In answering criticism of the prisoner swap that freed U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl from the Taliban, President Obama was asked about the circumstances surrounding Bergdahl’s capture. In response, Obama said, “Regardless of circumstances, whatever those circumstances may turn out to be, we still get an American prisoner back. Period. Full stop. We don’t condition that.”
Exactly. As a nation, the United States has made an explicit promise to its men and women in uniform: We will not abandon you. We will not leave you behind. The president was right to uphold that commitment.
Nonetheless, Obama’s political foes have been sniping at him over the prisoner transfer that freed Bergdahl, the only U.S. prisoner in Afghanistan. The objections come in three general forms, none of which hold water.
Some critics focus on the five men released from Guantanamo prison in exchange for Bergdahl. Some worry about the precedent the swap sets. And some essentially say Bergdahl is not worth saving.
It is hard to see how five Taliban more or less will make much of a difference in Afghanistan. None of them have the reach or resources of an Osama bin Laden, and apparently, none had plotted to strike at the United States as bin Laden did. In any case, Qatar has agreed to hold them for a year, during which time the U.S. presence in Afghanistan will be greatly reduced.
Speaking of the swap, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, asked, “What does this tell terrorists, that if you capture a U.S. soldier, you can trade that soldier for five terrorists?”
Except, of course, that swaps like this have been going on between foes forever. All combatants do it. Moreover, this is about Afghanistan, where hostage taking is hardly a new concept. What we call terrorism, the Taliban sees as warfare, and they and their forefathers have been at it for a long time.
In fact, for the Taliban to see that it is possible to negotiate with the United States may not be all bad. They know the U.S. military is winding down its presence in Afghanistan, and it might behoove them to work with American forces on some level to position themselves better for the country’s post-American future. That might also benefit the United States.
The most offensive criticism of the trade involves Bergdahl himself and centers on the idea that he brought it on himself – as if that releases the United States from its commitment. Exactly what happened is in dispute, but when captured by the Taliban, he had apparently either wandered off his base or deliberately run away. If true, that would make him guilty of either being absent without leave or desertion.
But the decision to trade for him was not based on his merit as a soldier. It was based on the fact that he wore the uniform of the United States.
Bergdahl will be brought back to this country. At that point, the Pentagon can investigate and handle his case in whatever way appropriate under military law. If he did desert, he can be court-martialed and punished accordingly – perhaps including being held accountable for the fact that other Americans died searching for him. If it is determined that he is guilty of some lesser offense, there is an entire range of possible punishments – none of which involve being left to die in enemy hands.
As the president said, the real message of getting Bergdahl back was to every other man and woman in the uniform of the United States: This country will not leave you behind – no matter what.
Obama got that right.
