Guantánamo: a strategic victory?

The Guantánamo detention centre has become a byword for everything wrong about America's war on terror—which is why one of the first things President Obama did after he was sworn into office was order its closure. But if we think that marks the end of this dark chapter in history, we are much mistaken, argues MG Zimeta in her web exclusive this week. In fact, Guantámano may have achieved exactly what its architects intended—not least because it has eclipsed the ongoing horrors of other US detention sites in Bagram, Kandahar, Kabul and Abu Ghraib. It has also also distracted from other "mini-Guantánamos" spawned by regimes eager to ingratiate themselves with the US, and has aided the erosion of basic human rights across the world, even in here in Britain, where we now have Orwellian legal instruments like control orders.

"Who counts as a 'person'? What counts as 'torture'? No one should be subject to inhumane treatment—but who can be subject to nearly inhumane treatment, or not-quite-inhumane treatment? These questions are absurd—or should be. That they are now seen as legitimate is Guantánamo's strategic success," says Zimeta.

As always, we'd love to hear your thoughts.