There is understandable controversy over the decision by President Obama to reject going public with the photos of Osama bin Laden’s corpse. We are a society that reveres openness and governmental disclosure. And powerful, even graphic, public records of the horrors of war are hardly without precedent. Government secrecy and the public interest are typically seen as oxymoronic.
And national security as a rationale for government-secrecy abuse is well documented. It wasn’t just the Richard Nixon and George W. Bush Administrations.
Two points.
First, when in doubt, we should strongly consider erring on the side of that which will lessen the chances of Americans dying. There’s a reason why those on the front lines of the fight against terrorism do not want the bin Laden photos released. That’s because American military are the ones whose chances of dying will increase. But it’s not limited to those in uniform.
To quote the president on 60 Minutes last Sunday night: “It is very important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence–as a propaganda tool. That’s not who we are. You know, we don’t trot out this stuff as trophies.”
What the president didn’t say was: “We’re talking about those so easily provoked to up the ante on violence that even Prophet Mohammad cartoons incite more mayhem and murder. We’re not dealing, obviously, with a totally rationale element. We’re not dealing with sovereign nation- states, standing armies and old school geopolitics. We’re dealing with a hijacked religion and its avenging, suicidal foot soldiers. So, no, I’m not about to further fuel the flames of incitement. Anyone doubt that the jihadi pep rally caused by Abu Ghraib footage didn’t result in more violence against Americans?
“It was my call to take out bin Laden. It worked. It’s also my call not to release photos that have the very real potential to trigger a visceral response that is not in anybody’s best interest. This is a matter of life and death–not just death-confirming photos of bin Laden.
“We made our point that we are relentless, that we don’t forget, that the heinous acts of mass murderers have consequences and that we will mete out justice regardless of the challenges involved. But, yeah, in the era of WikiLeaks, it will probably get out at some point. But I’m not about to be an enabler and release the photos and then rely on media outlets and the public to make their own decisions. That works in the abstract. But my focus is on those I’m ultimately responsible for–those already in harm’s way.”
Second, there’s no need to confirm anything with a photo. Those most affected know. That’s why al-Qaida has already acknowledged bin Laden’s death. They don’t need a photo of their odious icon with a bullet hole in his head to rally around.