Accident, Afghanistan, Arms, Army, Clashes, Conflict, Military, Politics, Terrorism, USA, Violence, War
It’s unlikely the US military will seek a long prison term for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl who is charged with desertion, mostly because of years he was held as a prisoner by the Taliban, says military defense lawyer Daniel Conway.
Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl went missing from an army base in Afghanistan
in 2009, and has been charged with desertion. He was held captive
by the Taliban for five years. The sergeant was released last May
in a controversial prisoner swap. Bergdahl has also been charged
with misbehavior before the enemy, and could face life in prison.
RT: How do you expect this court martial to
turn out? Do you think he’ll be sent to prison?
Daniel Conway: It’s difficult to say. We’ve seen
recent cases which are somewhat similar and in which there is a
sentence of about two years imposed. We’ve got some recent
guidelines that show us how military judges are going to assess
the case. I expect that there might be some confinement, but I
don’t expect that the US government will seek a substantial
amount of confinement. And that is probably mostly because of the
number of years that he spent as a prisoner.
RT: Is it surprising that the US went to
such great lengths to secure his release only to charge him with
DC: I would tend to agree, as Americans, and I’m
sure it’s the same in Russia; we don’t leave our fellow soldiers
and marines behind. So having said that, there was a real need to
have him returned to American control safely. Now there are a lot
of people within the ranks, and soldiers within the ranks, that
believe that we paid a steep price. And I’m sure that is a part
of the calculus here in terms of the decision to charge him.
RT: Before Bergdahl left the base he sent an
e-mail to his father calling the US army “liars and
backstabbers.” Do you think this had a negative impact on his
DC: Part of what the government has to prove in
order to secure a conviction for desertion is that he had intent
to leave his post. Certainly that e-mail is going to help
prosecutors get inside his mind at the time he left the base.
Sure, I think it is an important e-mail.
RT: The US released five Taliban prisoners
from Guantanamo Bay to ensure Bergdahl’s return – but the US does
not usually negotiate with terrorists. Why was an exception made
in this case?
DC: It’s difficult to say what conversations
were being made at the highest levels of policy. I can’t
necessarily speak to that. I do know that as Americans, and
former soldiers, and marines we place a significant value on the
lives of our fellow brothers and sisters in arms. Whatever the
administration’s analysis was in that particular determination, I
can’t speak to that.
RT: There have been reports that one of
those released Taliban fighters has returned to the battlefield.
How damaging could this be for the Obama administration?
DC: It’s difficult to say exactly what is the
extent of the harm of that particular decision is, and I’m
certainly not privy to that kind of information or intelligence.
I do know that there was a policy determination made that we
wanted this young man back. So the administration did everything
in their power to make that happen. We can debate whether the
cost was too steep or not but the fact remains that an American
soldier is back and in custody of the US, and that is a good
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.