Closing Gitmo

In the current issue of the National Review, Jonah Goldberg offers a spirited defense of the U.S. policy of detaining suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Unfortunately, his position, like that of the Bush administration, sounds much more like stubborness than solid reasoning. Goldberg writes:

"Of course, we could close Guantanamo, but if you actually support the war on
terror you must recognize that we would still need someplace like it. A rose
by any other name and all that. We can’t summarily execute every al Qaeda
member we capture. Not just because that would raise legitimate moral and legal
problems, but because we can’t win unless we interrogate these guys."

He goes on to say:

"[W]e could bring them to the United States. But this would be a legal quagmire, as
it isn’t clear what their rights would be on U.S. soil. And it would be a disaster to treat them like common criminals with all of the usual constitutional rights."

So, in a nutshell, Jonah's argument is that the only alternatives to our current policy are summary execution or treating Al Queda suspects as ordinary criminal defendants. This is classic straw man logic; defending a position by totally mischaracterizing the opposing point of view. I respect the intelligence of many of the writers at the National Review, but would it kill them to occasionally make an even-handed argument, one that at least comes close to fairly characterizing the views of those who disagree with them.

As Jonah well knows, most reasonable critics of our Guantanamo policy are not suggesting that detainees be treated like typical criminals. There are plenty of other options (military tribunals, specialized courts, prisoner of war status, etc.) But as it stands, most detainees have been afforded no due process whatsoever. We've thrown them into a prision just outside our own borders, a move that sends an unmistakable message to the rest of the world: when it comes to our enemies, we don't want to play by our own rules or even be consistent with our own ideals. That's a dangerously hypocritical message to be sending. It's yet another example of the Bush Administration (and many conservative thinkers) not fully understanding the nature of our current struggle, not understanding that we are primarily engaged in a war of ideas.