A Strange New Front in the War on Terrorism
National security is supposed to be the comfort zone for Republicans and President Bush-the place they feel strongest politically. It's also supposed to be the one area where Democrats, in the final weeks before midterm elections, might be squeamish about taking them on.
So the spitting match that erupted between Congress and the White House last week was all the more remarkable, not least because it was spearheaded by a trio of rebellious Republicans. Two die-hard Senate moderates-John McCain and Lindsey Graham-along with the powerful Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, chose the day before National Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Recognition Day to reject coercive techniques in interrogations of terrorist suspects and require tighter rules of evidence at military tribunals.
Unfortunately for President Bush, he had already played his trump card a week earlier, with his dramatic revelations about sending some of al Qaeda's top leaders, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, to GuantÃÂÃÂÃÂánamo Bay to face justice. Republican leaders clearly thought that once they redefined "military tribunals" as "terrorist tribunals" in the public debate, it would be even dicier for anyone to stand in their way.
Instead, other onetime Bush allies emerged to oppose the White House. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote a letter to support McCain's resistance to redefining parts of the Geneva Conventions, gravely warning, "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism."
Bush hastily called a press conference to try to replay the "war on terrorism" card, but, as they say at the gaming tables, "a card laid is a card played." In other words, no sale. Even CIA Director Michael Hayden hinted that there might be other ways to clarify the rules for CIA interrogators.
For now, McCain and company are holding fast. And even the usually more compliant House Republicans are taking their own stand against the White House, holding up a separate law that would authorize Bush's controversial eavesdropping program.
This story appears in the September 25, 2006 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.
advertisement
