Whether one learns in studying for a B.A. in history, at the Infantry Officers School (aka Benning School for Boys), at The Judge Advocate General’s School or from ordinary empiricism is irrelevant. In any kind of military, quasi-military or similar pursuit the least dangerous, if often difficult,  course is to define in advance what would constitute victory, what would constitute defeat,  how to handle each and all the intermediate possibilities.

Notwithstanding that obvious goal, the George W. Bush Administration  perfected no complete plan for the handling of terrorists and perhaps a tiny handful of alleged terrorists imprisoned in the (not particularly rough) confines of Guantanamo, much less what to do with them were they to be released from any form of incarceration, how, when or where. The Barack H. Obama Administration, notwithstanding its penchant for speedy decisions, sometimes so speedy as to be scary, seems also to be in need of serious planning.

The Administration has announced a Guantanamo closing date, the choice of which appears to be arbitrary or at least without a revealed rationale.  Now what?

Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. has had some discussions abroad.  It might not be helpful to ongoing relations with allies and alleged allies for much to be revealed about those discussions. However, there should be a plan capable of public disclosure and of fulfillment.  Also one must hope the Attorney General did not release confidentially abroad information withheld or to be withheld from the American people.

Several Members of Congress have enquired, especially Senators A. Mitchell (Mitch) McConnell, Jr., (R-KY) and Jefferson B. (Jeff) Sessions, III (R-AL), no answer to date.  Senator McConnell, in remarks on the Senate Floor, poses five questions:

“Which detainees will be released or transferred overseas?

           How do we know these men won’t return to the battlefield?

           Will they be tried in American courts or will we use military commissions?     

           Will any be sent to U. S. soil, even though the Senate voted against it 94 – 3?

           . . . [W]hat legal basis does the [A]dministration have to release trained terrorists into the U.S.?”

          These are pertinent questions.  Others might have further questions. Absent litigation or Congressional hearings the phraseology may be less important than the general proposition: What is the plan? The United States Government, after all, is dealing with terrorists, in our land already victimized by the tragedy of 9/11, in a world of erratic and partially unknown weapons of destruction and delivery, in a world in which terrorism can arise not from recognized nation-states but from “tribal” forces scattered hither and yon.

          What is the plan?

 

Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.

Share This

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

About the author