National Journal.com

nationaljournal.com > Lost in Transition

Government Executive Home NationalJournal.com

National Journal's Lost in Transition

INSIDER INTERVIEW

Tuesday, January 27, 2009 8:37 AM

Graham Worries About Aftermath Of Gitmo Closing

Lindsey Graham and President Obama(Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

National Journal's Kirk Victor recently spoke with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who set out his concerns about the implementation of President Obama's order to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

Graham, who has served as a judge advocate and as a prosecutor, worries that closing the prison is the "easy" move, but the more difficult call is what to do with the approximately 245 prisoners there. Graham also voiced concern that the president will feel pressure from critics on the left who favor prosecuting George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and others from the previous administration as war criminals for approving brutal interrogation techniques. Edited excerpts follow.

NJ: Have any of President Obama's actions in his first days in office surprised you?

Graham: The one thing I am somewhat concerned about is executive orders on Guantanamo Bay. I support closing it. I support making sure that we have a process that restores our image in the world, but I do not support a plan that would criminalize the war. I think we can find a system, a rule of law called the Law of Armed Conflict, to deal with these detainees when they are brought to the United States. The point I am trying to make is that we are at war and the Law of Armed Conflict should apply, not domestic criminal law. I don't know where this is going to take us, but I am hopeful they will not create a system that restricts our ability to defend ourselves and not advance our moral standing at all.

NJ: What do you do with some of these prisoners who may not be prosecutable but are very dangerous?

Graham: That's the point. Some of them can be tried as war criminals, like [Khalid] Sheikh Mohammed. I think you try them in the military.... Some will be repatriated to third countries. Probably half of them are going to be kept in jail because they are part of al-Qaida. The evidence is not such you would submit [their cases] to a criminal court because of the sensitive nature of it, but we know they are part of the al-Qaida network and a judge agrees with the military that they are part of al-Qaida.

You don't let those people go. You have a review process that keeps them in jail, constantly reviews their cases until they are no longer a threat. Sixty-one people have gone back to the fight after being released already.... Let me tell you -- closing Guantanamo Bay and moving them is the easy part. What to do with them is the hard part. We're talking about people who would kill us if they could.

NJ: Are you worried that Obama might be persuaded by critics on the left who want to pursue officials in the Bush administration who may have countenanced torture?

Graham: Yes, I am worried that the radical left who thinks that everybody at Guantanamo Bay is a victim and that Dick Cheney and George Bush are war criminals will have more sway [with the administration] than they deserve. But so far so good. I met with the administration on this issue.

NJ: Can President Obama withstand the pressure from the left on this issue?

Graham: This will be a good test. This is about a system that will render justice within our values, recognizing that we are at war. This is about a fresh start. If we're talking about prosecuting people because of political vendettas, then I think President Obama will have failed the test. If there is some competent evidence out there, somewhere, then that will be different, but this idea that policy disagreements lead to criminal [prosecution] will destroy our democracy. And I don't believe he is inclined to do that.

Categories:

1 Response

 

Responded on January 27, 2009 7:21 PM

rbindc

 "Political vendettas???"   Excuse me, but there is ample evidence suggesting that top level officials in the Bush administration violated both US and international law by sanctioning torture and the CIA rendition program.  Why should they not be indicted and prosecuted?   Let's start with Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and their lieutenants.  The agents actually doing the torturing we an let go.   After all, they were "just following orders," right?  After all, wasn't that an adequate defense at Nuremberg?  (Opps - no). If people like Rumsfeld, Cheney, Hadley, and Addington go free what disincentive will other have in the future to abide by the rule of law? We don't have to execute those found guilty.  A few years in prison doing hard labor should be sufficient deterrent.   The rule of law is at stake here - so where are all those law-and-order conservatives? If a black teenager stole a car they would be out for blood.  But let a white man give the order to torture and killing and they are only too willing...

Read More

 "Political vendettas???"  

Excuse me, but there is ample evidence suggesting that top level officials in the Bush administration violated both US and international law by sanctioning torture and the CIA rendition program.  Why should they not be indicted and prosecuted?  

Let's start with Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and their lieutenants.  The agents actually doing the torturing we an let go.   After all, they were "just following orders," right?  After all, wasn't that an adequate defense at Nuremberg?  (Opps - no).

If people like Rumsfeld, Cheney, Hadley, and Addington go free what disincentive will other have in the future to abide by the rule of law? We don't have to execute those found guilty.  A few years in prison doing hard labor should be sufficient deterrent.  

The rule of law is at stake here - so where are all those law-and-order conservatives? If a black teenager stole a car they would be out for blood.  But let a white man give the order to torture and killing and they are only too willing to look the other way.  What a bunch of hypocrites.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collapse

Comments


To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Lost in Transition does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.

Advertisement
Get Print-friendly version of this page E-mail this page to a friend Subscribe to Lost in Transition Follow us on Twitter
Advertisement

Search Blog Entries

Stay Connected

Archives

Special Reports

Categories

News

Resources

Add Lost in Transition To Your Site

Blogs

Experts

Experts: Health Care

Troublesome Directions

Latest response: Robert GreensteinNovember 20, 2009 3:38 pm