WASHINGTON — In the partisan realm of national security policy, President Barack Obama’s administration looks to have scored a victory this week. Najibullah Zazi, a man accused of planning to bomb the New York subway system last September, pleaded guilty in civilian court to three terrorism charges. As the Washington Post noted, law enforcement officials said “Zazi began to accelerate his cooperation after authorities charged his Afghan-born father with crimes and threatened to charge his mother with immigration offenses – options that are not available in the military justice system.”
Save for the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, national security and terrorism seem destined to feature perpetual strife and partisan opportunism. Don’t think the political operatives inside the Bush White House didn’t notice the boost the Republican president’s approval rating got with each decision to raise the color-coded terror alert level.
The Obama administration’s support for using civilian criminal courts over military tribunals for suspected terrorists makes sense; there is no compelling argument in favor of military tribunals, and a host of good reasons to treat terrorists like the criminals they are.
When Republicans heard FBI interrogators had read the so-called “underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab his Miranda rights nine hours after he was detained, they smelled blood in the water. This was another sign that Obama just didn’t “get” the threat we face; another chance to hurl a barrage of “soft on terror” accusations; another opportunity to frighten the American public and watch Obama’s poll numbers correspondingly decline.
But a funny thing happened between the attempted Christmas Day bombing and now: Obama’s poll numbers on the issue went up. A Washington Post/ABC News poll asked Americans if they “approve or disapprove of the way Obama is handling the threat of terrorism.” The last such survey conducted prior to the terror attempt – taken Nov. 15 – found 53 percent “somewhat” or “strongly” approved. In the latest poll on Feb. 8, that number was 56 percent.
Granted, with a margin of error of 3 percentage points, this is not exactly a ringing endorsement of Abdulmutallab’s handling. But given the ferocity with which Republicans firebombed the president on this one, it is, in the view of any civil liberties advocate, an encouraging sign.
In his inaugural speech, Obama spoke eloquently on the nexus of civil liberties and national security.
“As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man – a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience sake.”
It remained to be seen whether he could practice what he preached. No one doubts the difficulties inherent in ensuring freedoms while protecting the populace, and there was always certain to be the accusations of former Vice President Dick Cheney and company; those noble and selfless fear mongers eager to assert that the president’s touchy-feely approach to the bad guys was equivalent to “pretending we’re not at war.”
In the 13 months since his inauguration, Obama’s track record is not perfect. It is, nonetheless, an improvement over eight years of egregious disregard for civil liberties and due process. More encouraging still, the poll numbers seem to indicate that most Americans are ready to “light the world” once more.
