Terror Trial in New York City

Najibullah Zazi pleaded guilty on February 22 to criminal charges in a terrorist plot to attack the New York subway system, on or near the anniversary of 9/11 last year. A Star-Ledger editorial praised the conduct of the trial in a New York City federal court, while noting the loud noise from followers of former Vice-president Cheney, who are characterizing the use of civilian courts as weak.

The editor is correct in endorsing the handling of this case in criminal court and not by military tribunal. US Attorney General Eric Holder is also correct in prosecuting KSM in criminal court, as was the Bush administration in so handling most terrorism cases during their tenure.

Military tribunals have a poor record for convicting and punishing terrorists, and their recent endorsement by Cheney and other revisionists has nothing to do with our national security, and everything to do with evading the consequences of their past activities.

The military has one charge - use of overwhelming force in defending America from attack - and protection of American interests and allies abroad. Expanding the use of the military for rendition, and operation of detention and interrogation sites around the globe, particularly in Guantanamo, was done to prevent oversight and transparency. Predictably, that lack of oversight led to abuse, torture and, when light was inevitably shed on those practices, discord among our allies and loss of our moral standing in the world community.

The one practical argument for trying Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a military court is that, due to the illegal methods used in extracting evidence, a criminal trial would be subject to many constitutional challenges. But using military tribunals would require legitimizing the process that has brought us to this point, and we need to be moving in the other direction, distancing ourselves legally and morally from those onerous, ineffective and un-American methods.

A public criminal trial of KSM in federal court in Manhattan could be a cathartic rejection of terrorism, putting our democracy and resolve on display to the world - true American exceptionalism. But a frightened local business community, allied with anti-anything-Obama partisans, has raised barriers to this scenario, and the pro-torture faction touts military tribunals as a "reasonable alternative."

Like many seemingly ordinary debates since 9/11, whether or not to treat terrorists as criminals is a choice that cuts to the heart of who we are as a people. Expediency should not be a strong factor here.