The Rush to Demonize Sgt. Bergdahl
Four
months ago, Senator John McCain said he would support the exchange of
five hard-core Taliban leaders for the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
“I
would support,” he told CNN.
“Obviously I’d have to know the details, but I would support ways of
bringing him home and if exchange was one of them I think that would be
something I think we should seriously consider.”
But
the instant the Obama administration actually made that trade, Mr.
McCain, as he has so often in the past, switched positions for maximum
political advantage. “I would not have made this deal,” he said
a few days ago. Suddenly the prisoner exchange is “troubling” and
“poses a great threat” to service members. Hearings must be held, he
said, and sharp questions asked.
This
hypocrisy now pervades the Republican Party and the conservative
movement, and has even infected several fearful Democrats. When they
could use Sergeant Bergdahl’s captivity as a cudgel against the
administration, they eagerly did so,
loudly and in great numbers. And the moment they could use his release
to make President Obama look weak on terrorism or simply incompetent,
they reversed direction without a moment’s hesitation to jump aboard the
new bandwagon.
The
last few days have made clearer than ever that there is no action the
Obama administration can take — not even the release of a possibly
troubled American soldier from captivity — that cannot be used for
political purposes by his opponents.
Though we criticized the administration
for ignoring the law in not informing Congress of the transfer of the
Taliban detainees 30 days in advance, leave it to Senator Lindsey Graham
of South Carolina and other hyperventilators to claim that continued
release of prisoners from Guantánamo without prior notice is now considered an impeachable offense, a ludicrous leap.
Gov. Rick Perry of Texas says the whole exchange was cooked up
to distract the public from the Veterans Affairs scandals, and the
talk-show crowd has piled on Sergeant Bergdahl’s father for his suspiciously long beard.
Cowering
politicians now even seem to regret their initial burst of joy that a
prisoner was coming home. “A grateful nation welcomes him home,” said
Representative Lee Terry, Republican of Nebraska, in a Twitter message on Sunday.
The statement on his website was deleted a short time later. “Warmest
regards to his family with gratitude for his/their service and
sacrifice,” wrote Representative Stephen Lynch, Democrat of
Massachusetts, in another quickly deleted tweet.
This duck-and-cover response is the result of the outrageous demonization of Sergeant Bergdahl in the absence of actual facts. Republican operatives
have arranged for soldiers in his unit to tell reporters that he was a
deserter who cost the lives of several soldiers searching for him. In
fact, a review of casualty reports by Charlie Savage and Andrew Lehren of The Times showed there is no clear link between any military deaths and the search.
And
a classified military report shows that Sergeant Bergdahl had walked
away from assigned areas at least twice before and had returned,
according to a report in The Times
on Thursday. It describes him as a free-spirited young man who asked
many questions but gave no indication of being a deserter, let alone the
turncoat that Mr. Obama’s opponents are now trying to create.
If
anything, the report suggests that the army unit’s lack of security and
discipline was as much to blame for the disappearance, given the
sergeant’s history.
Thousands of soldiers desert during every war, including 50,000 American soldiers during World War II. As many as 4,000 a year
were absent without leave for extended periods during the Iraq war.
They leave for a variety of reasons, including psychological trauma, but
whatever their mental state, it is the military’s duty to get them back
if they are taken prisoner. That’s what the Obama administration did in
this case, and there was a particular sense of urgency because a video showed that Sergeant Bergdahl’s life might be in danger.
But
the critics seeking political advantage don’t care about the life or
mental state of a particular soldier, or of a principle of loyalty that
should provide comfort to any soldier in danger of capture. They live
only for the attack.
