Anyone with half of their brain present and/or functioning knows that governments are in the business of making deals. Deals must be made for agendas to be accomplished. Deals must be made to realize a set of national goals (and the lack of dealing is surely showing up in the lack of national goals in the U.S. these days). When governments do not make deals elite/ruling coalitions are unable to give voice to the interests of the constituents they represent in meaningful and constructive ways. So, stop telling me that the U.S. government should not have made a deal with the Taliban for the return of a U.S. soldier.
While states (governments) remain the primary actors in the international system, sane individuals must realize that other transnational actors exist and must be engaged with in the current configuration of the international system. Among these transnational actors are psuedo-governments (Taliban) and terrorists. At the end of the war in Vietnam the U.S. government did make deals for the release of U.S. service members held as POWs. Now, we can argue semantics here about the Taliban as psuedo-government or terrorist organization and thus was Bergdahl a POW or a hostage. Oh wait, we negotiate hostage releases too (sometimes in manners not quite above reproach--anyone remember the late 1980s).
So, I am not at all off-put by negotiating and dealing for Bergdahl's release. I will question a few things about this deal. One, if the law says a 30 day written notice must be given to the U.S. Congress by the U.S. President prior to releasing, swapping, whatever of prisoners at Gitmo, then the U.S. President broke the law and deserves the full weight of punishment for violating the law, as I believe our president is not above the law. Second, did we make a good bargain? Bergdahl, by credible evidence and reports, is a deserter and what is the value of a deserter. For my two cents worth we over-paid for Bergdahl's release. Two very high ranking Taliban members and three more to boot for Bergdahl is too much, negotiate better next time Mr. President.
While states (governments) remain the primary actors in the international system, sane individuals must realize that other transnational actors exist and must be engaged with in the current configuration of the international system. Among these transnational actors are psuedo-governments (Taliban) and terrorists. At the end of the war in Vietnam the U.S. government did make deals for the release of U.S. service members held as POWs. Now, we can argue semantics here about the Taliban as psuedo-government or terrorist organization and thus was Bergdahl a POW or a hostage. Oh wait, we negotiate hostage releases too (sometimes in manners not quite above reproach--anyone remember the late 1980s).
So, I am not at all off-put by negotiating and dealing for Bergdahl's release. I will question a few things about this deal. One, if the law says a 30 day written notice must be given to the U.S. Congress by the U.S. President prior to releasing, swapping, whatever of prisoners at Gitmo, then the U.S. President broke the law and deserves the full weight of punishment for violating the law, as I believe our president is not above the law. Second, did we make a good bargain? Bergdahl, by credible evidence and reports, is a deserter and what is the value of a deserter. For my two cents worth we over-paid for Bergdahl's release. Two very high ranking Taliban members and three more to boot for Bergdahl is too much, negotiate better next time Mr. President.
No comments:
Post a Comment