Cully Stimson on the Majid Khan Plea

Before the terms of Majid Khan's plea deal emerged, some conservatives were preemptively outraged by its reported terms. Marc Thiessen denounced as "astounding" what he called  "The idea that the Obama administration would release this murderous man from Guantanamo Bay. . . ." With the full details of the plea deal now out there, the tone of the commentary in the conservative world has shifted dramatically. Writing on Heritage Foundation's web site, Cully Stimson describes the plea as "a significant milestone in the war against terrorism [that] likely foreshadows cases to come." Writes Stimson, who offers an excellent summary and analysis of the terms of the agreement, by the way:

The Khan plea . . . may mark a new era [for military commissions]—one in which we will see more cases, more trials, and generally more activity. That alone is a welcome development. If he cooperates as expected, it should result in some other HVDs deciding to plead guilty, too. This is a common occurrence outside the context of military commissions and a healthy and welcome sign now that the Khan plea has been accepted. . . . The other significant aspect of this case is the increasingly obvious beneficial effect of putting Brigadier General Mark Martins in charge of prosecutions and detailing seasoned national security prosecutors from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to military commissions cases. The Khan plea was handled by a veteran DOJ counterterrorism prosecutor who has substantial experience handling terrorism cases in federal court. Whether Martins can recruit and attract other seasoned counterterrorism prosecutors to spearhead military commissions cases remains to be seen. Nevertheless, the Khan plea and its unique and carefully crafted terms and conditions will likely act as a template for future cases and will, unless something goes awry, contribute to the pursuit of justice for victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.