In a five-part series starting Sunday, Alan M. Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, addresses the trade-offs between civil liberties and national security.
- Employing military force against terrorists who use human shields: While the commitment to the rule of law constrains democracies in fighting terrorists who have no concern for international law, and we must fight terrorism with one hand behind our back, that does not mean that we cannot use the other hand forcefully, effectively, and legally.
- Surveillance and the right to privacy: The government is entitled to keep secret the technical aspects of our surveillance programs that give us a competitive advantage over our adversaries, and whose disclosure might provide terrorists with information useful to circumvent our legitimate efforts to keep track of their nefarious plans.
- Should terrorists who cannot be tried be detained?: Guantanamo contains several detainees who, if released, would almost certainly return to a life of terrorism. Imagine if the masked man who recently beheaded the two American journalists were captured, and a valued undercover source, who couldn't testify without blowing his cover, identified him as the killer. What should we do?
- Should terrorists be targeted for assassination?: What should a democracy, constrained by the rule of law, do if a dangerous terrorist cannot be captured, or can only be captured with undue risk to our soldiers? The U.S., UK, and Israel have opted for targeted killing. The use of drones with GPS-guided missiles has made this easier and more accurate.
- Is torture ever justified?: I am categorically opposed to torture, without exception. But I think every president would at least consider the option of torture of one terrorist, rather than permitting thousands of innocent Americans to be blown up.
The author is an emeritus professor of law at Harvard University and the author of Terror Tunnels: The Case For Israel's Just War Against Hamas.
