|
7A WF 83429 (originally aired 9/24/03)
With his daughter kidnapped and given the case number "7A WF 83429", President Bartlet has invoked the Twenty-Fifth Amendment (1) and temporarily stepped aside in favor of Republican Speaker of the House Glen Walken, a decision that many Democrats, including Josh, regret. The White House links the kidnapping to Muslim sleeper-agents, which CJ and Josh fear will lead to hate crimes against Muslims (2). The kidnappers announce that they want the United States to withdraw forces from Saudi Arabia (3) and Kumar (4), and it is believed that the kidnapping is in retaliation for Bartlet's assassination (5) of Kumari Defense Minister Abdul Shareef a year earlier. Zoe's French boyfriend admits that he gave Zoe GHB, a date-rape drug (6). Another terrorist attack, this time in Turkey, targets U.S. citizens (7), and President Walken plans to bomb terrorist camps in Kumar if Zoe is not quickly found.
(back to top)
|
Executive Authority and the Twenty-Fifth Amendment (last updated September 25, 2003) (back to top)
President Bartlet is the first president to invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment's procedures for handling a temporary situation where the president's judgment or abilities might be impaired. Under the amendment's third section, if the president is "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office," he can voluntarily step down temporarily and allow the vice president to assume the powers and duties of the office until he transmit another written declaration to the contrary.
It is not clear what happens when there is no vice president in office, as is the case here given the resignation of Vice President Hoynes shortly before Zoe's kidnapping. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment authorizes only the vice president to take command in such a situation, but Bartlet's interpretation makes sense and the United States Supreme Court, if asked, would probably defer to this interpretation in order to avoid adding confusion. In any event, he can reclaim the powers as soon as he declares himself able to hold the presidency.
Here is the full text of the third section of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment :
|
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives has written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President
|
The Twenty-Fifth Amendment was created in the wake of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, adopted by Congress in 1964, and finally ratified by the states in 1967, and it dictates how executive power is transferred when the chief executive is "unable to discharge" his duties. The first two sections clarify the succession from president to vice-president, and were used in the 1970s when President Richard Nixon filled Spiro Agnew's vacancy with Gerald Ford in 1970, and when Ford then replaced Nixon as President in 1974 and nominated Nelson Rockefeller as his own vice-president.
The Third Section and Ronald Reagan
Under the third section, the president can voluntarily transmit a "written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office," and until he transmits another written declaration to the contrary, the vice president serves as acting president with full powers and duties. This section has never been formally invoked, despite two known opportunities -- both during the Reagan presidency -- in which it arguably should have been.
The first occasion was the March 1981 assassination attempt in which Reagan was seriously wounded. Reagan did not sign a written declaration and so arguably retained the reins of power even during the 12 hours while he was anesthesia and in surgery. Even Reagan's own cabinet was confused about who held the powers and duties of the presidency, with Secretary of State Alexander Haig incorrectly declaring that he was "in control" and misquoting the Constitution.
The second was in July 1985, when Reagan underwent colon surgery, "during which time I will be briefly and temporarily incapable of discharging the constitutional powers and duties of the office of the President of the United States." Reagan specifically stated that he did not believe the Twenty-fifth Amendment to apply to "such brief and temporary periods of incapacity" like this one but that it was "my intention and direction" that Vice President George Bush discharge presidential powers upon the administration of anesthesia. Bush served as acting president for only eight hours, but many have questioned whether Reagan's letter constitutionally did transfer even temporary power and whether there was anyone legally holding the powers and duties of the presidency for that period.
The Fourth Section
The fourth section, which has never been invoked, empowers the Vice-President and a majority of the Cabinet to remove a president who does not or cannot recognize his inability to serve. President James A. Garfield was in a coma for 80 days after being shot by an assassin in 1881, and President Woodrow Wilson was invalid for much of his last term as president, and the fourth section provides a procedure for the Vice-President to step up in such cases.
Nevertheless, the amendment is not limited by its wording to such situations and thus could apply to a situation such as this one (or even to the situation depicted in the second season of Fox's 24). Given the precedent set by impeachment procedures, the United States Supreme Court would probably stay out of any court battle over the amendment's wording and simply defer to whatever interpretation is applied by the president and the vice president; the United States Supreme Court deferred in this way to however Congress defines the "high crimes and misdemeanors" involved in an impeachment hearing (for more on impeachment, go here).
If the president is able to challenge the decision and does so, he resumes power, but the Vice-President can re-affirm his declaration that the president is unable to serve and resume power temporarily. The President will ultimately resume power unless Congress decides by a 2/3 vote of both houses that the president is unable to serve or if sufficient time has passed without Congress making such a decision.
Source: Findlaw's annotation on the Twenty-Fifth Amendment is on-line here. Kenneth Crispell and Carlos Gomez, Hidden Illness in the White House (Duke University Press, 1988).
Hate Crimes : Statistics (last updated January 18, 2003) (back to top)
Hate-crime statistics reported to the FBI from 1996 to 2001 show that hate crimes are perpetrated most often against blacks, homosexuals and Jews, but also show that the number of such crimes against Muslims and against people based on their non-Hispanic ethnicity or national origin increased dramatically from 2000 to 2001, probably because of reactions to the September 11, 2001 attacks.
As reported by the FBI, the overall number of hate crimes increased 20 percent from 2000 to 2001 largely based on such crimes directed against Muslims and based on victims' non-Hispanic ethnicity or national origin. Specific incidents such as the October 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard and the 2001 hate crimes towards Muslims have drawn national attention, but it is still up for debate whether hate-crimes are in fact becoming more common or whether they are simply better reported now. Those who say that the incidence of hate-crimes has risen in recent years may not be taking into account a long-term view of history or making proper comparisons with earlier eras. The following chart reflects FBI statistics from 1996 to 2001, which includes data from law-enforcement agencies covering roughly 85 percent of the nation; reports from earlier years had considerably fewer agencies reporting and are thus less useful for comparison. For purposes of such data collection, hate crimes are defined by federal law as "crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity."
In 2000, with agencies covering 84.2 percent of the nation reporting, there were 8,603 bias-motivated incidents involving 9,430 separate offenses, 9,924 victims, and 7,530 known distinguishable offenders. Of these, most were based on race (53.8 percent), followed by religion (18.3 percent), sexual orientation (16.1%), ethnicity/national origin (11.3 percent), and a small few against the disabled or based on multiple biases. Racially-motivated hate crimes in 2000 were mostly anti-Black (66%), followed by anti-white (20%) and anti-Asian (6%); Hispanics are not included here but under the anti-ethnicity category. Religion-based hate crimes were mostly against Jews (75%); crimes against Muslims represented 2% of such religion-based hate crimes. Sexual-orientation hate crimes were directed mostly towards male homosexuals (69%) and then against lesbians (14%), with another 14% classified simply as against homosexuals without differentiation between males and females; 2 percent were against heterosexuals. Most offenses were against persons (65%) and usually involved intimidation (35 percent of all hate-crime offenses) or some kind of non-fatal assault; aggravated assaults were less common, and murders and non-negligent manslaughters were rare. Of the offenses not directed against people, most involved vandalism (29 percent of all hate crimes). Sources: The FBI's annual hate-crime reports are available on-line here. Making Hate a Crime: From Social Movement to Law Enforcement, Valerie Jenness and Ryken Grattet (Russell Sage Foundation, 2001). James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter, Hate Crimes : Criminal Law & Identity Politics (Oxford University Press, 1998).
Saudi Arabia (last updated May 13, 2003) (back to top)
Saudi Arabia, which is both the birthplace of Islam as well as the world's leading oil producer, is a crucial player in the Middle East. Due to the presence of oil, the United States has had very close ties to the Saudi regime since 1945 and especially since the Gulf War of 1990-91, but the relationship has become more strained in recent years on both sides, with non-elites in Saudi Arabia opposing the U.S. presence in the Middle East and with reports linking Saudi elites to terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda.
In particular, many in Saudi Arabia now oppose the United States' presence so close to Mecca, the holy place all Muslims are obligated to visit once in their lives if possible, and the United States' support of an elite regime that has been criticized for its human-rights record. One of the terrorist group al-Qaida's primary goals is to force the United States' withdrawal.
Ties to the United States
Effectively working under a security-for-oil agreement, the United States and Saudi Arabia have been allies since the 1940s. Saudi Arabia has been an oil power since World War II and now brings in about $70 billion a year from oil exports, which go largely to Asia; the United States itself gets more oil from Saudi Arabia than from any other country. With that oil money, Saudi Arabia has bough billions in military equipment from the United States and is by far the biggest consumer of United States military equipment.
Moreover, the United States has stationed military forces in Saudi Arabia since the Gulf War, a presence that has become very controversial due to having so many United States troops so close to Mecca. There were about 600,000 allied forces in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War, and about 5,000 troops and thousands of military contractors have been there since (troops are also in nearby Kuwait and Qatar). Religious leaders criticized King Fahd in 1992 for allowing United States troops on Saudi land, and Osama Bin Laden has said in interviews that one of his main goals is to drive the United States out of Saudi Arabia.
Three bombing incidents have targeted the American presence in Saudi Arabia. The first was on November 13, 1995 at a US-operated Saudi National Guard training center in the capital city of Riyadh, in which 8 people were killed and 60 wounded (5 of the 8 killed and half the casualties were Americans). The second was at the U.S. military residence in Dhahran, called the Khobar Towers, on June 25, 1996; 19 American servicemen were killed in this incident and 100 seriously injured. These two incidents are believed to be unrelated; the first was allegedly caused by four Sunni Saudi nationals, and the second allegedly by Shi'ite Saudi extremists supported by members of Iran's government.
On May 11, 2003, a third bombing attack against three compounds where foreigners lived resulted in the deaths of eight American citizens. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said the incident "certainly has all the fingerprints of an al-Qaida operation."
A Monarchy with a Poor Human Rights Record
Saudi Arabia has been a monarchy since King Abd Al-Aziz Al Saud unified the nomadic tribes in the area in the 1930s. King Fahd has ruled the country since 1982, though his son, Crown Prince Abdullah, has effectively led the country since Fahd suffered a stroke in 1995. The government is based on a conservative form of Islam and has declared the Koran to be its constitution, but has faced opposition from fundamentalists who want a more conservative regime in power. The country has no political parties or elected representative institutions.
The country's human rights record is poor, according to the U.S. State Department and international organizations, as is its record on religious freedom. The U.S. State Department's 2001 report on Saudi Arabia criticized it for denying citizens basic rights such as free speech and changing their government, and criticized abuses by the country's security forces. The Committee to Prevent Vice and Promote Virtue, whose agents are known as the Mutawwa'in, or religious police, monitors public behavior and have intimidated and abused citizens and foreigners of both sexes for offenses such as not following a strict dress code.
Women in particular have very limited rights in Saudi Arabia; they are not treated as equal members of society, are not allowed to drive, and are segregated in terms of education and their use of public facilities. Women are expected to wear an abaya, a black garment that covers the entire body, and to cover their head and hair. Women make up 5 percent of the work force and own about 20 percent of the businesses, but cannot represent themselves in financial transactions and have their testimony in a Shari'a court count half that of a man's.
One incident cited by critics of Saudi Arabia is the Mutawwa'in's alleged interference with rescue efforts at a March 2002 fire at a girls' public intermediate school in Mecca. According to Human Rights Watch, eyewitnesses reported that members of the Mutawwa'in intentionally prevented some students from evacuating because they were not wearing the required abaya, allegedly forcing students who escaped through the school's main gate to return via another and preventing parents and residents from helping. At least 14 students died in the fire, according to Human Rights Watch's account in a press release.
For more information on arms sales, go here. For more information on Saudi Arabia and the Middle East, go here.
Sources: The State Department's country background report is on-line here. Its human rights report on Saudi Arabia is on-line here. A Human Rights Watch press release on the March 2002 fire at a girls' school is on-line here. Secretary of State Colin Powell's May 13, 2003 comments on the May 11, 2003 bombing incident are on-line here.
Kumar (last updated September 25, 2003) (back to top)
Kumar is a fictional country located in the Middle East. It was clearly identified in the fifth-season premiere episode "7A WF 83429" as being located within the southern Hormozgan province of real-life Iran and as having control of the northern side of the Strait of Homuz.
Persian Gulf, centered on "Kumar" in Iran's Hormozgan province
Detail of the Strait of Homuz
"Kumar" is on the northern side
The Strait of Homuz is an extremely important water route that connects the oil-rich Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea and the rest of the world. According to an April 2003 report by the Energy Information Administration, about 88 percent of the oil exported from the Persian Gulf in 2002 - and about two-fifths of all traded oil - goes through the Strait of Homuz, and closure would "require use of alternate routes (if available) at increased transportation costs."
As shown in various episodes of the West Wing, the United States resumed selling major arms to and forming military alliances with Kumar in the third season ("The Women of Kumar"). Kumar has a poor human-rights record, especially towards women ("The Women of Kumar"). The United States' tense relations with Kumar in the West Wing series has evoked comparisons with Saudi Arabia.
Sources: The Energy Information Association's April 2003 fact sheet on Persian Gulf oil and gas exports is on-line here.
U.S. Policy Towards Assassinations (last updated September 24, 2003) (back to top)
President Bartlet's assassination of Kumari defense minister Abdul Shareef would not be allowed under (publicly known) United States law, but that prohibition is not codified in law, but in an executive order (EO 12,333) that Bartlet can and did change at will and without public notice of the change. Even if Bartlet had not changed law, this policy does not define what an assassination is, and the United States has long distinguished assassinations as separate from military operations directed against enemy leaders in the course of self-defense.
Generally, assassinations are considered by international law experts as the murder of a targeted individual for political purposes, usually involving circumstances of a covert or "treacherous" nature. Whether the intended killing of an individual counts as an assassination or as a generally acceptable military operation depends on whether the relevant countries are at peace or war, the forces carrying out the killing, and the means by which the killing is carried out.
(By the way, the Neutrality Act has nothing to do with assassinations. There were several acts known as the Neutrality Act in the 1930s, but the one still in practice, codified as Title 22, Chapter 9, Subchapter II of the U.S. Code, requires the President to designate foreign states involved in a war and thus prevent further U.S. involvement with either state)
Reforms since the 1970s
U.S. policy towards assassinations has been shaped since the 1970s by an executive order first promulgated in 1977 by President Gerald Ford and re-implemented by presidents since then. Ford's Executive Order 11905 provided, in part, that "no employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination." That order was expanded by President Jimmy Carter beyond "political" assassination to all assassinations, and is now embodied in EO 12,333, which was issued by President Ronald Reagan and maintained by subsequent presidents.
Ford's original order came in the wake of a Senate committee investigation into allegations about United States-authorized assassinations. That committee, which was chaired by Senator Frank Church, concluded that the United States was directly linked to the assassination of Rafael Trugillo of the Dominican Republic and to assassination attempts of Fidel Castro of Cuba., and recommended laws that would prohibit assassinations in peacetime. No such laws were ever enacted, probably pre-empted by Ford's executive action.
Executive Order 12,333's Limited Effect
EO 12,333 is open to much interpretation, perhaps intentionally so. It does not define assassination, which gives the United States some flexibility in its actions and allows it to pursue overt military operations even against specific individuals. It also does not define "engaging" or "conspiring," which arguably leaves room for the United States to encourage coup attempts as long as there are no specific plans for the killing of individuals.
The order also has limited constraint on the President, since he can modify or overrule the executive order at any time and, because it involves security matters, he does not need to notify the public of the change. The president would not have such flexibility to lift the constraint on his power if the ban on assassinations was embodied in a law rather than an executive order.
Effectively, the President has several options if he does wish to order the killing of a foreign leader. He can ask Congress to declare war, he can construe Article 51 to authorize the use of military forces in self-defense, he can narrowly interpret EO 12,333 to allow actions as long as specific plans to kill individuals are not involved, and he can modify or overrule EO 12,333 unilaterally. His ability to order the killing of a foreign leader visiting the United States, however, might be limited by other factors such as the general policy of not using military forces in the United States, which is given some effect by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.
Targeted Killing Sometimes Allowed via Anticipatory Self-Defense
During peacetime, the targeted killing of any individual, whether a combatant or not, is generally considered an assassination and is not permitted. However, countries at peace are still allowed to use military force under the inherent right of self-defense of nations, which is recognized in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.
Taking an arguably broad view of its rights under Article 51, the United States has used military force in peacetime situations where a country's actions were considered a direct threat to U.S. citizens or national security. The United States has invoked this right in launching airstrikes against Libya in 1983, invading Panama in 1989, and launching airstrikes against Iraq in 1993, though the United States did not officially target specific individuals in these operations in order to avoid having these actions labeled assassinations that might not be permitted by EO 12,333. Some critics say that the United States' view of Article 51 is overbroad, and that it was meant only to allow countries to repel either direct invasions or immediate, overwhelming threats under the Caroline standard established in the 1830s.
During wartime, countries have more freedom to target and attack individuals who are involved in military operations. A combatant is considered a legitimate target at all times, and is denoted as such by his or her uniform, and so a military operation to kill such an individual is considered permissible, unless done through treacherous means. Thus, the successful attack by U.S. military planes on Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto during World War II is generally considered an intended attack on an individual, but not an assassination.
Sources: W. Hays Parks, Executive Order 12333 and Assassination, Army Lawyer (1989). Stephen T. Hosmer, Operations against Enemy Leaders (Rand, 2001). Lt. Commander Patricia Zengel, Assassination and the Law of Armed Conflict, Military Law Review, Volume 134, Page 123 (Fall 1991). Bert Brandenburg, The Legality of Assassination as an Aspect of Foreign Policy, Virginia Journal of International Law, Volume 27, Page 655 (1987). Boyd M. Johnson, III, Executive Order 12,333: The Permissibility of an American Assassination of a Foreign Leader, Cornell International Law Journal, Volume 25, Page 401 (1992).
Date-Rape Drugs (last updated April 22, 2003) (back to top)
Drugs such as flunitrazepamn (commonly known as Rohypnol or roofies) and Gamma Hydroxybutyric acid (commonly known as GHB) have been called "date rape" drugs because they have been used to incapacitate potential sexual-assault victims by reducing their capacity to resist and causing memory problems afterwards. Rohypnol and GHB are both banned in the United States but are illegally imported and can be found in clubs.
It is difficult to know how prevalent are sexual assaults involving date-rape drugs, as they pass quickly through the body and residual amounts are very difficult to detect, drug officials have said.
According to a DEA official's prepared testimony in March 1999, "the number of cases in which GHB has been used to facilitate sexual assault is impossible to determine; many such cases may go unreported or unsubstantiated due to the difficulty of detecting its use. GHB is quickly eliminated from the body making detection in the body fluids unlikely. In addition, GHB's fast onset of depressant effects and its amnesiac effect render victims unable to recall the details of the attack."
Nonetheless, there were at least 13 sexual-assault cases involving 22 victims under the influence of GHB known to the DEA from 1996 to 1999, according to the DEA official's testimony.
GHB was originally sold in health food stores as a releasing agent for growth hormones that would stimulate muscle growth, but the FDA issued an advisory declaring GHB generally unsafe and illegal in 1990, and re-issued its warning in 1997. GHB then became a Schedule I controlled substance in 2000, which means that it cannot be used for any legal purpose in the United States.
Flunitrazepam is manufactured as Rohypnol by Hoffman-La Roche and is prescribed as a sleeping pill in Europe, Mexico and other places outside the United States, but it has never been approved for medical use in the United States and is treated as a Schedule I controlled substance in several ways.
The Drug-Induced Rape Prevention and Punishment Act of 1996 makes it a federal crime to give any unconsenting individual a controlled substance with the intent of committing a violent act such as rape against that individual. The Hillory J. Farias and Samantha Reid Date-Rape Drug Prohibition Act of 2000 banned GHB and required annual reports on the abuse of date-rape drugs. Some states have also revised their rape laws in recent years so that the use of date-rape drugs or other substances to reduce a victim's ability to consent or resist are covered.
Sources: March 1999 testimony by Terrance Woodworth, deputy director of the DEA's Office of Diversion Control, is on-line here. A September 2001 DEA report on club drugs, including GHB and Rohypnol, is on-line here.
Major Terrorist Acts against the United States or involving United States citizens (last updated September 25, 2001) (back to top)
- April 18, 1983: Bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, 63 killed. Linked to the Islamic separatist group Hizballah.
- October 23, 1983: Bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, 241 marines killed. Linked to the Islamic separatist group Hizballah.
- September 20, 1984: Bombing of the U.S. embassy annex in Beirut, Lebanon, 14 killed. Linked to the Islamic separatist group Hizballah.
- December 21, 1988: Bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, 259 passengers and crew killed, including 217 Americans. Two Libyans went on trial in the Netherlands in 2000; Abdel Basset al-Megrahi was found guilty and the other found not guilty.
- February 26, 1993: World Trade Center bombing: $500 million in damages, six killed, more than a thousand injured. This incident was organized by Ramzi Yousef, who is linked to Muslims who fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, but was not the doing of any formal terrorist organization with an identifiable organizational structure, known base of operation, or well-established means of fundraising.
- April 1993: Unsuccessful attempt by Iraqi Intelligence Service to assassinate former President George Bush during a visit to Kuwait. President Bill Clinton authorizes retaliatory cruise missile strikes against IIS headquarters in Baghdad.
- Summer 1995: FBI arrests members of a plot to attack various landmarks in New York City, organized by Shaykh Omar Abdel Rahman, the head of an Egyptian-based terrorist organization who also has links to Muslims who fought the Soviets in Afghanistan.
- April 19, 1995: Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, 168 killed, hundreds injured. Conducted by Timothy McVeigh (for more information, click here).
- April 3, 1996: Theodore Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber, is detained by federal agents after sending package bombs for nearly two decades, killing 3 and wounding 23.
- August 7, 1998: Bombing of two US embassies in the East African cities of Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, at least 301 killed, more than 5,000 injured. Organized by al-Qaeda, the terrorist group led by Osama Bin Laden.
- October 12, 2000: Attack on USS Cole in Yemeni port of Aden, 17 sailors killed. Organized by al-Qaeda, the terrorist group led by Osama Bin Laden.
- September 11, 2001: Attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, resulting in the deaths of thousands. Allegedly organized by al-Qaeda, the terrorist group led by Osama Bin Laden.
Sources: Terrorism in the United States 1999, by the FBI's Counterterrorism Threat Assessment and Warning Unit, available here. Foreign Terrorist Organizations, Designations by the Secretary of the State, released by the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism on October 9, 1999, available via the State Department's website online here.
|
|
|
Home / Calendar
The West Wing
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
The Colbert Report
Saturday Night Live
Commander in Chief
Law & Order
*
Issues
Resources
Site FAQ
Search via Google
Ripped from the Headlines?
West Wing: Santos discusses a lawsuit about intelligent design
West Wing: Electoral map as of the 10/9 episode; Santos needs to catch up big-time
SNL: The Miers nomination
South Park: Inspired by Katrina
Boston Legal: End to assault-weapons ban
Daily Show: A 2004 study found that 21 percent of young people regularly get their campaign news from comedy shows like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Saturday Night Live. So, some footnotes.
NOTE: All photos are copyright their respective owners.
| |
