Skip to main content
Part of complete coverage from

Five tough ethics issues in Bergdahl swap

By Frida Ghitis
updated 8:30 PM EDT, Wed June 4, 2014
These are photos obtained by WikiLeaks that match the names of the detainees released by the Department of Defense. Their release was in exchange for the release of <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/19/us/bowe-bergdahl-fast-facts/index.html' target='_blank'>Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl</a> who was being held by the Taliban. The Department of Defense would neither confirm nor deny their accuracy.<strong> Khair Ulla Said Wali Khairkhwa </strong>was an early member of the Taliban in 1994 and was interior minister during the Taliban's rule. He was arrested in Pakistan and was transferred to Guantanamo in May 2002. During questioning, Khairkhwa denied all knowledge of extremist activities. These are photos obtained by WikiLeaks that match the names of the detainees released by the Department of Defense. Their release was in exchange for the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl who was being held by the Taliban. The Department of Defense would neither confirm nor deny their accuracy. Khair Ulla Said Wali Khairkhwa was an early member of the Taliban in 1994 and was interior minister during the Taliban's rule. He was arrested in Pakistan and was transferred to Guantanamo in May 2002. During questioning, Khairkhwa denied all knowledge of extremist activities.
HIDE CAPTION
Guantanamo detainees swapped for Bergdahl
Guantanamo detainees swapped for Bergdahl
Guantanamo detainees swapped for Bergdahl
Guantanamo detainees swapped for Bergdahl
Guantanamo detainees swapped for Bergdahl
<<
<
1
2
3
4
5
>
>>
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Frida Ghitis: Obama dealt with reconciling "no deal with terrorists," "no one left behind"
  • Ghitis: Another issue: If Bergdahl left his post, does "leave no one behind" apply to deserters?
  • She asks: What cost is too high in saving a hostage? Israel contended with this many times
  • Ghitis: Does the life of one person we know warrant losing others we might not know?

Editor's note: Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for The Miami Herald and World Politics Review. A former CNN producer and correspondent, she is the author of "The End of Revolution: A Changing World in the Age of Live Television." Follow her on Twitter @FridaGhitis. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Frida Ghitis.

(CNN) -- Did President Barack Obama do the right thing when he agreed to trade Taliban leaders in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl?

The issue has become a weapon in the partisan political arsenal and it will surely join the Benghazi incident in election season. And yet, the Bergdahl deal is something quite different.

Frida Ghitis
Frida Ghitis

When Obama approved the release of dangerous, top-value Guantanamo prisoners in exchange for an American soldier captured under mysterious circumstances, he negotiated a tangle of competing moral principles. If it were possible to wrestle with these issues in a nonpartisan way, the country might gain from this difficult experience.

The Bergdahl-Taliban trade will be discussed in ethics classes for years to come.

Here are some of the hard questions:

1) America holds two principles high on its moral agenda. First, the U.S. does not leave any of its soldiers behind in the battlefield. Second, the U.S. does not negotiate with terrorists. But what happens when the two principles collide? Which matters more?

Obama has made his position clear: "We don't leave men and women in uniform behind." The administration argues it did not negotiate with terrorists. And although the United States does not classify the Taliban as a terrorist organization, the Taliban, including those released in the deal, have worked with al Qaeda and have had a major role in killing thousands of civilians.

Khirulla Khairkhwa, for example, according to secret U.S. documents released by WikiLeaks, was "directly associated" with Osama bin Laden. Mohammad Fazl, according to Human Rights Watch, presided over the killing of thousands of Shiite Muslims.

A transaction that frees members of a shadowy organization lends the group prestige. It invigorates it and sends the message that taking prisoners ultimately pays.

CNN has obtained photos from the purported Twitter account of Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid. The photos purportedly show the arrival of the Guantanamo detainees arriving in Doha, Qatar, after being released in exchange for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. This image allegedly shows Mullah Norullah Noori. CNN has obtained photos from the purported Twitter account of Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid. The photos purportedly show the arrival of the Guantanamo detainees arriving in Doha, Qatar, after being released in exchange for U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. This image allegedly shows Mullah Norullah Noori.
Released detainees arrive in Qatar
HIDE CAPTION
<<
<
1
2
3
4
>
>>
Photos: Released Guantanamo Taliban detainees arrive in Qatar Photos: Released Guantanamo Taliban detainees arrive in Qatar

The U.S. broke one of its rules. But it had to. The two rules were mutually exclusive. The U.S. had to break one in choosing a path through this moral dilemma.

2) Does the rule of "leave no one behind" apply to deserters?

Fmr. Navy SEAL: 'This was choreographed'
Are swapped detainees living in luxury?

We don't know much about how Bergdahl came to become a prisoner. But many of his comrades in the field say Bergdahl walked away from his post by choice. He reportedly emailed his father before leaving, "The future is too good to waste on lies" and left a note in his tent saying he was leaving, according to The New York Times.

Soldiers say six Americans died trying to find him after he left. If that is true, does the "leave no one" rule still apply to him?

Obama says: "We still get an American soldier back if he is held in captivity. Period. Full stop. We don't condition that."

It's an unsettling decision, particularly for the relatives of those who may have died trying to save him. But the rule sends a message to other American soldiers that their country takes this solemn commitment very seriously.

If Bergdahl is a deserter, he should face justice on that count. If his desertion caused America such an awful price, he -- and the country -- will have to live with that.

3) Does the life of one man we know warrant losing the lives of many whom we don't know?

There is an ugly truth hanging over any prisoner exchange with an active enemy: It saves one life, but it is likely to cost many more. If the trade were a simple mathematical calculation, it would make no sense. The U.S. says 17%, perhaps as many as 29%, of those released from Guantanamo Bay have turned to terrorism.

The predicament is familiar to Israel, which has released thousands of convicted prisoners in lopsided trades for a handful of Israelis, even for the bodies of Israelis killed by their captors.

The decision is wrenching even when the soldier gaining his freedom was captured through no fault of his own. In 2011, Israel traded 1,027 Palestinians, including many convicted in terrorist attacks that killed scores of civilians, in exchange for Gilad Shalit, who had been held by Hamas for five years. By then, Israeli statistics already showed that terrorists freed in exchange for 19 Israelis over the years had gone on to kill 182 more.

Still, they went ahead with the deal, and the public supported it. Shalit had become an Israeli icon, everyone's child. But the fact is that one person, with a name, a family, a face, somehow takes more value than other nameless ones who may die later as the result of the trade.

4) If a person should be saved, what cost is too high? Is there a limit?

Just how much is one American soldier worth? As far as we know, the deal with Bergdahl brought five of the top Taliban leaders to freedom -- although they are supposed to remain in Qatar for one year. Other countries have paid large amounts of cash as ransom to free their citizens. The price is not only the amount exchanged at the moment of the trade. It is also what happens with that currency whether it's people or money. Unrest in parts of North Africa, which has left hundreds, perhaps thousands dead, was financed in part by ransom money paid by various governments.

5) If a prisoner exchange is politically costly but morally correct, should a politician support it?

Obama must have known there would be political fallout. He made his decision. Hillary Clinton, too, is lending measured support to the trade.

None of these is an easy question. Each country answers them in the light of its own values and priorities. America would do well to examine them in a nonpolitical way, as a crafting of the nation's beliefs, and a guide for making moral choices in the future.

Who was swapped for Bergdahl?

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
updated 7:22 PM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Is ballet dying? CNN spoke with Isabella Boylston, a principal dancer at the American Ballet Theatre, about the future of the art form.
updated 5:47 PM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Sally Kohn says it's time we take climate change as seriously as we do warfare in the Middle East
updated 9:02 AM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Dean Obeidallah says an Oklahoma state representative's hateful remarks were rightfully condemned by religious leaders..
updated 3:22 PM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
No matter how much planning has gone into U.S. military plans to counter the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the Arab public isn't convinced that anything will change, says Geneive Abdo
updated 11:44 AM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
President Obama's strategy for destroying ISIS seems to depend on a volley of air strikes. That won't be enough, says Haider Mullick.
updated 9:03 AM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Paul Begala says Hillary Clinton has plenty of good reasons not to jump into the 2016 race now
updated 11:01 AM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Scotland decided to trust its 16-year-olds to vote in the biggest question in its history. Americans, in contrast, don't even trust theirs to help pick the county sheriff. Who's right?
updated 9:57 PM EDT, Thu September 18, 2014
Ruben Navarrette says spanking is an acceptable form of disciplining a child, as long as you follow the rules.
updated 11:47 AM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Frida Ghitis says the foiled Australian plot shows ISIS is working diligently to taunt the U.S. and its allies.
updated 3:58 PM EDT, Fri September 19, 2014
Young U.S. voters by and large just do not see the midterm elections offering legitimate choices because, in their eyes, Congress has proven to be largely ineffectual, and worse uncaring, argues John Della Volpe
updated 9:58 PM EDT, Thu September 18, 2014
Steven Holmes says spanking, a practice that is ingrained in our culture, accomplishes nothing positive and causes harm.
updated 2:31 PM EDT, Thu September 18, 2014
Sally Kohn says America tried "Cowboy Adventurism" as a foreign policy strategy; it failed. So why try it again?
updated 10:27 AM EDT, Thu September 18, 2014
Van Jones says the video of John Crawford III, who was shot by a police officer in Walmart, should be released.
updated 10:48 AM EDT, Thu September 18, 2014
NASA will need to embrace new entrants and promote a lot more competition in future, argues Newt Gingrich.
updated 7:15 PM EDT, Tue September 16, 2014
If U.S. wants to see real change in Iraq and Syria, it will have to empower moderate forces, says Fouad Siniora.
updated 8:34 PM EDT, Wed September 17, 2014
Mark O'Mara says there are basic rules to follow when interacting with law enforcement: respect their authority.
updated 9:05 AM EDT, Tue September 16, 2014
LZ Granderson says Congress has rebuked the NFL on domestic violence issue, but why not a federal judge?
updated 7:49 AM EDT, Tue September 16, 2014
Mel Robbins says the only person you can legally hit in the United States is a child. That's wrong.
updated 1:23 PM EDT, Mon September 15, 2014
Eric Liu says seeing many friends fight so hard for same-sex marriage rights made him appreciate marriage.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT