Though Middle Eastern involvement is a frequent topic of debate in today’s mainstream culture, it is somewhat seldom we see the faces of the men and women who have taken ?up arms.
This past year, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl became a household name overnight as he was traded out of five years of Taliban captivity in exchange for five members of said group.
Bergdahl’s name has resurfaced in the media once more, as he has finally been charged with desertion and misbehaving before the enemy after almost 10 months of behind-the-scenes debate. The Editorial Board believes this decision warrants a closer look, as the political forces surrounding it have made Bergdahl a statement for ?public viewing.
Though most Americans seemed to agree Bergdahl should be returned to the United States, significant controversy surrounded both the White House’s chosen method of operation and Bergdahl’s original motives behind leaving base.
Following Bergdahl’s initial release from Taliban custody, House Speaker John Boehner said “we all wanted to bring” Bergdahl home, but that President Obama should be criticized for not securing guarantees that the released Taliban members would not ?resume militant activity.
Questions surrounding Bergdahl’s actions still remain, and Army officials are still tight-lipped as to how and why the decision to bring Bergdahl to face a preliminary Article 32 hearing ?was reached.
Many of Bergdahl’s comrades have expressed surprise upon learning of his being charged; after such a long period of silent limbo, they seem shocked to have heard a conclusion.
Bergdahl’s attorneys are preparing for a highly emotional and political battle should the initial hearing convict Bergdahl of either charge.
A serious portion of the sergeant’s life is at stake; in addition to the five years he spent as a prisoner of war, Bergdahl could be charged with up to life in prison following a conviction for misbehaving before the enemy.
Therefore, his attorneys had begun to fight this battle before it even started by releasing a letter this past March requesting leniency for Bergdahl due to his time as a Taliban captive. This letter was accompanied by a statement from Bergdahl describing his experiences as a prisoner of war, when chained to a bed, spread eagle, ?blindfolded.
The lengthy period of silence between Bergdahl’s rescue and the announcement of his charges has piqued the Board’s interest, as it appears to hint at the ongoing political battleground that exists within the military itself.
Undoubtedly, public perception is key, and Bergdahl’s actions could be used as a model for unacceptable ?behavior.
In this regard, those involved in the argument for Bergdahl’s being charged likely take no experience he could’ve gone through as an excuse for leniency.
Although the seriousness of military court’s structuring is a mystery to many, Bergdahl’s situation will most certainly make the decision of his initial hearing a widely debated public spectacle.
We just hope that America is still able to consider the seriousness of what Bergdahl has already experienced, whatever the outcome ?might be.
