expressed in houses in Gaza or the West Bank, with the hospitality;
endless cooking of homemade food; polite children, with the oldest helping
with the youngest; and impeccable cleanliness. The female strength that is
the cultural norm among women under occupation in Palestine has carried
Mrs. el Banna through three years without her husband, and at one point
nearly one and a half years with only one letter. In a common demonstra-
tion of spite, the Americans held the letters, and only in early 2005 did they
release thirteen letters together. In these circumstances, the bubble of hap-
piness that Mrs. el Banna has created for her children in a London suburb,
while safeguarding their privacy, is a heroic female achievement.3 In late
2005 she and her older boys began to speak in public, in a brave break from
all her previous cultural traditions.
Aftermath
works cited
Alleg, Henri. 1958. La Question. Paris: Editions de Minuit.
Amnesty International. 1973. Report on Torture. http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/
ENGAMR511452004.
Brittain, Victoria. 2005. “The Ones Left Behind.” Guardian, 19 Februrary.
———. 2006. “Guardian Unlimited,” Commentisfree, 27 March.
Brittain, Victoria, and Gillian Slovo. 2004. Guantanamo, Honour Bound to Defend Free-
dom. London: Oberon Books.
Danner, Mark. 2005. Torture and Truth. New York: Granta Books.
Greenberg, Karen J., and Joshua L. Dratel. 2005. The Torture Papers: The Road to Abu
Ghraib. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gutman, Roy, Christopher Dickey, and Sami Yousafzai. 2002. “Guantanamo Jus-
tice?” Newsweek, 8 July.
Hersh, Seymour. 2004a. Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib. New
York: HarperCollins.
———. 2004b. “The Gray Zone.” New Yorker, 15 May.
La Gangrene. 1959. Paris: Editions de Minuit.
Mayer, Jane. 2005. “Outsourcing Torture: The Secret History of America’s ‘Extraor-
dinary Rendition Program.’” New Yorker, 14 February. http://www.newyorker.
com/fact/content/?050214fa_fact6.
Rasul, Shafiq, Asif Iqbal, and Rhuhel Ahmed. 2004. “Composite Statement: Deten-
tion in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.” http://www.ccrny.org/v2/reports/
docs/GitmocompositestatementFINAL23july04.pdf.
Ratner Michael, and Ellen Ray. 2004. Guantanamo, What the World Should Know. New
York: Arris.
Shane, Scott. 2005. “Suit by Detainee on Transfer to Syria Finds Support in Jet’s
Log.” USA Today, 30 March. http://www.node707.com/archives/003550.shtml.
Silvers, Robert, trans. 1960. The Gangrene. New York: L. Stuart.
West, Cornell. 2004. Democracy Matters: Winning the Fight against Imperialism. New
York: Penguin.
Yee, James. 2005. “For God and Country: Faith and Patriotism under Fire.” New
York: Public Affairs.
guantanamo 219