Why Obama's deal to free Bowe Bergdahl riles Democrats, too

Obama's decision to swap POW Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban in US custody is making some congressional Democrats uncomfortable. It's getting to be a disconcertingly familiar feeling. 

|
Charles Dharapak/AP
President Obama speaks during a news conference at the G7 summit in Brussels, Thursday, June 5, 2014. Obama said Thursday he makes 'no apologies' for swapping POW Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban in US custody at Guantánamo, ending the sergeant's five years of captivity.

In a difficult election year for congressional Democrats, the Obama administration's swap of prisoner of war Bowe Bergdahl for five high-level Taliban isn't helping, as the ensuing flap is prompting some Democrats to question the president's decisions – once again.

Republicans initiated the barrage of criticism, but now some Democrats are expressing dissatisfaction with President Obama's handling of the Bergdahl case. Moreover, the internal fuming is becoming something of a regular feature of Democratic life: Democrats in coal-producing states are angry about a new EPA carbon-emission rule, and others joined GOP calls for the secretary of Veterans Affairs to resign over secret wait lists for veterans' medical treatment. And don't forget the political hits Democrats feel they have already taken over the 2012 attacks on US personnel in Benghazi, Libya, and the Affordable Care Act.

Democrats who object to the Bergdahl-for-Taliban trade do so on the merits. But ​the November election is probably also an underlying concern.

“Don't expect many candidates to run as ‘Obama Democrats,’ ” says John Pitney, a congressional expert at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, Calif. “The main question for the party this fall is whether the president will be a mere problem or a catastrophic liability.”

Mr. Obama said Thursday he makes “no apologies” for swapping Bergdahl for five Taliban in US custody at Guantánamo, ending the sergeant’s five years of captivity.

But his representatives have been busy explaining the decision to members of Congress, at a lunch for Senate Democrats on Tuesday and then at a classified briefing for all senators on Wednesday evening. But even these outreach efforts did not assuage concerns among some in the president’s party.

“I came out of there with more questions than I got answers,” said Sen. Joe Manchin III (D) of West Virginia, after hearing from the administration’s defense, diplomatic, and intelligence officials at Wednesday's closed-door meeting.

The red-state Democrat did not buy one of the administration’s reasons for the swap: Bergdahl's deteriorating health. The senators on Wednesday viewed the proof-of-life video of the sergeant – estimated to have been taken in December – but Senator Manchin thought it merely showed a man who was “drugged,” not necessarily a man in ill health. Some senators agreed, while others said Bergdahl “did not look good,” or “did not look like a well person,” and noted that he stuttered.

“We all agree that we’re not dealing with a war hero,” Manchin said, adding that he wants to see an internal investigation of Bergdahl, including what those who served with him said at the time of his disappearance five years ago. The New York Times reported Thursday that a classified report completed two months after Bergdahl left his unit in Afghanistan concluded he most likely walked away of his own free will. The report also found that Bergdahl had “wandered away from assigned areas before,” the Times wrote. The classified report did not conclude that there is evidence Bergdahl had permanently deserted. 

Manchin, like many Republicans, is concerned about the potential for the five freed Taliban to return to the fight and kill Americans. The men are now under a travel ban in Qatar, with that government’s promise to monitor them for at least a year. The senator is upset, too, that the administration did not notify Congress of the prisoner release 30 days before it happened, as required by law.

That also riled two leading Democrats on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, chairwoman Dianne Feinstein of California and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia. They refuted a claim, made by White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough during a Tuesday lunch with Senate Democrats, that Congress had been in the loop about a swap. Only Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada knew about the prisoner trade in advance.

The Associated Press meanwhile reported that the reason the White House did not inform Congress was because the Taliban had threatened to kill Bergdahl if knowledge of the deal leaked and became public.

"The Senators were told, separate and apart from Sgt. Bergdahl’s apparent deterioration in health, that we had both specific and general indications that Sgt. Bergdahl's recovery – and potentially his life – could be jeopardized if the detainee exchange proceedings were disclosed or derailed,” a senior administration official said Thursday.

The president also has his defenders for the swap. Richard Durbin, the Senate majority whip from Illinois, said after Wednesday’s meeting: “The premise was sound: Bring home our troops. If they are captured, bring them home. I think we’ve got to keep returning to that because there are many who want to dismiss this and say, ‘Well, we have suspicions about this man.’ "

As more information unfolds about the Bergdahl case – and it will as hearings and leaks continue – Obama may come out looking better, or worse. The problem that Democrats face, says Mr. Pitney, is that “fairly or unfairly, people are starting to see the administration as incompetent.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why Obama's deal to free Bowe Bergdahl riles Democrats, too
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2014/0605/Why-Obama-s-deal-to-free-Bowe-Bergdahl-riles-Democrats-too
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe