FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

An Endless War on Terror?

It might seem an odd moment for the War on Terror to expand.  The 9/11 terrorist attacks are now ten years in the past; Osama bin Laden is sleeping with the fishes; and all of the alleged 9/11 perpetrators who are not dead are in custody awaiting trial.

President Obama—the man who ran for president promising to end the Bush Administration’s signature methods of fighting terrorism—is still in office.

Ten years after America’s entry into World War II, to make an imperfect but still telling analogy, the country had moved on to other global conflicts.  The Japanese and Japanese-Americans who were held in internment camps had been released, albeit without an apology, and Germany was an ally, not an enemy.

But the War on Terror has not only stayed with us, it’s growing.  Bills currently in Congress go well beyond the already broad bounds of the Bush Administration’s War on Terror policies.

Yes, the timing is odd, but only if one cares about evidence, logic, cause-and-effect relationships, and other possibly outmoded concepts.  Seen through the lens of politics, fear-mongering, and the election cycle, the timing of these bills is understandable.  Call it election fever.

An Irresponsible Congress

The combination of hungry Republicans and cowardly Democrats—and the uniquely horrible Joe Lieberman—makes for a perfect legislative storm. While apparently unable to agree on a payroll tax cut or other economic measures that might help struggling Americans, members of Congress are working in model bipartisan fashion to pass dangerous and irresponsible counterterrorism legislation.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which contains provisions that would rip holes in the Constitution, passed the Senate last week on a 93-7 vote.  An equally awful though somewhat different version of the bill passed the House of Representatives several months ago.  Unless the end product is radically improved during conference committee negotiations—an unlikely outcome—some alarming mix of House and Senate NDAA provisions will reach President Obama’s desk very soon.

It is hard to overstate how bad this legislation is. It would essentially make Guantanamo permanent, and enshrine the Guantanamo approach to fighting terrorism as the country’s default counterterrorism policy. Detention without trial would become a normal feature of US law, and the military would become the presumptive detaining and prosecuting authority in entire categories of cases. The bill’s broad powers would even threaten American citizens arrested on U.S. soil.

These provisions wouldn’t just take the country back to the War on Terror framework, they would, in many ways, expand it beyond its earlier boundaries.  During the Bush Administration, even as Guantanamo attracted public scrutiny, hundreds of terrorism suspects were prosecuted in the US federal courts.  Defendants like Zacarias Moussaoui and Richard Reid are now serving life sentences after court proceedings governed by the same rules as other criminal cases.

This brings me to another important point.  As any review of the record will show, it is not just human rights and civil liberties that the bill shreds.  From the standpoint of effectiveness, the law is a disaster.  It takes responsibility for bringing terrorists to justice away from the federal, state, and local law enforcement authorities that have the necessary expertise in investigating and prosecuting terrorism, gravely handicapping future counterterrorism efforts.

A Weak President?

The crucial remaining question is how President Obama will react to this congressional affront.  Back in May, when the House was debating its version of the bill, the White House issued a Statement of Administration Policy that threatened a veto. Using strong and principled language, the White House objected to provisions of the bill that threatened to establish a never-ending War on Terror, and that foreclosed Obama’s stated plans to shut down Guantanamo.

Although President Obama’s record on human rights and national security issues has not been terribly consistent, there have been recent encouraging signals that he is planning to follow through on his veto promise.  Last week, just after the Senate approved the NDAA package, a National Security Council spokesman issued a statement that renewed the president’s threat of a veto.

If ever there was a moment when presidential leadership was needed, this is it. Not only is a veto necessary to stop a damaging bill from becoming a pernicious law, it is needed to change the larger political dynamic.

The president needs to seize the initiative on these issues, instead of leaving them to the political hacks and conservative ideologues in Congress.  It is the current policy stagnation—marked by Obama’s failure to challenge the Guantanamo status quo of detention without trial—that leaves the door wide open to bills such as these.

With Republican positions on these issues growing ever more extreme (witness Senator Lieberman’s recently-introduced citizenship-stripping bill, and Senator Kelly Ayotte’s shameful efforts to bring back torture), it is long past time to say no.

Joanne Mariner is the director of Hunter College’s Human Rights Program. She is an expert on human rights, counterterrorism, and international humanitarian law.

This column previously appeared on Justia’s Verdict.

More articles by:

JOANNE MARINER is a human rights lawyer living in New York and Paris.

November 14, 2018
Sam Bahour
Israel’s Mockery of Security: 101 Actions Israel Could Take
Cesar Chelala
How a Bad Environment Impacts Children’s Health
George Ochenski
What Tester’s Win Means
Louisa Willcox
Saving Romania’s Brown Bears, Sharing Lessons About Coxistence, Conservation
George Wuerthner
Alternatives to Wilderness?
Robert Fisk
Izzeldin Abuelaish’s Three Daughters were Killed in Gaza, But He Still Clings to Hope for the Middle East
Dennis Morgan
For What?
Dana E. Abizaid
The Government is Our Teacher
Bill Martin
The Trump Experiment: Liberals and Leftists Unhinged and Around the Bend
Rivera Sun
After the Vote: An Essay of the Man from the North
Jamie McConnell
Allowing Asbestos to Continue Killing
Thomas Knapp
Talkin’ Jim Acosta Hard Pass Blues: Is White House Press Access a Constitutional Right?
Bill Glahn
Snow Day
November 13, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
The Midterm Results are Challenging Racism in America in Unexpected Ways
Victor Grossman
Germany on a Political Seesaw
Cillian Doyle
Fictitious Assets, Hidden Losses and the Collapse of MDM Bank
Lauren Smith
Amnesia and Impunity Reign: Wall Street Celebrates Halliburton’s 100th Anniversary
Joe Emersberger
Moreno’s Neoliberal Restoration Proceeds in Ecuador
Carol Dansereau
Climate and the Infernal Blue Wave: Straight Talk About Saving Humanity
Dave Lindorff
Hey Right Wingers! Signatures Change over Time
Dan Corjescu
Poetry and Barbarism: Adorno’s Challenge
Patrick Bond
Mining Conflicts Multiply, as Critics of ‘Extractivism’ Gather in Johannesburg
Ed Meek
The Kavanaugh Hearings: Text and Subtext
Binoy Kampmark
Concepts of Nonsense: Australian Soft Power
November 12, 2018
Kerron Ó Luain
Poppy Fascism and the English Education System
Conn Hallinan
Nuclear Treaties: Unwrapping Armageddon
Robert Hunziker
Tropical Trump Declares War on Amazonia
John W. Whitehead
Badge of Shame: the Government’s War on Military Veterans
Will Griffin
Military “Service” Serves the Ruling Class
John Eskow
Harold Pinter’s America: Hard Truths and Easy Targets
Rob Okun
Activists Looking Beyond Midterm Elections
Binoy Kampmark
Mid-Term Divisions: The Trump Take
Dean Baker
Short-Term Health Insurance Plans Destroy Insurance Pools
George Wuerthner
Saving the Buffalohorn/Porcupine: the Lamar Valley of the Gallatin Range
Patrick Howlett-Martin
A Note on the Paris Peace Forum
Joseph G. Ramsey
Does America Have a “Gun Problem”…Or a White Supremacy Capitalist Empire Problem?
Weekend Edition
November 09, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Louis Proyect
Why Democrats Are So Okay With Losing
Andrew Levine
What Now?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Chuck and Nancy’s House of Cards
Brian Cloughley
The Malevolent Hypocrisy of Selective Sanctions
Marc Levy
Welcome, Class of ‘70
David Archuleta Jr.
Facebook Allows Governments to Decide What to Censor
Evaggelos Vallianatos
The Zika Scare: a Political and Commercial Maneuver of the Chemical Poisons Industry
Nick Pemberton
When It Comes To Stone Throwing, Democrats Live In A Glass House
Ron Jacobs
Impeach!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail