海角大神

NBC News聽and聽Fox News聽are both reporting that Army Sgt Bowe Bergdahl, whose release last may was initially hailed only to devolve into controversy over the terms of the deal and the circumstances of Bergdahl鈥檚 initial disappearance,聽will be charged with desertion, but it鈥檚 unlikely he will spend any time in prison:

The Army is denying that a final determination has been made聽in Bergdahl鈥檚 case, but NBC is sticking with their story, notwithstanding the denial, so it鈥檚 safe to assume that there鈥檚 a good basis for believing it to be true. Assuming that鈥檚 the case, it鈥檚 likely to be the latest controversy in the Bowe Bergdahl saga. When聽Bergdahl was first released, it was treated with some degree of fanfare as the president addressed the nation from the White House Rose Garden while flanked by Bergdahl鈥檚 parents. Very quickly, though the deal聽came under criticism from Republicans聽due both to the terms of the deal that led to his release, which included the release of five men held at the Guantanamo Bay prison under the auspices of the Qatari government, and the fact that the administration had聽failed to comply with a statute requiring advance notice to Congress for releasing prisoners from Guantanamo Bay.聽There were also lingering questions over the circumstances that led to Bergdahl becoming a Taliban prisoner, including聽the long-standing accusation that Bergdahl had deserted his post聽and even claims that he may have provided aid or intelligence to his captors. While the Army eventually聽cleared Bergdahl of any charges that he aided the enemy, the investigation of his possible desertion continued and, most recently, was聽sent to his commanding officer聽for a final determination on how to proceed. If today鈥檚 reports are to be believed, it would appear that such a determination has been made.

The penalty for desertion could be quite severe, but, as noted above, it鈥檚 likely that Bergdahl鈥檚 case will be resolved with a 鈥渓ess than honorable鈥� discharge, loss of rank, and loss of the back pay he otherwise would have accrued during the period that he was held in captivity. All things considered, this seems like a fair outcome to me. After five years in Taliban captivity, there seems to be little reason to punish Bergdahl more severely, although I鈥檓 sure many on the right will demand Bergdahl鈥檚 head for this, if only because it would serve as further ammunition against the president. That desire for revenge would seem to me to be misplaced, though. For one thing, even if it鈥檚 true that Bergdahl is guilty of desertion, that does not mean that the administration should not have done everything possible to bring him home. Indeed, many of the same Republicans who were criticizing the president for making the deal that led to Bergdahl鈥檚 release were criticizing him months earlier for not doing more to reach a deal to get Bergdahl released, and even then the deal being discussed was basically the same on that was ultimately agreed to. Second, punishing Bergdahl further doesn鈥檛 really seem to have any purpose to it. Bergdahl seems to have suffered enough during his captivity, and indeed may not have been psychologically suited for combat to begin with. Resolving these potential charges with a plea seems like the best way to deal with this.

Doug Mataconis appears on the Outside the Beltway blog at http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/.