In a welcome announcement on Friday, August 2nd, it was revealed that Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III assumed direct oversight of the case and revoked the plea deal for the September 11th plotters. This decision will effectively put the death penalty back on the table for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, and two of his accomplices, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin Attash and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al-Hawsawi. This reversal acknowledges the severity of their crimes, including the murder of 2,976 individuals, and the over 4,000 additional deaths resulting from health effects related to Ground Zero.
For the first responders who ran into the burning towers, the families of those lost, and the veterans who fought in the ensuing Global War on Terror, maintaining the death penalty as an option is crucial for delivering justice. Many of these individuals carry the physical and emotional scars of that day and the wars that followed. Allowing KSM and his cohorts to avoid the death penalty would be a slap in the face to those who sacrificed so much.
Moral injury is the psychological distress that results from actions or inactions violating one’s moral or ethical code. This injury can stem not only from enemy actions but also from the decisions of one’s own government. Keeping the death penalty on the table is vital to prevent further moral injury. It preserves the integrity of justice for those who experienced the horrors of 9/11 and its aftermath. The U.S. military fell short of its fiscal 2023 enlisted recruiting goal by over 41,000 recruits. The Navy missed its target by 80%, the Army by 77%, and the Air Force by 89%. Leniency toward terrorists responsible for the worst attack on U.S. soil would likely deter potential recruits and weaken our national defense.
Moreover, failing to maintain the death penalty as an option risks exacerbating the already dire issue of veteran suicides. The number of veterans who take their own lives far exceeds the casualties of the Global War on Terror. By failing to deliver a sense of justice and closure, a lack of accountability would exacerbate the sense of betrayal and hopelessness among veterans, contributing to their mental health struggles. The aftermath of the fall of Kabul in 2021 served as a stark reminder of the psychological impact on our service members. Veterans who fought to secure Afghanistan watched in despair as the Taliban swiftly reclaimed control and harmed allies, undoing years of sacrifice. Reversing the plea deal with KSM mitigates further moral injury to our community, reinforces feelings of justice, and addresses the scars borne by those who served.
Keeping the death penalty on the table for terrorists like KSM also serves as a deterrent to our enemies. They must see our justice system as resolute and unwavering.
This decision strengthens our posture against global terrorism and sends the right message to both our allies and adversaries. It also eliminates the possibility of terrorists using kidnappings as leverage to negotiate the release of their comrades serving life sentences. This was the explicit goal of al-Qaeda during the attack on our U.S. Mission in Benghazi on September 11, 2012—the objective was to abduct Ambassador Christopher Stevens to trade for imprisoned terrorists.
Reinstating the death penalty as an option for KSM and his accomplices is not just a legal decision; it’s a moral one with far-reaching implications. It honors the sacrifices made by first responders, veterans, and their families, deters our enemies, and supports military recruitment and morale. As we again face growing threats to the U.S. Homeland from groups like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, maintaining a strong and resolute stance is crucial. Preventing further moral injury and committing to justice are essential for supporting those who have given so much in defense of our nation.