Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Pres. Obama Delivers Statement on Plan to Close Guantanamo Bay. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired February 23, 2016 - 10:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:21] CAROL CASTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Good morning. I'm Carol Castello. Thank you so much for joining me. You see the Roosevelt Room that's in the White House, that any moment now the President Barack Obama will deliver a statement on his long awaited plan to close Guantanamo Bay.

The White House just deliver that plan rather to Congress keeping Guantanamo Bay open is quite expensive because so many (inaudible) bill last year $445 million.

Athena Jones live at the White House with more. Good morning, Athena.

ATHENA JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Carol. This of course was an early promise made by the president. One of this first step he took when we took office was to sign an executive order to begin the process of closing Guantanamo Bay. But of course he's been (inaudible) all along facing stiff opposition from Congress from the start.

There's no real indication that's expected to change. But what's in this plan? We're talking about 91 detainees who still remain at Guantanamo Bay. What to do with them about? Ten would be prosecuted. Others would be transferred to other countries. The rest will be transferred to. I still yet to be named 13 possible facilities...

CASTELLO: All right, Athena. Athena, the president has come out. Let's listen.

BARACK OBAMA, (D), U.S. PRESIDENT: In our fight against terrorists like al Qaeda and ISIL, we are using every element of our national power -- our military; intelligence; diplomacy; homeland security; law enforcement, federal, state and local; as well as the example of our ideals as a country that's committed to universal values, including rule of law and human rights.

In this fight, we learn and we work to constantly improve. When we find something that works, we keep on doing it. When it becomes clear that something is not working as intended -- when it does not advance our security, we have to change course.

For many years, it's been clear that the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay does not advance our national security, it undermines it. This is not just my opinion. This is the opinion of experts. This is the opinion of many in our military. It's counterproductive to our fight against terrorists, because they use it as propaganda in their efforts to recruit. It drains military resources, with nearly $450 million spent last year alone to keep it running, and more than $200 million in additional costs needed to keep it open going forward for less than 100 detainees. Guantanamo harms our partnerships with allies and other countries whose cooperation we need against terrorism. When I talk to other world leaders, they bring up the fact that Guantanamo is not resolved.

Moreover, keeping this facility open is contrary to our values. It undermines our standing in the world. It is viewed as a stain on our broader record of upholding the highest standards of rule of law. As Americans, we pride ourselves on being a beacon to other nations, a model of the rule of law. But 15 years after 9/11, 15 years after the worst terrorist attack in American history, we're still having to defend the existence of a facility and a process where not a single verdict has been reached in those attacks -- not a single one.

When I first ran for President, it was widely recognized that this facility needed to close. This was not just my opinion. This was not some radical, far-left view. There was bipartisan support to close it. My predecessor, President Bush, to his credit, said he wanted to close it. It was one of the few things that I and my Republican opponent, Senator John McCain, agreed on.

And so, in one of my first acts as President, I took action to begin closing it. And because we had bipartisan support, I wanted to make sure that we did it right. I indicated that we would need to take our time to do it in a systematic way, and that we had examined all the options.

[10:35:04] And unfortunately, during that period where we were putting the pieces in place to close it, what had previously been bipartisan support suddenly became a partisan issue. Suddenly, many you previously had said it should be closed backed off because they were worried about the politics. The public was scared into thinking that, well, if we close it, somehow we'll be less safe. And since that time, Congress has repeatedly imposed restrictions aimed at preventing us from closing this facility.

Now, despite the politics, we've made progress. Of the nearly 800 detainees once held at Guantanamo, more than 85 percent have already been transferred to other countries. More than 500 of these transfers, by the way, occurred under President Bush. Since I took office, we've so far transferred 147 more, each under new, significant restrictions to keep them from returning to the battlefield. And as a result of these actions, today, just 91 detainees remain, less than 100.

Today, the Defense Department, thanks to very hard work by Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, as well as his team, working in concert with the Office of Management and Budget, today, the Department is submitting to Congress our plan for finally closing the facility at Guantanamo once and for all. It's a plan that reflects the hard work of my entire national security team, so I especially want to thank Ash and his team at DOD. This plan has my full support. It reflects our best thinking on how to best go after terrorists and deal with those who we may capture, and it is a strategy with four main elements.

First, we'll continue to securely and responsibly transfer to other countries the 35 detainees out of the 91 that have already been approved for transfer. Keep in mind, this process involves extensive and careful coordination across our federal government to ensure that our national security interests are met when an individual is transferred to another country. So, for example, we insist that foreign countries institute strong security measures. And as we move forward, that means that we will have around 60 and potentially even fewer detainees remaining.

Second, we'll accelerate the periodic reviews of remaining detainees to determine whether their continued detention is necessary. Our review board, which includes representatives from across government, will continue to look at all relevant information, including current intelligence. And if certain detainees no longer pose a continuing significant threat, they may be eligible for transfer to another country as well.

Number three, we'll continue to use all legal tools to deal with the remaining detainees still held under law of war detention. Currently, 10 detainees are in some stage of the military commissions process, a process that we worked hard to reform in my first year in office with bipartisan support from Congress. But I have to say, with respect to these commissions, they are very costly, they have resulted in years of litigation without a resolution. We're therefore outlining additional changes to improve these commissions, which would require congressional action, and we will be consulting with them in the near future on that issue.

I also want to point out that, in contrast to the commission process, our Article 3 federal courts have proven to have an outstanding record of convicting some of the most hardened terrorists. These prosecutions allow for the gathering of intelligence against terrorist groups. It proves that we can both prosecute terrorists and protect the American people. So think about it, terrorists like Richard Reid, the shoe bomber; Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who tried to blow up an airplane over Detroit; Faisal Shahzad, who put a car bomb in Times Square; and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who bombed the Boston Marathon. They were all convicted in our Article III courts and are now behind bars, here in the United States.

[10:40:10] So, we can capture terrorists, protect the American people, and when done right, we can try them and put them in our maximum security prisons, and it works just fine. And in this sense, the plan we're putting forward today isn't just about closing the facility at Guantanamo. It's not just about dealing with the current group of detainees, which is a complex piece of business because of the manner in which they were originally apprehended and what happened. This is about closing a chapter in our history. It reflects the lessons that we've learned since 9/11 -- lessons that need to guide our nation going forward.

So even as we use military commissions to close out the cases of some current detainees which given the unique circumstances of their cases make it difficult for them to be tried in Article 3 courts. This type of use of military commissions should not set a precedent for the future. As they have been in past wars, military commissions will continue to be an option when individuals are detained during battle. But our preferred option, the most effective option for dealing with individuals detained outside military theaters, must be our strong, proven federal courts.

Fourth, and finally, we're going to work with Congress to find a secure location in the United States to hold remaining detainees. These are detainees who are subject to military commissions, but it also includes those who cannot yet be transferred to other countries or who we've determined must continue to be detained because they pose a continuing significant threat to the United States.

We are not identifying a specific facility today in this plan. We are outlining what options look like. As Congress has imposed restrictions that currently prevent the transfer of detainees to the United States, we recognize that this is going to be a challenge. And we're going to keep making the case to Congress that we can do this is a responsible and secure way, taking into account the lessons and great record of our maximum-security prisons.

And let me point out, the plan we're submitting today is not only the right thing to do for our security, it will also save money. The Defense Department estimates that this plan, compared to keeping Guantanamo open, would lower costs by up to $85 million a year. Over 10 years, it would generate savings of more than $300 million. Over 20 years, the savings would be up to $1.7 billion. In other words, we can ensure our security, uphold our highest values around the world, and save American taxpayers a lot of money in the process.

So in closing, I want to say I am very clear-eyed about the hurdles to finally closing Guantanamo. The politics of this are tough. I think a lot of the American public are worried about terrorism, and in their mind the notion of having terrorists held in the United States rather than in some distant place can be scary. But part of my message to the American people here is we're already holding a bunch of really dangerous terrorists here in the United States because we threw the book at them. And there have been no incidents. We've managed it just fine.

And in Congress, I recognize, in part because of some of the fears of the public that have been fanned oftentimes by misinformation, there continues to be a fair amount of opposition to doing closing Guantanamo. If it were easy, it would have happened years ago -- as I wanted, as I have been working to try to get done. But there remains bipartisan support for closing it. And given the stakes involved for our security, this plan deserves a fair hearing. Even in an election year, we should be able to have an open, honest, good-faith dialogue about how to best ensure our national security.

[10:45:14] And the fact that I'm no longer running, Joe is no longer running, we're not on the ballot, it gives us the capacity to not have to worry about the politics. Let us do what is right for America. Let us go ahead and close this chapter. And do it right, and do it carefully, and do it in a way that makes sure we're safe. But gives the next president and more importantly, future generations, the ability to apply the lessons we've learned in the fight against terrorism and doing it in a way that it doesn't raise some of the problems that Guantanamo has raised.

I really think there's an opportunity here for progress. I believe we've got an obligation to try it.

President Bush, said he wanted to close Guantanamo, despite everything that he had invested in it. I give him credit for that. There was an honest assessment on his part about what needed to happen. But he didn't get it done, and it was passed to me.

I've been working for seven years now to get this thing closed. As president, I have spent countless hours dealing with this. I do not exaggerate about that. Our closest allies raise it with me continually. They often raise specific cases of detainees repeatedly. I don't want to pass this problem on to the next president, whoever it is.

And if as a nation we don't deal with this now, when will we deal with it? Are we going to let this linger on for another 15 years, another 20 years, another 30 years?

If we don't do what's required now, I think future generations are going to look back and ask why we failed to act when the right course, the right side of history and justice and our best American traditions was clear.

So, again, I want to thank Secretary Carter, you and your team did an outstanding job and you've shown great leadership on this issue.

With this plan we have the opportunity to finally eliminate a terrorist propaganda tool, strengthen relationships with allies and partners, enhance our national security and most importantly uphold the values that bind us as Americas.

I'm absolutely committed to closing the detention facility at Guantanamo. I'm continue going to make the case for doing so as long as I hold this office. But this is a good moment for everybody to step back, take a look at the facts, take a look at the views of those who have been most committed to fighting terrorism and understand this stuff, our operatives, our intelligence officials, our military. Let's go ahead and get this thing done.

Thanks very much, everybody.

COSTELLO: All right, I don't think the president is going to accept any questions from the crowd of reporters there. But you heard his plan to close Guantanamo Bay, and we're going to talk about that because there's a lot of controversy surrounding this.

With me now to discuss, Athena Jones, Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr, Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, our CNN Military Analyst, Paul Callan our Military Analyst and on the phone I have Congressman Mark Meadows, he's from North Carolina, he's on the house oversight and government reform subcommittee on government operations.

Congressman, I'd like to start with you because you're opposed to closing Guantanamo Bay. The president will have his defense secretary deliver a report on the plan to close the facility. Will you read it?

REP. MARK MEADOWS (R), NORTH CAROLINA: Well, certainly. You can't really weigh in on anything that you don't read, but just adhering the president make these announcements just now, you know, several of his objectives, I don't see how they're going to be accomplished by closing Gitmo.

I mean if it's being used as a recruiting tool, how would placing them in a maximum security prison in the U.S. actually address that?

You know, it's essentially releasing these Gitmo terrorist amounts to granting amnesty to terrorists. And I've been down there. They would return to the battle field. Some say more than a third of them return and pose a great national security threat.

So am I opposed to it? Yes. I think the American people are opposed to it, and certainly we need to have some answers.

COSTELLO: The president also said his plan would save the government taxpayers, the American taxpayers between $290 and $475 million a year. Is that enough to justify closing Guantanamo?

[10:50:03] MEADOWS: Well -- when, oh, yeah what price do we put on our national security in when we start to look at that, that's over a 10 to 20 year period. So it's $85 million. That's a rounding area in Washington D.C. when we spend some $600 billion a year on defense alone.

And I can tell you that certainly I'm a fiscal Conservative. I want to make sure we're making the best financial decisions, but as we start to look at this, you know, what he didn't mention is that out of the people that have been released, we know that Sheikh al Sudani is now an al-Qaeda leader in Yemen and was actually in detention there at Gitmo.

We need to close it, but we need to close it by bringing them to justice and having them go before a military tribunal. And we've been spending millions of dollars on attorneys to defend them, and yet, here we are trying to make a political statement instead of really addressing the concern for all of this as Americans. It is bipartisan. We do want to make sure that our homeland is secure.

But I can tell you having been down there, we don't even let the military men and women who guard them have their real names on their fatigues for the potential of retribution from these hardened terrorists that are there. And so, you know ...

COSTELLO: So, Congressman. What do we do then? What is the answer? There's 91 prisoners left at Guantanamo Bay. Do we just leave them there or continue to use the facility? What should happen? MEADOWS: Well, I think that, you know, I was there when there was over 150, and what we've essentially been doing, and those were supposedly the worst of the worst. And I can tell you that they appeared to be that way just based on some of the things I'd read.

So what we need to do is make sure that, indeed, that they have their day in front of a military tribunal. I'm not for indefinite detention. But in order to release them, there would have to be a completion of hostilities. We're still in a fight against terrorism. You know, he wants to say we can turn our back on 9/11.

Well, if the terrorist attacks stop, then indeed it's time we do that, but they continue to happen also here, you know, as recent as San Bernardino in Ohio. We've got to make sure that we address this that keeps Americans safe.

This plan won't do this. It just transfers the liability from Gitmo to the United States which is something that law says that we can't do, and certainly something I don't support.

COSTELLO: All right, Congressman Meadows, thank you for joining me this morning.

I want to go to General Mark Hertling, now. You heard what the congressman said. Will closing Guantanamo Bay just send the terrorists back on the field to attack Americans in another place?

GEN. MARK HERTLING (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: There is certainly, carol, a recidivism effect to a certain percentage of these prisoners. We have seen that in the past, and you can cite that there have been numbers, not large numbers, but numbers of these individuals who have been detained but who did not have proof in terms of terrorist action released or placed in another country.

Yes, that is true. So you have to argue that point. But in fact, what I would contend, having been on battle fields, having been overseas in multiple assignments, yes, this is a bane on American society that we're holding people illegally in an offshore facility.

Other people in the world to include the Middle East, say "Hey America is a land of opportunity, and it is a land of freedom based on rule of law. Why do you have this prison here?" If these people have violated the law, why don't you put them in their prisons? Why don't you try them?

And that's what we've been attempting to do in releasing some of them that have had recidivism rates, there are others that we have held onto, that in fact, there's evidence against them and they will be tried. But where they're held is critically important.

We have a very dangerous prisoners in a lot of military detention facilities throughout our country. We have very dangerous prisoners in a lot of federal correctional institutions around our country.

It just makes no sense to me as a soldier that we maintain this prisoner of war facility which is what it is in a war that's going to continue to go on for a very long time.

COSTELLO: All right, I want to head to the White House for just a second and talk with Athena Jones because it didn't take long Marco Rubio and two other senators are going to introduce a bill to stop this before they've ever read the report prepared by the secretary of defense.

So maybe -- I mean, I surely the president expected this, though.

JONES: Surely he did. You heard him say Carol that he's very clear- eyed about the politics of this there are restrictions in place by congress. If it were easy, it would already have been done.

[10:55:03] The fact is that Rubio and these other senator don't need to introduce a bill, because current legislation, a current law to defense bills the president signed included language of the banned any transfer to the U.S. But you can see that politics are going to play heavily into this even before the president took to the podium.

We heard from Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell on the senate floor saying this is a campaign promise the president made when he was a senator back in 2008. McConnell called it an ill considered crusade to close the security of detention facility at Guantanamo.

Now Senator McConnell said they will review the plan. But when it comes to congress weighing in, bipartisan will of congress has already been expressed against that proposal that he's referring to those that language in those defense bills.

So this is going to be a very, very steep hill to climb for the president. He acknowledged it over and over again.

What's interesting I thought Carol is that you didn't hear any mention of unilateral action or executive action, two dirty words to a lot of certainly Republicans on Capitol Hill, the White House in the past has left the door open saying that he could potentially do that. But now we're seeing more emphasis on working with congress. Carol?

COSTELLO: All right, Athena Jones, thanks. And thanks to all of my guests.

I have to take a break. I'll be back with much more in the NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)