Bergdahl and the President

It is always a good thing when a POW returns home. Regardless of the circumstances, the return of Bowe Bergdahl from the clutches of the Taliban should be met with relief and thankfulness. Though he was most likely a deserter and thus should be subject to military justice, it was important that the US military retrieve him. Even the most wayward soldier deserves to come home.

It is likely that his foolish and careless decision to leave camp and wander into the villages and wilds of Afghanistan indirectly led to the deaths of other American soldiers. However, it is important to remember that the direct responsibility for those deaths lies at the hands of those who pulled the trigger or planted the bombs; i.e. the Taliban. This does not mean Bergdahl is blameless, but it does mean that like many young men, he likely didn’t fully consider the consequences of his actions.

There has already been speculation about the degree of collaboration he had with the Taliban while in captivity. There is no conclusive evidence as to what Bergdahl did or did not say to his captors. But, it is important to remember that collaboration made under duress is a different animal than that given willingly and gleefully. The case of the American POWs in North Vietnam is instructive. Virtually all of them, including John McCain, signed “confessions” made under duress. These were, of course, intended solely as a tool of propaganda and were achieved through torture. Bergdahl certainly deserves the benefit of the doubt on this charge.

I have less compassion for the dishonorable and deceitful way this episode has been handled by the Obama administration. I hesitate to question the deal itself: Five Taliban leaders for one American soldier may not seem fair, but in a situation like this, it was the Taliban that held all the cards. No, the deal may be rotten, but it’s likely the best we could do. What bothers me specifically is the way it was dealt with by the Obama administration.

The White House Rose Garden ceremony stunk of the worst kind of PR stunt. An occasion that called for a quiet transfer of prisoners became a celebration of the Obama administration’s “great” achievement. Trotting out the long-suffering parents and letting the father bizarrely mouth a Muslim benediction to the microphones seemed to be an extremely poor decision. This was a deal not worth celebrating. His return home IS worth celebrating, but the deal itself was not some stroke of brilliance, it was simply the best we could get under the circumstances.

Surely the administration knows full well the circumstances of Bergdahl’s disappearance? Why would they attempt to sugarcoat it? Even worse, National Security Advisor Susan Rice credits Bergdahl as serving with “honor and distinction”, knowing that he, at best, abandoned, and, at worst, deserted his comrades. Then, Defense secretary Chuck Hagel said he was “unaware” of any deaths of soldiers who were looking for Bergdahl, contradicting the claim made my multiple American soldiers who served in Afghanistan. Additionally, Hagel’s claim that Bergdahl’s death was imminent has been disputed by the intelligence community. All the while, President Obama refuses to apologize for his decision.

Some pundits see the prisoner exchange as a cynical way to start emptying Guantanamo. If you start with execrable characters like the ones released in this deal (they were judged as being very likely to continue military activities upon their release), then it becomes easier to release the rest. I very much hope this was not the administration’s motivation.

The most disturbing part of this entire affair has been the administration’s attempt to turn this situation into some sort of political triumph. The president, his cabinet, and his other advisors have attempted to make a hero where none exists and have contorted themselves into impossible positions while doing so. But the worst effect of all this is likely to be Pres. Obama’s relationship with the military. The evidence, based on interviews with Bergdahl’s fellow soldiers, and the anecdotal reports by retired military members speaking with their active colleagues, has been that there is an overwhelmingly negative reaction amongst the military to the administration’s actions. They have foolishly given the appearance of siding with a deserter over active members of the military who stayed true to their oaths.

Sidenote: There has been talk of impeaching President Obama for breaking the law by not informing Congress of the Taliban release. While it is true he did break the law, the law itself is almost certainly unconstitutional. Article 2 of the Constitution gives the president power to conduct foreign policy, not the Congress.

Ridiculous Sidenote: This is how Chuck Norris deals with people who capture American soldiers...