Over on Fevered Rants, bloggista Alex del Castillo has dug up some interesting legal references pertaining to the John Walker affair in Afghanistan. He has some good links on the subject.
The owing allegiance phrase could likely be debated as to what it means exactly, but I think intent is clear. What would be the purpose of a law against treason if the act of treason automatically renounced one’s citizenship and conceivably made one merely an enemy of the state rather than a treasonous citizen? Actually, I think citizenship at the time of trial is a red herring, it is the act that counts.
However the issue of citizenship at the time of Walker’s alleged treason is rather more important legally I assume as the actions cannot be ‘treason’ if he had renounced any allegiance to the US earlier. I am no lawyer but if that is the case, why is be being held by the USA at all? Why not just leave him in the tender cares of General Rashid Dostam‘s Uzbeks?
I must confess I have always declined to accept the idea of the state-centric notion of ‘citizenship’. I see nothing wrong with loyalty to a society with which one has affinity but I for one feel no such thing for any state, which is quite another matter. My outrage over September 11 was not because the United States was attacked, but because fellow members of an extended civil society of which I am a member were murdered without cause by some sociopathic collectivist Islamic terrorists. Nationality per se is really not the issue.
By my way of seeing things, Walker chose to join the Taliban and thus should be of no more consequence than any other captured Taliban soldier. It should be remembered that the US/UK are at war in Afghanistan to destroy Al Qaeda and attacking the Taliban was only done because that proved to be a pre-requisite for achieving that objective. If Walker were a member of Al Qaeda, well, that would be different. He would be part of the organization responsible for September 11 and should be treated accordingly…but that does not seem to be the case.
As a defeated Taliban member, however, he should have just been left to get on with his new ‘friends’ in what is left of Kandahar, if Dostam’s people were inclined to let him go. If they were not, and he died in some fly infested prison cell in Mazar-i-Sharif, I do not see how it would be the concern of anyone in the USA. I would hardly describe that as being let off lightly! Alex del Castillo sums up with a similar view, but more because he views it as what he deserves. I take the view that it is the correct thing to do, which is a somewhat different sentiment even if the result may be the same.
