For John, BLUF: Leave no one behind. Nothing to see here; just move along.
But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.♠The tradition in the US military is that we leave no one behind. We have done some pretty hairy things in pursuit of that goal. There is glory to spare. For example, on 2 June 1972, General John Vogt, Commander of Seventh Air Force, in Saigon, shut down the air war over North Viet-nam to rescue Captain Roger Locker, who had been on the ground, near Hanoi, for 23 days before he was plucked to safety.
So, the President agreeing to swap five Taliban from Guantanamo Bay for one US Army soldier, Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, makes sense to me. Sure, Sergeant Bergdahl wasn't captured in battle, but probably when he wander off into a place he shouldn't have been. But, he is one of ours. He was lost and now he is returned to us.
Yes, we paid a high price. Someone I know provided the following information:
The brain trust of the Taliban was significantly increased by this release.He then notes that those who will pay the price for this swap will be the Afghani Government and especially its military and police.Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhawa -- former interior minister and help to create the Taliban
Mullah Mohammad Fazl -- chief of staff of the Taliban Army
Mullah Norullah Noori -- member of the prison riot that killed CIA officer Spann
Abdul Haq Wasiq -- deputy chief of Intelligence
Mohammadd Nabi Omari -- member of a joint al-Qaeda-Taliban cell in Khowst province, strong ties to Haqqani
I'm all for not leaving someone behind but this is a significant price to pay for that. The end of the Afghanistan war will only be in our eyes. These people will wait out their year in Qatar and then be right back at it.The one area where there is a problem, in my mind, is the legislation requiring Congress be notified 30 days prior to any release from Guantanamo of prisoners there.♥ That did not happen in this case. There was no notice to anyone on Capitol Hill until after the release of Sergeant Bergdahl. Some may point out that the President issued a signing statement when he signed that particular piece of legislation, but signing statements were suspect when President Bush did them, so they are certainly still suspect.
In what I consider an administrative lapse of judgement, the Administration didn't even call up to the leadership of the two hours in the hours before the release, saying "We are about to execute this swap—please keep it under your hat." This kind of ignoring of the law does not engender confidence in the Administration on the part of the Loyal Opposition.
Regards — Cliff
♠ Luke 15:32.
♥ My understanding is that the 30 days is a shortened period from previous legislation.
6 comments:
Two comments. First, the word in the SOF community is that Berghahl didn't get captured, he joined and tweeted that he will be overjoyed when all the Gitmo prisoners are freed. Something very rotten and fishy in this deal. He is definitely not being welcomed home by his former brothers in arms.
Second, Obama just set a major bad precedent. We have a long, long policy that we do not negotiate with terrorists. Well....now we do and we can never go back. Every two bit scumbag that wants to play terrorist will kidnap someone (or have them join up for mutually enjoyed benefits) and then hold them for a ransom.
This is just plain stupid.
BTW.....had the Armed Forces of the United States WANTED to free this guy with no exchanges or deal making....we could have done it easily. They knew where he was all the time. There is a reason we didn't go after him.
I am of the school that says al Qaeda are the terrorists and the Taliban the more or less legit government that wouldn't, couldn't, control them.
What I don't understand, in your theory, is why the Taliban kept him alive for so long. If he was really part of the Taliban wouldn't he have been blown up in some bombing by now?
Frankly, I think the Administration was smart to remove him from the chess board. That said, wrong to not have told Congress before the public announcement. Some day the folks in Congress will grow a backbone, including the Democrats, and realize they are a co-equal branch.
Regards — Cliff
I just saw this comment somewhere:
QUOTE
Negotiating with the enemy and repatriating prisoners of war (POWs) is part of what normally happens when wars end.
The US involvement in the Afghan war will end this year. It is arguably in our interest to negotiate with our enemies to shape the environment that will exist after we depart. Those discussions begin with small matters like the fate of individuals, and expand to large matters.
Seen this way, the Bergdahl/Taliban trade was a trust-building exercise that is part of a larger diplomatic strategy for ending our role in this war. This exercise was successful for both sides, and may open the door to subsequent discussions about larger issues.
UNQUOTE
But, where was the Afghan Government in all of this?
Regards — Cliff
I can't verify his actions right now. Given our experiences with other grand dramas from Obama...and the fact that Hagel says that much about the situation is classified and will remain so.....we may NEVER know the truth. I am just following what folks in the SO community are saying. The probably have some insight.
I don't think the Taliban "kept him alive" so much as realized his value as a bargaining chip....and hey...the guy became one of them anyway.....from the shreds of information out there....he wasn't exactly in shackles. He played badminton with the folks "holding him" and learned the language more or less fluently....brewed his own Afghan tea each day...made his own meals.
Just doesn't add up.
Obama used this as a political grandstand...with many prongs. Congress will bleat about it for awhile....then nothing.
The one person that Congress could have easily used to make a statement and a stand they demurred......Lois Lerner. She is in contempt of Congress. So what? How does that adversely affect her life? She is getting a nice fat retirement income....no restrictions on her activities.....life is good for her. Actually..I think the press has the line wrong. She holds Congress in Contempt.
Cliff....there was only ONE prisoner in this war...and that status is dubious at best.
Are you suggesting that this is one more "honorable peace" and that it is an acceptable outcome??? If the answer is "Yes" then how do we explain why people went there and died For what...so down the road we could give up and go home. WAR is for table stakes....you either go for everything and win....or you don't do it...unless you want to be like the US in the last half a century. We talk tough, send a lot of our people to be killed, then lose our resolve and weasel out. Hitler was hoping that was what we'd do when he put on the pressure. At least THEN we had gonads.
Even when the Public, as understood by the politicians in DC, say basta there are things to be negotiated.
Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment