Who Loves Guantanamo?

In an article in Financial Times today, it was reported that:

"Republicans yesterday pointed to reports that a former Guantanamo Bay prisoner had become a top al-Qaeda operative in Yemen to cast fresh doubt about President Barack Obama's plan to close the prison."

Even the US penal system, a global laughing stock, releases prisoners when they finish with their sentence. In fact, prisoners are typically released early and placed on parole. The average felon completes only 15% of his or her sentence in prison before being placed on supervised release. High recidivism rates in the US point to the failure of prison as a formative rehabilitative experience. However, don't we still release these prisoners in accordance with their sentences?

Why, then, is concern of recidivism among Guantanamo prisoners a legitimate argument towards keeping the prison open? I use the word recidivism liberally, as many or most of the prisoners are guilty only of arousing suspicion or having too close proximity to foreign terrorist institutions. Most haven't been sentenced, nor have they been given any sort of tribunal or trial to define what it is they actually did, a precursor to culpability even being discussed, let alone systematically determined.

Arguing that Guantanamo remain open for fear of detainees reverting against America (Surprisingly, after being imprisoned indefinitely against their will without access to US due process and without communication with their families for years, many will be taking the Pledge of Allegiance out of their daily routines.) retains traction only because of the politically-charged buzz word, terrorism, and the undue fear it arouses.

These same republicans would never argue that we indefinitely extend, in violation of the US constitution, the prison terms of American prisoners for fear of potential repeat offenses. Their equivalent argument for Guantanamo detainees should be promptly disregarded.