US President Barck Obama is failing to match his words to his actions, according to one Washington analyst, and his promise to end the Guantanamo "mess" must not lead to detention without trial on American soil.

Phyllis Bennis, Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington and at the Transnational Institute in Amsterdam,was reacting to a Thursday's speech on national security policies in which President Obama vowed he would not retreat on his decision to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center. He called the prison "a mess", saying it had stained America's image abroad and created more terrorists than it detained.

By Louise Dunne, for Radio Netherlands

The president delivered his speech at the US National Archives - a highly symbolic location where the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights are kept. He attacked Bush-era anti-terror tactics, saying they were rooted in fear and ideology. Mr Obama took on critics on the right who believe "anything goes" in the fight against terrorism, as well as allies on the left who, he said, put total transparency above national security.

Reshaping standards
Earlier this week, the US Senate rejected plans to transfer detainees out of Guantanamo Bay and voted against funding the decommissioning of the prison camp. Mr Obama defended his plan, insisting that there was no danger in holding prisoners in maximum-security prisons in the US.

"I am not going to release individuals who endanger the American people. Al-Qaeda terrorists and their affiliates are at war with the United States, and those that we capture, like other prisoners of war, must be prevented from attacking us again. Having said that we must recognize that these detention policies cannot be unbounded...That's why my administration has begun to re-shape the standards that apply, to ensure that they are in line with the rule of law."

This "re-shaping" of standards is an important step, according to Ms Bennis, but she points to the difference between words and actions.

"It was an indication of the growing gap between his extraordinary rhetoric and the very limited approach to implementation of what he stands for in his presidency. The rhetoric is not unimportant because one of the great victories of the Bush administration was in reshaping politically, ideologically and rhetorically how people in the United States see issues of human rights, issues of terrorism and issues of fear. They were very successful at building on the politics of fear."

Disturbing possibility
Mr Obama's language is important in challenging that climate of fear according to Ms Bennis, but his plans don't match his rhetoric. She's particularly critical of the possibility of a new system of long-term detention without trial.

"The US - at least in words - has always condemned that. We are now about to go down the road of countries like Israel, the UK during the period when they were going after Irish prisoners and so many other countries that have allowed and encouraged this kind of detention without trial. And that we would do this under a president who was voted in precisely because he opposed the extremism of the Bush administration is a very disturbing possibility."

Dutch international law expert Geert-Jan Knoops was asked to advise the Obama administration on the closure of Guantanamo, and he's sympathetic to the president's dilemma. One, he says, that's virtually impossible to resolve.

"A single solution to the closure of Guantanamo Bay doesn't exist. It's a question of "damage control", trying to limit the damage done to the judicial system by the Bush administration. Deep down, Mr Obama wants nothing more than to shut the prison and release those against whom no evidence has been found. But the political reality is much tougher than he thought when he took office."

Listen to the interview with Phyllis Bennis