Bowe Bergdahl may or may not be a hero, but to hear the
reactionaries tell it, he is definitely a deserter and possibly a traitor. Note
the rush to judgment. Sargent Bergdahl has not had any chance to hear the
accusations against him much less confront his accusers. Prominent conservative
politicians, right-wing talkers, and reactionary bloggers are stampeding to
heap scorn on this American soldier.
Whatever Sargent Bergdahl’s status is ultimately
determined to be, he is an American citizen and a member of our armed forces.
He should not be virtually lynched in public by partisans so fervently seeking
an angle of attack on the president that they cannot restrain themselves. The
man has been subject to the tender mercies of the Taliban for five years. This
could not have been either pleasant or easy. It was what almost every American would,
I’ll wager, consider an ordeal. As is his right, he will be debriefed and may
have his day in court. Under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice the following pertains:
Presumption of Innocence
Under our legal
system, everyone is presumed innocent until a court finds them guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. A court may make a fair and just decision only after it has
heard all the evidence relating to the guilt or innocence of an accused.
This is the equivalent of the normal order of operation
in the civilian legal system. Consequently, Sargent Bergdahl should be welcomed
home and the proper procedures should be allowed to run their due course. Let
us catch our breaths and find it with in our minds and hearts to live up to our
civic ideals in the case of this returning soldier. If we cannot do this, then
what exactly is Sargent Bergdahl and all his brothers and sisters in uniform
supposed to be fighting for?
Obama said, “Let me just make a simple point here:
regardless of the circumstances, whatever those circumstances may turn out to
be, we still get an American soldier back if he’s held in captivity. Period.
Full stop. We don’t condition that.” This is not something the president just
made up for this particular case; it is one of the most enduring and honored
precepts of American military conduct. Why is it a cause of outrage in this
instance? Here’s a hint. It is not truly because of Sargent Bergdahl or the
five Taliban members exchanged for him.
“The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution and UCMJ,
Article 10, guarantee the right to a speedy trial. The accused soldier has the
right to be advised of the charges against him as early as possible. Normally,
the accused must come to trial within 120 days of either arrest or preferral of
charges, whichever is earlier.”
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/27-1/Ch1.htm Sargent Bergdahl was
debilitated when he was returned, so he has hardly been in a condition to
participate in the rebuttal of charges against him if any are preferred.
Nonetheless, he and every member of our armed forces should not be charged, let
alone, tried, convicted, or sentenced through a partisan incited media maelstrom.
Taliban delegates, with whom U.S. officials negotiated in
Qatar over the fate of Sgt. Bergdahl, represent a political faction and a
military force in Afghanistan; they are enemy combatants, not terrorists. The
Taliban are fanatical; their ideals are benighted; their practices are abhorrent.
They are oppressors of those under their power and our bitter adversaries, but
they are not terrorists. Before the Americans drove the Taliban from power,
they were the rulers of Afghanistan. The United States is still fighting a war in
Afghanistan, and the Taliban are our enemies in that war. Bergdahl was not a
“hostage”. He was a prisoner of war, and what happened on May 31 was an
exchange of POWs. Now that Sargent Bergdahl is recovered from captivity, his
rights and responsibilities as an American citizen and service member kick in
in full force.
The Bergdahl family endured five years of dreadful stress
while their son was a prisoner of war. We owe them empathy and goodwill now
that Bowe is in the process of returning to the United States. The attacks on this
family, especially the father, show the viciousness of which hyperpartisans are
capable. One has gone so far as to claim, Bowe’s father “claimed the White
House for Allah.” This preposterous claim was based on the opening remark Bob
Bergdahl made which included a Pashto phrase: Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem which means In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Allah is the
Arabic word for God; it is not a name. Therefore, simply think “In the name of
God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.” This formulation would have evoked no
outrage whatsoever.
The reactionaries are gleefully broadcasting accusations
of desertion against Bowe Bergdahl. This is shameful for a number of reasons.
First, desertion is a very specific charge under U.S. military law. It is not a
charge that is made lightly and it is not a charge that is proven easily. “As
former Judge Advocate General Lawyer and South Texas College of Law professor
Geoffrey Corn,” a conviction for desertion under military law requires very
specific, narrow criteria be met. “The
prosecutor would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bergdahl ‘quit
his unit with intent to remain absent permanently.’” That intent would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Even an
AWOL conviction is not assured. Conviction
for AWOL only requires proof that a soldier left his unit without permission.
Because of the time that has elapsed, however, it would be difficult to piece
together interviews of members of Bergdahl’s unit to definitively describe
circumstances of his leaving.
Furthermore, conviction on any charge comes only after a
person is charged. Thus, far Sargent Bergdahl has not been charged with
anything. He was never designated as
a deserter or taken off of the army's rolls. In fact, he was promoted to sergeant in absentia. This action hardly seems likely
toward a person the army considered a villain in any substantive manner. The allegations
and assertions roiling about in the media and on the Internet are bereft of evidentiary
substance and due process that pertain to criminal prosecution. As Americans,
all of us have a civic and ethical duty to resist a rush to judgment. The
recurrent failure of some many to fulfill these duties has not rescinded them.
Our fellow American deserves respect for his full panoply of civil rights under
both military law and our foundational ideals.
Letting this shrieking frenzy
go uncontested does severe harm to this soldier and his family. He is finally safe
and hopefully recovering. What possible justification can there be for the fury
that has followed his return? Whatever he did or did not do, he deserves the
chance to regain his strength, find his bearings, and make strides toward
normalcy. Furthermore, libeling and slandering him and his family are
deplorable actions especially when they are done largely to camouflage
political attacks on President Obama. Over and above all the other factors that
are wrong with the reactionary response to Sargent Bergdahl’s return, the
transparent ulterior motivation adds insult to the potential injury.
One of the most severe
aspersions cast on Sargent Bergdahl is the allegation that his departure caused
others to die trying to recover him. The problem with this is it does not seem
to conform to the evidence. On June 3, 2014, the New York Times reported:
“A
review of the database of casualties in the Afghan war suggests that Sergeant
Bergdahl’s critics appear to be blaming him for every American soldier killed
in Paktika Province in the four-month period that followed his disappearance.”
The main search for Sargent
Bergdahl lasted 8 days and ended on 8 July 2009. “No one on this assignment was officially pronounced as a casualty
during its tenure, nor, ultimately, at any point in time.” Nearly two months later, “two members of Third
Platoon lost their lives (Bergdahl was with Second Platoon), and rank and file
service personnel of Second Platoon apparently believed that Third Platoon's
mission at the time involved the search for Sergeant Bergdahl. But this is not
confirmed by official records. Considering that the official search period
concluded almost two months before these deaths, reliable sources say it is
unlikely that they happened due to any attempt to recover Sargent Bergdahl.
Another vehement objection raised
is that the five Taliban members freed from Guantanamo were the “worst of the
worst.” This seems debatable in that they were never charged during their years
of incarceration. Considering the fact that in August of 2008, “A military jury today found Salim Ahmed
Hamdan Osama bin Laden’s driver, guilty
of material support for terrorism but innocent of conspiracy charges,’” how bad
could these five have been if they were never even charged with anything?
Even by the debased standards of 21st
century American political discourse, the tirades following Sargent Bergdahl’s
return have been disgraceful. “U.S. officials secured the release of an
American prisoner of war and for much of the right; the first instinct was to
condemn the president. The second instinct was to smear the prisoner and the
third instinct was to vilify the prisoner’s dad as a Muslim covert and
veritable traitor.” In the ceaseless effort by reactionaries to discredit the
president.
If one thinks the “ceaseless effort”
descriptor is excessive, consider these comments by U.S. Attorney General
Michael Mukasey who contended President Obama had the Constitutional authority
to make the exchange for Sargent Bergdahl: “"He broke the law, but I
believe that the law itself is unconstitutional," Mukasey said, referring
to Obama's apparent failure to give Congress 30 days' notice before approving
the prisoner exchange "Article II [of the U.S. Constitution] makes him
commander in chief of the armed forces. These people were in the custody of the
armed forces. "It's [the law] unconstitutional, and Obama said so at the
time that he signed it." Nevertheless,
Mukasey suggested that Congress could
still impeach the president for agreeing to release five Taliban prisoners of
war in exchange for Bergdahl, saying that “elected officials do not need to
commit crimes to be impeached.” Astonishing as it should be, Mr. Mukasey is
wrong. “The Constitution sets specific grounds for impeachment. They
are “treason, bribery, and other high
crimes and misdemeanors.” To be impeached and removed from office, the
House and Senate must find that the official committed one of these acts.” Neither
facts nor fairness impede the reactionary hate campaign against the president
as this disinformation from a Republican former Attorney General proves.
Infamous, venomous, hyperbolic mendacity is
routine for the reactionaries among us, but they have plunged to new depths in
this latest effort. The agitation ginned
up toward Sargent Bergdahl and thus the president, harms the country and the
body politic. Those inciting this rapacious indignation do not care in the
slightest about the harm they do. For them, the only considerations are TV
ratings and potential political advantage.
As a resident of Sargent Bergdahl’s hometown rightly observes: “Fox has
been horrible. I'm a conservative but I'm disgusted by how they're trashing
him,” said Lee Ann Ferris, an interior designer who lives near the Bergdahls’
wood cabin five miles out of town. “It's
a modern-day lynch mob.”
As long as there are rating points and
election votes to be gained, media demagogues and political opportunists will
push and publicize poisonous allegations and alarmist speculations. It is up to
truly patriotic, decent Americans to denounce these manipulations and
machinations. The quality of our civilization is dependent on the benevolence
and sanity of our politics. The quality of our politics in turn depends on our
general willingness to constructively participate and resolutely demand that
the common good is its abiding objective and genuine civility is its enduring
spirit.
The people who volunteer for America’s armed
services and go into harm’s way deserve better. The Republic to which the vast
majority of us repeatedly vowed allegiance deserves better. The children in
whose name and interest we must preserve all that makes America a promise
rather than a plague deserve better. Whatever duly empowered authorities
ultimately determine, we must rally to the defense of Sargent Bergdahl and his
family, lest grave harm be inflicted America due to mob action toward him. How
the saga of Sargent Bergdahl plays out will tell far more about us and the land
we claim to love than it will about him. Let us stand up for what makes America
deserving of admiration around the world and ensure that history will judge our
deeds to have been of the highest caliber.
A good start to assuring that we are well
remembered would be to heed President Obama’s words from the video that
follows.
http://youtu.be/xwZKiH4Egdc
