History of the Base, the Treaty which Gives the U.S. the Right to be There, and the Question of Whether there are Compelling Military Reasons to Retain the Base

Remarks of Wayne S. Smith
Center for International Policy Conference at
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Washington, D.C.
March 5, 2003

Chair: Professor Cynthia McClintock

Let me introduce Wayne Smith. He was a PhD candidate in the late 1970's at George Washington. So, I had the great pleasure of being on his dissertation committee. He wrote his dissertation on Argentina and it was a wonderful dissertation. It is terrific that Wayne is here to provide us with insights about the history of the base. Unfortunately, the seat here is vacant. Rear Admiral Eugene Carroll has died and I would like to ask for a moment of silence for his death.

Welcome and we will begin with Wayne.

Remarks of Wayne S. Smith

As Cynthia has said, our friend Admiral Eugene Carroll passed away on February 19th.

Let me explain that Admiral Carroll passed away while I was out of town. I didn't return until last week and although I did call a couple of people, it seemed awkward and perhaps counterproductive to try to get someone to take his place. Moreover, I had discussed this with him several times over the past couple of months and I knew more or less what he was going to say. We decided that rather than have a last minute replacement that it would be more befitting to leave him on the program. I will simply, as nearly as I can, give you the position that I know he would have taken.

Gene Carroll was a fantastic human being, a Rear Admiral, a fighter pilot during the Korean War, on carriers during the Vietnam War, commanded carriers in the sixth fleet, had held some extremely responsible positions in the navy. But near the end of his career, he began to have doubts about American foreign policy and American military policy and so joined the Center for Defense Information, and became its vice-president. In a very careful and responsible way, he became a critic of certain aspects of U.S. policy. Very carefully spoken and a very responsible and principled human being, he will certainly be missed greatly. He was a great guy.

Cuban Participation

Let me say also that there may be some question as to Cuban participation, or the lack thereof. After all, Guantanamo is in Cuba and Cuba still has ultimate sovereignty over the territory, which we simply lease from Cuba. But the Cubans issued a statement on January 11th of last year. Their position on Guantanamo naval base is that it is still sovereign Cuban territory and at some point they wish to regain it. But, they are not pressing for that; they are not making any demands at this point. They are prepared to be patient and wait for a proper moment. That statement is available to everyone and I don't think there would be much to add. Moreover, as most of you know, the US interests section in Havana is giving almost no visas to Cuban officials. So we decided it would simply be a waste of time anyway, and given the Jan. 11th statement, that Cuban participation was not really necessary and so we would go without it. We advised the Cuban interests section that we were doing this.

U.S. Participation

We did, on the other hand, invite representatives of the NAVY JAG. They didn't even have the courtesy to reply. But if I were defending their position, I think I wouldn't have replied either. So, it is understandable, but regrettable that they do not participate. I wish they had sent someone to explain to us what they mean by unlawful belligerent. I think what it means is simply we don't extend POW status to the detainees at Guantanamo. At any event, we did try to have U.S. government participation, but they didn't choose to participate.

Guantanamo Lease

We began plans for this gathering because it is the hundredth anniversary of our acquisition of the base, in February. We missed by a bit, but the lease was signed in February of 1903 by the two governments. It was not a lease for 99 years. It is a lease and treaty that can only be modified or abrogated with the consent of both parties. So, so long as the U.S. chooses to remain there, it legally can do so. One of the first acts of the new revolutionary government of Cuba in January of 1959 was to issue a statement that the new government would honor and respect all existing international treaties and agreements and that, of course, included the Guantanamo treaty. So, the United States has a legal right to remain in Guantanamo. The question is whether it makes sense to do so.

The lease also specifies that this area be leased to the U.S. as a coaling station and for naval operations and for no other purpose, thus raising the question as to whether turning it into a penal colony is really within the terms of the lease.

We only pay 2,000 dollars a year to lease on the base. The Cuban government never cashes the check. I think it did the first year, '59, but since that time, the Cuban government has not cashed any of the rental checks. The Cuban government takes the position that the U.S. should turn the base back over to Cuba. Again, they are not saying that we must do so, they are not threatening Guantanamo. They are simply saying that it is sovereign Cuban territory, which it is, and they want to regain its use.

Acquisition of the Base

It was acquired essentially so that American naval vessels could coal, service, or whatever to facilitate their ability to protect the approaches to the Panama Canal. We long since gave up the Panama Canal. We don't control that anymore, and American naval vessels don't use coal anymore. The agreement does say naval operations, not simply coaling, and the base was useful for some time as a training facility so that fleet units could service in Guantanamo while they carried on trial runs and training operations in deep water to the South. During the cold war, of course, it would have been very difficult for the U.S. to think of turning the base back to Cuba, given that Cuba was a military ally of the Soviet Union, our principle global adversary. We couldn't be certain that if we turned it over to the Cubans, that they might not allow the Soviets to use it. And while that might or might not have been of vital importance or some real threat to U.S. security, it was a possibility that we didn't want to open. So during the cold war years, no American president could consider returning the base to Cuban control. Certainly given the international, political and strategic situation, they would have been severely criticized for doing so.

But the Cold War is over and as Eugene Carroll was going to point out, Cuba does not represent any threat whatever to U.S. security and certainly the Cubans at this point would not even consider, if the base were returned to them, allowing the Soviets to use it. We certainly could write something into any agreement signed between the U.S. and Cuba to that affect. Moreover, Russia and the U.S. are cooperating on a number of issues.

Purpose of the Base

With the Cold War over, the principle reason for retaining the base disappears. As Admiral Carroll was going to say, the base is at this point of no real military use or need. There might be an exception to that if we gave up Roosevelt Rhodes naval base in Puerto Rico, which is used for training exercises and so forth. That might change the equation somewhat and one can imagine that our naval commanders would argue if we do give up Roosevelt Rhodes, there is a continuing need for Guantanamo to facilitate training exercises. I would suggest that talking about using the base for training exercise is less than a compelling reason to hold on to it against public opinion in Cuba and I think the rest of the world. Foreign bases are not really popular in the rest of the world, certainly when they are opposed by the host country. It would be one thing if we have a naval base in the Philippines and they are perfectly happy to have it there and we pay rent. That is not the case here. This is a base imposed on Cuba by the U.S. Yes, we have a legal right to be there, but we must begin to ask ourselves now, a hundred years later, and given the changed world situation, if it would not really be more in the interest of the U.S. to negotiate the return of the Guantanamo naval base to Cuban control.

There are all sorts of ways in which that could be done without any dire disadvantage to the U.S. One thing that has been raised very informally is turning the whole facility into a regional health center and research center for diseases that are prevalent in the Caribbean. You would have doctors from other Caribbean states, Cubans and perhaps at some point, if we ever have normal relations, even doctors from the U.S. Now this would be under Cuban control, but it would be a regional health facility. That's one possibility; there are all sorts of others. Cuba has said a number of times that the base could be useful in helping to spur economic growth and the development of Guantanamo the province, which is among the least developed in Cuba.

The circumstances and existing conditions do not rule out passing the base back to the Cubans. It is a matter of political will. At this point of course, the U.S. is not giving visas to Cuban officials. The U.S. administration takes a very closed view of Cuba. We are not prepared to negotiate anything much with them even when it comes to cooperation in drug interdiction. We have a coast guard officer assigned to Havana. And there is some degree of cooperation, but very little, but there is so much more that we could do. Like facilitating radar installations for them. They have had to put many of their patrol boats in mothballs. They can't afford to keep them up. It would really be in the interest of the U.S. to help them bring the patrol boats out of mothballs. But imagine mentioning that in a meeting in the Dept. of State under present conditions. Given those attitudes, as we aren't prepared to enter into normal discussion with the Cubans, we aren't prepared to open a dialog with them even in areas such as drug interdiction, areas where it is clearly in our interest, it is unlikely that anyone is going to suggest that we discuss the future status of the Guantanamo naval base. I would only say that 100 years have gone by, yes. I don't think another 100 will pass before we come around to discussing this with the Cubans. Public opinion in the U.S. is now running strongly in favor of having a more normal relationship with Cuba. As is often pointed out and said, if we can have normal trade and diplomatic relations with China and even with Vietnam, where sixty thousand Americans lost their lives, why not with Cuba? And there is simply no convincing response to that question.

Conclusion

Guantanamo is a peculiar place. Like the other side of the moon, it's completely separate. A lot of people don't realize that. When I was on the way to Havana to be chief of the Interests Section, a lot of people asked me, ' I guess you will do your shopping at the PX in Guantanamo naval base.' Well no, that is 600 miles down at the other end of the island. Not only that, but its surrounded by barbed wire entanglements and the largest mine field in the world, and no one comes in or out, except for a few Cuban workers who continue to come through the "cattle shoot" as they called it. I don't think there are any left, if there are, there are only a handful. As the Cuban workers, either retired or died, they replaced them with Jamaicans. So now you have almost daily flights from Jamaica bringing workers up, workers going down on leave, naval personnel going to Jamaica for R&R. The tie now is with Jamaica and not with Cuba. The base is completely independent. It distills its own water; it does not get any food supplies from Cuba. So the base is completely independent. It is isolated, but if you are married, it is a pleasant place to be. You don't even have to tell your kids to be careful playing in the street because no one drives faster than ten miles an hour. There is golf, tennis, swimming, diving, sailing, and so forth. But if you aren't married, you take that plane to Jamaica frequently.

I will close on that because I said I would not get into folklore. I am sure that, when it's possible, and when there is a more appropriate moment, all kinds of stories will be written about life at the Guantanamo naval base.