On March 7, 2011, President Barack Obama signed an executive order making a number of changes to policies regarding those detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In a reversal of his previous policy, the order resumes military trials for Gitmo detainees. It also establishes a "periodic review" process for for long-held Guantanamo detainees who have not been charged, convicted or designated for transfer, "but must continue to be detained because they 'in effect, remain at war with the United States,'" according to a White House fact-sheet.



The new policy was viewed by many media outlets as an acknowledgment by the administration that it could not keep Obama's campaign promise to close the Guantanamo facility.



The lede of a Washington Post story said the president's executive order "will create a formal system of indefinite detention for those held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who continue to pose a significant threat to national security" and that the executive order "all but cements Guantanamo Bay's continuing role in U.S. counterterrorism policy."



The New York Times, meanwhile, said that while the order permits military trials to resume, it is also "implicitly admitting the failure of his pledge to close the prison camp."



And ABC News, said the order "sends mixed signals about the future of the controversial detention center and the president's own standing on the issue, experts say."



Although Obama did not mention the fate of Guantanamo in his brief released statement, the accompanying fact-sheet released by the White House maintains that the administration "remains committed to closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay" and makes the case that the policy changes are "in keeping with" the president's long-term strategy toward that end.



But civil rights groups quickly denounced Obama's order as an admission that he has turned his back on his campaign promise.



"While appearing to be a step in the right direction, providing more process to Guantanamo detainees is just window dressing for the reality that today"s executive order institutionalizes indefinite detention, which is unlawful, unwise and un-American," Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union said in a released statement. "The detention of Guantanamo detainees for nine years without charge or trial is a stain on America"s reputation that should be ended immediately, not given a stamp of approval."



"The only way to restore the rule of law is to put an end to indefinite detention at Guantanamo and the broken commissions system, and to prosecute terrorism suspects in federal criminal courts," Romero stated. "Today"s announcement takes us back a step when we should be moving forward toward closing Guantanamo and ending its shameful policies."



Tom Parker, an official with Amnesty International said the administration's insistence that it remains committed to closing Guantanamo is merely "lip service to the things President Obama previously stated."



"It's very clear he is not prepared to make the tough decisions it would require to close it," Parker said.



In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, Parker said, "With the stroke of a pen, President Obama extinguished any lingering hope that his administration would return the United States to the rule of law by referring detainee cases from Guantanamo Bay to federal courts rather than the widely discredited military commissions."



The administration, however, also maintains that it is committed to efforts to try some cases in federal court, despite Congress enacting significant roadblocks to that.



"As the Administration has long stated, it is essential that the government have the ability to use both military commissions and federal courts as tools to keep this country safe," Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said in a released statement. "Unfortunately, some in Congress have unwisely sought to undermine this process by imposing restrictions that challenge the Executive Branch"s ability to bring to justice terrorists who seek to do Americans harm. We oppose those restrictions and will continue to seek their repeal."



That's hardly giving up, many experts argue.



Mason Clutter, policy counsel for the Constitution Project, a bipartisan group that has called for shutting the prison, pointed to a provision of the order that reads: "In the event detainees covered by this order are transferred from Guantanamo to another U.S. detention facility where they remain in law of war detention, this order shall continue to apply to them."



That suggests the administration is still committed to pursuing other alternatives to Guantanamo, Clutter said,



So does she think that will happen by the end of an Obama first term?



"Absolutely not," Clutter said.



There are still 172 people being held at Guantanamo, Clutter said. Congress has pretty well tied the administration's hands, prohibiting prosecution in U.S. federal courts and making it extremely difficult to transfer them to other countries, according to Clutter.



"Even if the review board determines someone should be released," Clutter said, "it will be hard to transfer them out of Guantanamo."



In other words, for the time being, there are no options other than Guantanamo. Until they figure out what to do with all of the detainees, Clutter said, it seems pretty clear they will remain at Guantanamo.



Duke University law professor Scott Silliman thinks it's premature to call this promise broken. The actions taken by Obama seek to reduce the number of detainees at Guantanamo over time. Obama has expanded the review process for those for whom there will never be a criminal trial.



"He hasn't given up on closing Guantanamo Bay," Silliman said. "Obviously, it's not going to happen soon." Given the political reality of the situation, he said, "Guantanamo is probably going to be open for a couple more years."



Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies in Washington, also contests the idea that that Obama's actions amount to an admission that he has broken his promise to close Guantanamo.



"I don't know where it's come from that they've thrown in the towel," Martin said.



The White House has long said it intended to try some of the detainees in military court. Martin said. And it has long maintained that it intended to hold some as law of war detentions (detentions based on legal principles of international law for nations during wartime). She noted that Congress' prohibition on transfers to federal courts in the U.S. expires in September and that Obama ought to have at least until then to change Congress' mind.



We disagree. Obama has now had a full two years in office, and the possibility of keeping this extremely difficult promise seems even more remote now than when his presidency began. Some argue that Congress is largely to blame, while others say Obama simply made a political calculation not to expend too much political capital on it. But blame is not the final arbiter of whether a promise is kept or broken. The administration has clearly not backed off claims that it continues to pursue this promise. But even those who think this promise is merely stalled instead of broken acknowledge that it's unlikely Guantanamo will be closed by the end of Obama's four-year term. We're not inclined to extend the timeline for this promise into a second term when resolution between now and then seems unlikely. We will revisit our rating should the situation change dramatically, but for now, we are moving this to a Promise Broken.