On the Contrary

I was somewhat disappointed this Sunday when I did not see a rational discussion of what to do with the detainees other than the political arguments that are being thrown out there by the Republicans to try to score political points, not solve a problem.  As we are all aware President Obama has proposed closing Guantanamo, which may I add the Republicans in the person of John McCain were fully supportive of till they figured they could use it as a scare tactic.  At any rate President Obama has listed five categories of detainees.  These categories are:

1. Those the courts have ordered released (21 Chinese Muslims who pose no danger to our country and cannot be released back to China)
2. Those that can be “safely” shipped off to another country for detention or rehabilitation
3. Those that can be tried in our Federal court system
4. Those that can be tried by rejuvenated military tribunals for violations of the laws of war (I wonder if Dick Cheney is in this bunch)
5. Those that cannot be tried, pose a danger to this country, and must be held indefinitely

Now the Republicans have begun a fear campaign that sadly the Democrats fell for.  This basically said detainees could not be kept moved to our prisons ignoring the fact that we already keep terrorists and serial killers without one escape.  Be afraid, be afraid, terrorists will soon be loose in your neighborhood.  This is, of course patently ridiculous, but the Demos and a fickle public fell for it.  But this doesn’t address what are we going to do with these guys and solve the real problem of closing Gitmo and finding a path to justice.  From the Republican point of view, apparently the status quo carried out forever is okay.  From President Obama’s point of view, Guantanamo is the symbol of our failure to provide justice and is a rallying point for Jihadists and must be closed.  This was the Republican point of view until they thought they could play politics with the issue which tells you all you need to know about their “patriotism”.

I will attack the first three and leave the last two for tomorrow’s blog.  What I find is that we are not rationally discussing these options and considering realistic outcomes.  We have the 17-21 Muslim Chinese that did nothing wrong and the only place to released them is here since we can’t send them home and other countries are hesitant to clean up our mess.  My thought here is get on with it.  We made a big mistake in our approach to using a big net to scoop up suspected terrorists and just as Fidel Castro made a fool of us with the boat people, our offering bounty for terrorists resulted in this misbegotten incarceration.  Sending them home would be to their death, so we have no choice.  Sometimes there are consequences to your stupidity.

Next let’s look at those who can be safely transferred to other countries for detention and rehabilitation. This is what the Bush administration did to the tune of 525 of them and the Pentagon is now claiming that 1 in 5 returned to the battlefield.  Now this 1 in 5 number is highly suspect since they include anyone who made a video about their captivity as “returning to the battle field”, but let’s say it is correct.  Considering their treatment, 1 in 5 is way better than the recidivism rate we get in our own prison system (roughly1 in 2).  But these fine American politicians who are standing up and saying not in my back yard would have no complaint with sending them home.  So odds are if we send them home, we are going to see some of them again on the battlefield.  Does this mean we should incarcerate them forever and do we have any legal basis for doing so?  How does this solve our problem of bringing them to trail or releasing them which is what our justice system demands?

Next we have the group who can be charged and convicted in our federal courts.  But think about it.  Except for a very few who are mass murders, many would not get sentences that exceed the time already served and then what happens to them?  They get released.  So the “move them to the federal system” only ensures that they get justice according to their crimes and then they too have to be repatriated to their countries where some will be seen on the battlefield once again.

Are you getting the drift here?  Unless they are sentenced to life imprisonment, and a couple will be, but most will not, or we keep them indefinitely at Guantanamo, sooner or later we will have to repatriate them to their countries and then it is their choice whether they rejoin the battle.  Keeping them indefinitely at Guantanamo means our justice system is a sham.  So the obvious conclusion is some will return to the battlefield where they will most likely be killed.  Exactly what is everyone so afraid of?   If justice is to mean anything, we will just have to live with it.  All the scare tactics in the world will not allow us to lock up everyone who might threaten us in the future.  We simply must live by our values and accept that freedom brings some risks.  Hopefully we can gut up and live up to our values.

This issue of arresting people before they can perpetrate a crime is a very troubling thought and is at the heart of preventative detention which I shall tackle tomorrow.  But the real question in a war on terror that may go on for years and years is just what do you do with prisoners?  What are we doing with Taliban caught in Afghanistan?  Food for thought.