The defense of a nation begins with the protection of its citizens and the certainty that attacks against its people will have consequences. The United States has built much of its identity on that conviction, backed by its armed forces and by institutions that have a duty to respond to the most serious crimes.
The case of Nidal Malik Hasan, convicted of the Fort Hood massacre, once again brings that responsibility to the forefront—with the difference that there are plans to broadcast the execution of the former military psychiatrist live on the internet.
Behind those killed and wounded by Hasan’s actions are families who had to learn to live with a loss and service members who experienced firsthand the consequences of that violence. Hasan received a sentence that reflects the gravity of his actions, and his execution represents the fulfillment of a penalty imposed by military justice.
Public discussion should start from that reality, because any reflection on punishment must first acknowledge the harm caused to the victims and the obligation of institutions to protect society.
See more. What are the best cruise lines in the world? These companies were recognized
The Department of Defense defends the broadcast of the execution as a warning about the consequences of serious crimes. This stance reflects a firm conception of authority, because acts against this great nation come at a price, and the state must make that clear.
The danger of such a broadcast lies in the fact that the final act may end up overshadowing the events that preceded it. Public attention could focus on the image of Hasan during his final moments, while the victims, their families, and those who survived the attack are pushed into the background. It would be a paradox if the man responsible for such a crime were once again to take center stage in public discourse, this time through the broadcast of his own death.
The United States has every reason to defend its citizens, support its armed forces, and demand consequences for attacks against the nation, and we will not apologize for that. The question is how to communicate this without letting the focus shift to spectacle and without the victims losing their rightful place in the collective memory. The legitimacy of justice and the public nature of its enforcement raise distinct issues, even though both are part of the same decision.
Hasan’s death will not erase what happened at Fort Hood nor bring back those the families lost, but our country must preserve the memory of the victims, stand behind its institutions, and make it clear that violence against its citizens has consequences. The United States must decide how it wants to tell this chapter of its history, without allowing interest in the condemned man’s final moments to ultimately overshadow those who never had the chance to return home.
¡Follow to El Mundo Usa.TV in social media!
