Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
The Daqduq Dilemma
He is an enemy combatant, so treat him as one.

By Andrew C. McCarthy


Archive Latest RSS Send
Text  

An Iran-backed Hezbollah commander who killed American soldiers in cold blood has been in U.S. custody for four years. Most Americans would see this as a good thing. For the Obama administration, it is a vexing dilemma. This highlights, yet again, why the country can’t afford a second Obama administration.

Ali Mussa Daqduq has been a Hezbollah operative for almost 30 years. He is the hardcore. When he joined back in 1983, the “Party of God” (hizb Allah) was just getting its start as Iran’s forward militia in Lebanon, announcing its allegiance to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and killing hundreds of Americans in bombings, abductions, and hijackings that targeted U.S. military personnel, intelligence agents, and civilians. Daqduq quickly climbed the ranks, becoming a top terrorist trainer in an organization so adept that al-Qaeda began taking its instruction in the early 1990s. He rose to command Hezbollah’s most lethal cells and even ran the security detail for its leader, “secretary general” Hassan al-Nasrallah.

Advertisement

It was only natural, then, that Iran turned to Daqduq in 2005 when the mullahs decided to reprise in Iraq the strategy that had worked so well in Lebanon. He was tasked with building an Iraqi version of Hezbollah: a jihadist network that would first use terrorist attacks to sap America’s will to remain in the region and then be poised to seize de facto control of the country — to run Iraq as an Iranian satellite.

It worked like a charm. As Bill Roggio recounts at The Long War Journal, Daqduq partnered with Iran’s deadly special-operations unit, the Quds Force, to set up an intricate web of Shiite terror cells. Battalions of 20 to 60 recruits were brought to Iranian bases for schooling in close combat tactics, kidnapping, and intelligence collection, while also learning to use explosively formed penetrators, mortars, rockets, and sniper rifles. When their training was complete, they were loosed on Iraq. Fueled by Iranian supplies, they targeted and killed American and allied forces. Most notoriously, they carried out the January 2007 Karbala massacre, in which five American soldiers were killed, four of them as captives, handcuffed and shot before U.S. rescue teams could close in.

Daqduq was captured by American forces two months later. He has been in the custody of our military in Iraq ever since. He is not a defendant. He is not a capo in some Iranian Cosa Nostra family. He is a terrorist enemy of the United States, who has committed atrocities against American soldiers during a war authorized by Congress. Compared with him, most al-Qaeda jihadists are pikers. Hezbollah is as bad as it gets, and Daqduq is as bad as Hezbollah gets.

If one accepts that the object of war is to defeat the enemy, there is no doubt about what must happen here. Under the laws of war, Daqduq is an enemy combatant: He may be detained until the conclusion of hostilities, subjected to trial by military commission, and put to death — or, at the very least, imprisoned for the rest of his life.

These laws of war are codified in American statutes. Candidate Obama may have pined for a return to the law-enforcement approach to counterterrorism (i.e., treating alien enemies as mere defendants entitled U.S. constitutional protections and civilian trials), but President Obama has grudgingly accepted — at least on paper — the need to maintain combatant detention and trial by military commission. In 2009, he signed a cosmetic revamping of the Military Commissions Act (MCA). Under it, unlawful enemy combatants — who are now called “unprivileged enemy belligerents,” lest the use of Bush terminology betray the adoption of Bush methods — may be detained by our armed forces and tried by commission if they have “engaged in” or “purposefully and materially supported” “hostilities against the United States.” The definition fits Duqdaq to a tee.

In saner times, this one would be easy. Daqduq should be transferred to Guantanamo Bay. Once the military determines he is no longer of use for intelligence purposes (we’re told Daqduq talked after originally pretending to be a deaf mute), he should be given a commission trial for war crimes and, upon conviction, executed. If there is a lack of sufficient admissible evidence to try him — if, for example, our knowledge of his atrocities comes from intelligence sources or confessions that can’t be used in a trial — he should be detained indefinitely. Case closed.

But for an administration that has politicized justice more than any in history, nothing is that simple. Displaying his familiar penchant for taking one position in public while unleashing the faceless bureaucracy to undermine it, Obama agreed to military commissions strictly for electoral purposes. By signing the MCA, he pandered to a public strongly opposed to civilian trials for enemy combatants; behind the scenes, though, the Lawyer Left that staffs Obama’s Justice and State Departments works to ensure that commissions will not actually be used — or, at least, that they will be used only when public outcry forces the administration’s hand, as it did in the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the 9/11 plotters.

1   2   Next >
Text  

You Might Also Like...

Trinko: Will Fear Decide Texas Senate Race?

Symposium: Polling Life

Malkin: Obama’s Land of the LOST



COMMENTS   7

EXPAND  

   07/23/11 09:00

When I travel outside the US, I am embarassed to admit being an America because of many of our weak, vacillating, spineless, whining national politicians, particularly our president. Hope we can vote him/them out of office next year and vote in some I can be proud if, even if I don't agree with them.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   07/23/11 09:12

We help all these terrorists out and they still want to kill us. What is wrong with them? Maybe we need to give them another sack full of money to make them feel better.

Mr. President: These people want to kill all of us. They are not common street thug criminals. What part of killing us do you not understand?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   07/23/11 09:45

When it comes to war, there is no such thing as an enemy. When it comes to politics, anyone who disagress is an enemy. I've been watching my left-leaning friends for over a decade and these are the two entry requirements for self-identification as moderately (in their eyes) liberal.

In other words, disqualification as Commander in Chief doesn't cost you any Democratic votes. It might even help depending on the circumstances.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
William L. Gensert
   07/23/11 10:09

After watching what has happened to this country these last two and a half years, I suspect that soon most Americans will long for the days before hope and change.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   07/23/11 13:11

Human nature is flawed and, in this world, will remain so. War is a reality. Those who "don't believe in war" should take note that those waging war on us do.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Bulldog 82
   07/25/11 08:39

In this instance I will have to agree with the Obama Administration. He should be released to Iran. I suggest we release him from aproximately 5,000-feet! Now, if only the Air Force could calculate the ballistics of a flailing terrorist, we could deliver him to Amadinajad (sp.)!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
stuart rubin
   07/25/11 16:18

surprised that Obama has not had this person put in a nice home in Detroit yet

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact