The Cuban–American Treaty was signed on February 17, 1903, by the first president of Cuba, Tomás Estrada Palma, and on February 23, 1903, by the president of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt. The treaty stipulates that Republic of Cuba will perpetually lease to the United States the Guantánamo Bay area (surrounding areas of land and water) for the purpose of coaling and naval stations. The United States will have absolute jurisdiction and control over the area and in return will recognize the Republic of Cuba's ultimate sovereignty over the area. Cuban vessels involved in trade or war will have free passage through the waters.
The treaty actually fell short of the original desires of both the United States government and its military cabinet.[1] Their aim was to accomplish the leasing to the United States of a total of four naval bases located in strategically favorable port areas of Cuba, including Guantánamo Bay. The other three were Bahia Honda (close to the Cuban capital of Havana), Cienfuegos, and Nipe Bay.[1] The Isle of Pines was also considered for annexation into the U.S. This separate situation arose from a dispute because the island was not specifically mentioned in the Platt Amendment which defined Cuba's modern boundaries.
The government of Cuba believes it to be in violation of article 52 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which declares a treaty void if its conclusion has been procured by the threat or use of force.[2] However, Article 4 of the same document states that Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties shall not be retroactively applied to any treaties made before itself.[3] The treaty was part of the Platt Amendment, conditions for the withdrawal of United States troops remaining in Cuba since the Spanish–American War. Professor Alfred-Maurice de Zayas also argues that the United States has broken the terms of the treaty by allowing commercial use of the land and not giving Cuba ultimate sovereignty over the area.[4]
The ongoing detention of prisoners at the base is in itself said to constitute a violation of the original treaty, which explicitly states that the United States is allowed "generally to do any and all things necessary to fit the premises for use as coaling or naval stations only, and for no other purpose." Such argument thus hinges upon whether detention of prisoners is a valid role of a naval or coaling station.