We Don’t Negotiate with Terrorists.
Why Aren’t We Seeing More of that Defiant Talk?
Dating back to at least the Nixon era, there has been an American ethos that is encapsulated in our collective consciousness as “We don’t negotiate with terrorists.” Ronald Reagan campaigned with a promise that “there will be no negotiation with terrorists of any kind.” President George W. Bush, speaking on Philippine President Arroyo’s leadership, said:
She’s tough when it comes to terror. She fully understands that in the face of terror, you’ve got to be strong, not weak. She knows, like I know, that the only way to deal with these people is to bring them to justice. You can’t talk to them, you can’t negotiate with them, you must find them.
In this post, I am not debating the past rights or wrongs, the actual truth or falsity, or the efficacy of this ethos. Rather, I am highlighting its statement as a masculine bromide, a logic as American as John Wayne: The solution to terrorism is justice. Anyone who would deign to negotiate is considered weak and is likely to create more problems with more terrorists in the future.
We can see this ethos reflected in movies like Harrison Ford’s portrayal of the presidential character in “Air Force One”:
Atrocity and terror are not political weapons and to those who would use them: your day is over. We will never negotiate. We will no longer tolerate, and we will no longer be afraid. It’s your turn to be afraid.
The Face of Terror: Insurrection & Cyber-Posse Tactics
What act of terror do I have in mind? The acts of insurrection by Former President Trump. Recently, a Colorado district court made over 300 findings after a trial that Mr. Trump “engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 through incitement.” That decision was upheld by the Colorado Supreme Court. The Maine Secretary of State came to the same conclusion after a legally required hearing, in addition to at least nine other judges before that. We also have the extensive evidence from the J6 hearings. And I have my own eyes, which watched the TV that day, sickened and horrified. To me, keeping domestic terrorists on “stand by,” inciting an insurrection and then failing to stop it immediately once it has started counts as an act of domestic terrorism. (I outline other dangers in my most recent post: Decency’s Last Stand).
Furthermore, Defendant Trump and his Bully Squad have engaged in what can only be described as cyber-posse tactics: disseminating personal information and often falsehoods about someone (e.g. doxxing) with the likely outcome being that their believers will harass, intimidate, and issue vicious threats at the intended recipient. This cyber-posse is not limited to targeting hapless individuals assisting in an election like Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. The Bully Squad has even turned on their own, targeting conservative legislators who don’t vote the way they desire.
What I keep wondering is why aren’t we seeing more of the “We don’t negotiate with terrorists” ethos?
Republicans signal valuing appeasement over justice
Instead, Trump’s top Republican rival candidates for the Presidency have already signaled that they would pardon Mr. Trump if they were elected. Given how far behind Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley are in the polls compared to Mr. Trump, their campaign promises seem designed to ingratiate themselves into a spot on the ticket as Vice President. Preemptively promising pardons in this context not only departs from a commitment to justice — it illustrates a form of obeisance to Trump, effectively sidelining any opposition in favor of appeasement and political expediency.
If press reports on Ms. Cheney’s new book are to be believed, conservatives submitted to Former President Trump’s demands at every turn. There was no negotiation. For instance, immediately after the insurrection, Mr. McCarthy deemed Trump’s actions untenable. Shortly afterward, Mr. McCarthy was flying down to Mar-a-Lago because the former President was “not eating” and “depressed.” It would be laughable if we were discussing Mr. McCarthy’s toddler or teenager, but this was a response to an insurrection against the Constitution with credible threats of hanging the Vice President. These threats were so serious the Secret Service were calling their loved ones and wanted to evacuate the Vice President from a secure location inside the Capitol.
What goes around comes around
Ms. Cheney also stated that Congressional members had wanted to impeach President Trump but “they were afraid for their security, for their families’ security.” Those conservative congresspeople watched as Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss were put through the wringer with fears of being hanged, which harkens back to the Jim Crow era of lynching. These legislators should have known that at some point, it would be their turn. The poem “First They Came” by Martin Niemöller resonates profoundly here, warning of the perils for those who do not stand up while the more vulnerable are pursued. “Initially an antisemitic Nazi supporter, [Martin Niemöller’s] views changed when he was imprisoned in a concentration camp for speaking out against Nazi control of churches.” His lesson: Failing to speak out against threats — whether they come from within one’s own party or outside adversaries — eventually puts all at risk.
Will ‘We the People’ submit?
We stand at a crossroads, confronted with a question of principle and integrity. Will we allow threats to undermine the rule of law and erode our commitment to justice? Do we have the resolve to stand up to the Bully Squad?
If our resolve should falter, then perhaps our ethos might sadly need to be restated: “We don’t negotiate with terrorists; we submit to them.”
Some are being steadfast in their resolve to our Constitution’s guiding principles. For instance, even after having a fake crime reported against her in the hopes of provoking a heavily armed police response (being “swatted”), the Maine Secretary of State upheld the principle of the rule of law:
But I want to go back to the rule of law and the Constitution, because that’s what’s important. And we, all of us citizens, have a role to play in this democracy, in free and fair and respectful debate.
A few days later President Biden would give an impassioned speech at Valley Forge:
America, as we begin this election year, we must be clear: Democracy is on the ballot. Your freedom is on the ballot.
It’s Our Duty and National Pride to Uphold Constitutional Principles
It is crucial for voters and legislators to maintain resolve to uphold the foundational principles of the Constitution. Upholding these Constitutional principles is not just a duty as citizens or a “sacred cause” but a testament to our national spirit — a clear message that we will not bend, submit, nor break in the face of threats to our democratic ideals.
