It’s been three days now since a civilian American freighter, the Maersk Alabama, was engaged by pirates in the Gulf of Aden, who were repelled by the crew but managed to escape with the captain. They are currently surrounded by a flotilla of U.S. Navy vessels, and are still holding out for a two million dollar ransom. The navy is trying to prevent them from reaching shore with the captain, while also making sure not to provoke any action which might cause them to harm the captain.

Today’s New York Times reports that Somali elders, who are in charge of the pirates’ actions, have offered to forego the ransom and allow the captain to go free, in exchange for which, they expect the pirate to be allowed to flee.

On Saturday, a group of Somali elders from Gara’ad, mediating on behalf of the pirates, spoke by satellite phone to American officials, according to Abdul Aziz Aw Mahamoud, a district commissioner in the semiautonomous region of Puntland in northeastern Somalia. The elders proposed a deal in which the pirates would release Captain Phillips, with no ransom paid, and that the pirates would then be allowed to escape.

But Mr. Abdul Aziz said that the Americans insisted that the pirates be handed over to Puntland authorities, and the elders refused. By noon local time, the Americans cut off communications with the elders, he said.

So, let me get this straight: the United States has decided to make Captain Richard Phillips, civilian, a political pawn?

Let me get this straight: they have gone back to the family and said “They offered to release the captain unharmed for no ransom, and we turned them down.“

So, now what?

More waiting? How is this in the captain’s interests? And if this is not about the captain’s health and safety, then we would have surely attacked by now, no?

Or perhaps we wish to provoke an escalation, an excuse to blow them out of the water? I don’t know, maybe it’s me, but they have 250 other hostages; are we prepared to risk their safety as well? What if the pirates decided on an eye for an eye?

Are we prepared to blockade Somali ports? Are we prepared to send in the Marines? Are we prepared to open a third front in the global war on terror?

I have to say, that makes no sense to me. Didn’t Mr. Obama campaign for the presidency on the stance that the U.S. military is already stretched too thin? Surely, and I may be way off here, President Obama has no intention of stretching them even further?

So here is where I’m confused. If we have no intention of escalating, why does it matter that the pirates be arrested? Do we expect the Somali court system to solve the piracy problem? Is it our place to insist that they do? Isn’t that meddling, and wouldn’t it have unforeseen consequences?

No, that doesn’t make sense to me either. What makes sense to me is that we get the captain back, safe and sound, while paying no ransom.

Now if we could only find a way to accomplish that…

So, do you suppose we could go back to the elders now and say “Sorry, we had a blonde moment, of course we accept that offer.”?

Is it too late to wipe the egg off our face?

Closing thought: liberal commentators have been fond of asking lately, “Who put the grownups in charge?”

One question that has lingered is, “How grown-up will this administration be when it comes to military conflict?”

Here we are. Now I really want to know: Does it matter to the American people that somebody arrests these pirates, or does it matter that the captain is returned safe and sound, with no ransom paid? I’d really like to know the answer to that.

Exit question: How does President Obama spin this if anything happens to the captain?