Jimmy Karlan is professor emeritus at Antioch University in Keene, New Hampshire.
GUILFORD-This morning, in my rural Vermont home, I found myself facing an unexpected moral dilemma.
A couple of weeks ago, after setting traps, I had killed 17 mice. Today, I discovered one more dead mouse on my basement workbench and another, very much alive, dangling from a trap on the floor after a 3-foot fall onto the concrete.
Now what? I asked myself. Should I finish off this terrified, helpless, injured creature?
I rehearsed both options: the quick, grim efficiency of a second attack, or the slower and more cumbersome task of rescuing it.
As I approached, the mouse twisted frantically, doing its confused best to escape what it surely assumed was my fatal decision.
I hesitated, picked up my hand-held grapple, and found I could free the mouse without harming myself or making its fear any worse. Once released outside, it vanished into the snow in the blink of an eye.
Walking back to the house, it struck me: If this same scenario had played out in the hands of my government, the outcome would have been different.
A second strike would be rationalized as the only acceptable choice — after all, mice can cause structural damage and even house fires. Eliminating the “threat” would be labeled smart, defensive, and necessary.
* * *
Please accept my apologies if you feel I’ve trivialized drug policy and the lives of two survivors of the Sept. 2 Venezuelan boat strike.
Let me be perfectly clear where I stand: Without evidence of criminal activity and the opportunity for due process, the nine boaters killed by the first strike and the disregard for the rules of law and engagement for killing the two survivors (e.g., the Geneva Convention defines the ethical and strategic responsibility to war survivors), I personally find the U.S. actions abhorrent.
But I did find that this small incident in my daily life resonated with something in the bigger world.
There’s at least one interesting difference between me and Admiral Bradley, the commander of the Joint Special Operations Command who oversaw the boat strike.
I knew of no laws or rules of engagement around what to do with a surviving mouse. And yet, I rescued my enemy. Admiral Bradley had very clear laws and international rules of engagement that he chose to disregard and instead killed two injured, nonthreatening human beings.
In my basement, I had everything I needed to rescue and release my lone survivor and risk its return attack on my windowsills and wiring. A U.S. Navy ship — with thousands of personnel, advanced aircraft, and technology capable of retrieving wreckage from the bottom of the sea — had more than enough capacity to rescue two human beings clinging to a destroyed vessel.
If I could have looked my government in the eye, I would have like to say: “Get a military-grade grapple. You certainly have one.”
* * *
I have never served in the military, and I hold deep respect and gratitude for those who have.
But had I been in the position of making that decision, I hope I would have found the moral clarity and courage to say, “Rescue them. Warm them. Feed them. Confine them safely. Treat them with dignity. Follow the rules of engagement and the law. Protect their due process.”
And to those eager to slash government spending?
I’m willing to bet a house full of mice that rescuing two survivors clinging to a capsized motorboat costs far less than firing another missile from one of the most advanced — and expensive — weapons systems on Earth.
This Voices Essay was submitted to The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at voices@commonsnews.org.