I don’t mean the the prison, though of course that has some relevance to the discussion, I mean the Navy base itself. We have no military need for it. At this point it’s obviously never going to be used to launch an attack on Castro’s regime, and, post-Cold-War, there’s no longer any obvious need even to keep a close eye on it. If we need to project military power in the Caribbean, we already have a Naval Air Station in Key West that, I’m sure, could easily be expanded to accommodate warships. Or we could set up a new base anywhere on the Florida coasts. The presence of the Guantanamo naval base just annoys the Cubans, and isn’t it about time we started to try to make friends with them?
BTW, we already have an Air Force base in Tampa – MacDill AFB, the HQ of CENTCOM – and lots and lots of unused land on the eastern shore of Old Hillsborough Bay. Congress take note! 
Hell no! USF is already crawling with ROTC, and we don’t need more (the new ROTC Castle nonwithstanding — that thing’s a monstrosity, an abomination).
Um…no. We shouldn’t.
Next question?
-XT
Why not?
Yes. Next.
Because it’s in the US’s best interest to maintain that base there…and it’s in Cuba’s best interest that the US give that base up. But then you knew that. You should have worded your OP as ‘Is it in Cuba’s best interest if the US shuts down the Gitmo Naval base?’…then the answer would be yes.
-XT
It would be a surrender to Communism.
Why do you you hate America?
How?
Because if the U.S did that, it would lead to COMMUNISM!
They would be overjoyed at the symbolic victory, but it wouldn’t make the Cuban state any safer or stronger.
Actually, I think there’s a pretty decent military need for it. When Haitian refugees started flooding the US in the early and mid 90s, Guantanamo began transforming into a refugee camp. Intercepting fleeing Haitians in sinking boats and getting them to a forward base probably saved a lot of lives, and who’s to say we’re not going to see more trouble in Haiti for a long time?
It’s also a great place for counterdrug missions, and has developed important roles in those missions too for Southern Command. So, there’s a lot of stuff going on at Guantanamo.
But if it were closed, there are really no good options. We probably won’t build a new military base for many decades to come for one primary reason: it’s too damn expensive. Seriously? We’re just going to buy up more beachfront property in Florida? Forget it. Between the costs of acquiring property, building stuff, and offsetting local tax revenues, it’s damn expensive to build and run a base in the US. In contrast, we’re paying about $4,000 a year for the rights to GTMO, and Cuba isn’t even cashing the checks. You can be damn sure that even the Impact Aid – the checks that the military writes to local educational authorities to offset loss of real estate taxes – is a hell of a lot more than $4,000 a year.
I have no clue what Cubans think of the base, but I suggest we start trying to make friends by dropping travel restrictions and opening up trade. Once we’ve normalized relations, and our naval base can contribute to the local economy in the same way that our other bases overseas do, then we ask the Cuban people about whether they want all those well-paid sailors and marines spending their money in Cuban-owned businesses. The answer may be different then than it would be now.
Gee, I don’t know BG. It’s on a Naval base on an island in a part of the world where we don’t have a Naval base. It’s on an island who is an unfriendly power to the US but who is forced to honor our having a base there.
How is it NOT in the US’s best interest to have such a base? Even leaving aside the stuff Ravenman brought up?
Or, perhaps it’s just in our best interest to keep a close eye on an unfriendly power, ehe? Whether they be communists or Hottentots…
-XT
There are a number of functions that are taking place, last I’d heard, at Guantanamo that aren’t duplicated at any other east coast bases. Now, some of this is simply that live-fire exercise ranges are easier to get approved when the USN doesn’t have to work through US domestic organizations to get them approved.
I’m also of the impression that Gitmo is still used for some pretty intense Damage Control training for east coast ships, as well.
So, if Gitmo is closed a number of operations will have to be transferred to other bases - which is not impossible, but it is expensive. Similarly, returning Gitmo to Cuban auspices would involve some non-neglible expenses. I doubt that there would be an insistence on environmental remediation, nor do I know whether traditional remediation would be even necessary. Last I heard, however, there are a number of active minefields at the edges of the base/facility that, in good conscience, I cannot condone leaving in place if the US were to leave the facility.
Now, to talk about alternatives for the Naval facilities there - If this were pre-2004 I’d have said that Roosevelt Roads Naval Station would have been the obvious place to transfer things to. But that has been closed. Some of RR’s responsibilities were transferred to Mayport, FL, but I’m not sure just how good a fit that would be for the DC portion of Gitmo’s operations. During the original Peace Dividend closures, Mayport’s Congressional lobby was arguing that it should be taken off the base closure list, and that Norfolk should be closed instead. While, at the same time insisting that they would still refuse to allow Nuclear powered vessels into the port. So, I begin with an exasperated view of Mayport. Unless they’ve changed their stance on nuclear powered vessels, I don’t think they’d be a good fit for many of Gitmo’s training responsibilities.
To sum up, I have no real problem with closing Gitmo, but I’d like to know where the programs being run there, now, will be moved to, first, before I make up my mind. And to know what the costs of transferring those programs would be, compared to continued operations at Gitmo.
Why build a new base? We’ve already got one.
It’s not a drastically important strategic spot right now, but it’s cheap and already built. Why build a new one?
Ravenman makes good points, and certainly Cuba is unfriendly, but not much of a power. Castro has no allies but Chavez, who for all his noise would never contemplate war with his biggest oil customer; and in any case the military superiority of the U.S. WRT both together is so overwhelming that the presence or absence of the Guantanamo base would make little strategic difference in any conflict. We also have the advantage of proximity – at need we could launch forces from Florida, Puerto Rico, and the USVI; Guantanamo Bay is redundant. Castro is no threat to anyone beyond his own shores, and won’t be even that much longer. None of the other Caribbean states are much interested in going Communist. There are no Cuban troops supporting the Zapatista rebels in Mexico. AFAIK there are no Cuban troops abroad anywhere, any more. Cuba is an “unfriendly” state only because we persist in treating it as one – at a time when we’ve long since opened trade with China and Vietnam.
You still haen’t stated any reasons why we should close it. No reason to make nice with Cuba yet. Fidel is mostly dead. Raul is not getting any younger. Better to just lay low on the issue until we see what Cuba will become. Closing and moving the facilities would be expensive. It is used extensively by Coast Guard ships to refuel and refit. We get the use of the land rent free (Catro returns our rent every year). No reason to get rid of it. GTMO is not being used as a staging platform for a future invasion of Cuba. We know it. The Cubans know it. Both sides have drawn down their security forces around the base. The Cubans try to ignore it and we find it useful. Why get rid of it?
Besides you never know when the US might find the urgent need to import Banana Rats.