Human Rights Groups Oppose U.S. Guantánamo Detention Plan

U.S. Sanctions and the Migration Crisis

The United Nations issued a warning in February 2026 that Cuba could face a humanitarian crisis due to U.S. sanctions and economic restrictions. These measures, including fuel and goods blockades, have led to power outages, food shortages, and limited medical supplies. The U.S. embargo, in place since 1960 and continued under the Trump administration, has worsened the situation, with Cuba accusing Washington of engaging in economic warfare. Russia’s recent oil exports have temporarily eased the strain, but the embargo remains active, according to Truthout. Human rights organizations argue that the sanctions are the primary cause of the migration crisis, as Cubans seek to escape deteriorating living conditions. The Trump administration’s refusal to lift the embargo has drawn criticism, with some calling it a policy of coercion that drives the exodus.

Guantánamo Bay’s Role in Immigration Detention

General Francis Donovan, head of the U.S. Southern Command, stated that the Pentagon would establish a detention facility at Guantánamo Bay to manage potential mass migration from Cuba. This plan has faced strong opposition from human rights groups, who warn that the facility’s history of legal violations and inhumane treatment makes it unsuitable for migrant detention. The Guardian reported that the administration’s strategy to use Guantánamo as a detention hub is part of a broader approach to immigration control through ‘coercive and punitive policies,’ which critics claim ignore the root causes of the crisis. The UN’s warning in February aligns with these concerns, emphasizing the need for diplomatic solutions to the humanitarian emergency in Cuba.

“the Pentagon would establish a detention facility at Guantánamo Bay to manage potential mass migration from Cuba”

A History of Controversy

Guantánamo Bay, a U.S. military base leased from Cuba since 1903, has been used for immigration detention under legal ambiguities. The Migrant Operations Center (MOC), jointly managed by the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, has detained migrants intercepted at sea for decades. Established in the 1990s, the MOC has operated under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which permits the military to detain individuals deemed threats to national security. In 2025, the Trump administration expanded Guantánamo’s role in immigration enforcement, sending 780 immigrants to the base since February 2025. Many were detained for weeks without legal representation or adequate medical care. Truthout noted that the MOC’s conditions have been described as ‘inhumane,’ with reports of overcrowding, poor sanitation, and insufficient food supplies. Critics argue the facility’s infrastructure is ill-suited for long-term detention, with aging buildings and unreliable utilities increasing risks for detainees.

Legal and Human Rights Concerns

The administration’s use of Guantánamo for immigration control has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts and human rights advocates. The MOC’s operations, conducted under the AUMF, have been criticized for enabling indefinite detention without due process. The Guardian reported that three detainees cleared for release in 2025 remained indefinitely held, raising concerns about arbitrary detention. This expansion of Guantánamo’s role in immigration enforcement has been labeled a systemic erosion of rule of law, with opponents arguing it violates international human rights standards. In February 2025, the administration had planned to erect tents at Guantánamo to detain up to 30,000 migrants but abandoned the effort due to logistical challenges.

“deeply troubling and unacceptable”

International Condemnation

Dozens of U.S. and international human rights organizations have condemned the Trump administration’s plan to establish a migrant camp at Guantánamo Bay. A letter to Congress signed by 85 groups, including the Center for Constitutional Rights and Amnesty International, called the proposal ‘deeply troubling and unacceptable.’ The letter urged lawmakers to ‘ensure not another dollar goes towards the detention facilities at Guantánamo‘ and to ‘end the coercive and punitive policy of sanctions and the embargo.’ These groups argue that Guantánamo’s history of abuse, including its role in the post-9/11 detention program, makes it an unsuitable site for migrant detention. Truthout highlighted the groups’ focus on ending the embargo as a key step in resolving the crisis, emphasizing that the sanctions are the primary cause of the migration surge.

Calls for Diplomatic Solutions

Michael Galant of the Center for Economic and Policy Research has criticized the administration’s approach, arguing that lifting the embargo and ending the fuel blockade would address the migration crisis. The letter to Congress also noted that the MOC’s operations have been criticized for poor treatment of detainees, with private contractors managing the facility facing scrutiny over their handling of migrants. Human rights advocates warn that detaining Cubans at Guantánamo would cause irreparable harm, citing the facility’s lack of medical care, inadequate living conditions, and risk of prolonged detention. These groups are calling for an immediate halt to the expansion of Guantánamo’s role in immigration enforcement and a shift toward diplomatic solutions to the crisis.

Global Criticism and the Path Forward

The U.S. plan to use Guantánamo Bay for migrant detention has drawn widespread international criticism, with the United Nations and other global bodies condemning the move as a violation of human rights. The UN’s February warning about Cuba’s potential humanitarian collapse has been echoed by diplomats and human rights organizations, who argue that the U.S. blockade is the root cause of the migration crisis. Truthout noted that the administration’s focus on anti-immigration policies has overshadowed the need for a diplomatic approach to the crisis. Critics argue that the use of Guantánamo as a detention hub represents a systemic erosion of rule of law, with policies like invoking the Alien Enemies Act and using national security authorities to target immigrants further undermining legal protections.

Legal experts warn that the expansion of Guantánamo’s role in immigration enforcement could set a dangerous precedent for the treatment of migrants globally. The MOC’s operations, conducted under the AUMF, have been criticized for their lack of transparency and accountability, with detainees often held without due process. The Guardian reported that the administration’s plan to use the base for mass migration management has been met with skepticism from legal scholars, who argue it violates international humanitarian law. The international community is calling for an end to the use of Guantánamo for detention and a commitment to addressing the humanitarian crisis in Cuba through diplomatic means rather than punitive measures.

A Call for Humanitarian Engagement

The debate over the U.S. plan to use Guantánamo Bay for migrant detention highlights a broader conflict between diplomatic solutions and coercive policies. Human rights groups and international bodies argue that the administration’s focus on sanctions and detention is exacerbating the crisis, while critics of the embargo claim lifting it would be a step toward resolving the migration surge. Truthout emphasized the need for a humanitarian approach to the crisis, with the UN and other organizations calling for an end to the blockade and a commitment to dialogue with Cuba. The Trump administration’s expansion of Guantánamo’s role in immigration enforcement has been criticized as a systemic erosion of rule of law, with opponents warning that it undermines international human rights standards. The path forward will require a shift from punitive measures to diplomatic engagement, with the U.S. needing to address the root causes of the migration crisis rather than focusing on containment. The international community is urging the U.S. to prioritize diplomacy over detention, emphasizing that the solution to the crisis lies in lifting the embargo and addressing the economic and political conditions in Cuba.