If in 2011, Osama bin Laden continued to be an active and vital leader of terrorism against the U.S., then President Obama's ultra-showy, ultra-expensive killing of bin Laden served a legitimate national security purpose.
However, if in 2011, bin Laden was merely a frail, aging player who'd faded from first-line power, President Obama's spectacular, Jack Bauer-like raid and over-the-top dramatic message to the nation were primarily political theater, not military moves to deter a genuinely imminent threat to U.S. security.
I'm also troubled by three other aspects of President Obama's brash assassination of Osama bin Laden:
Why was bin Laden not taken into custody and tried?
Why was Osama bin Laden killed rather than taken into custody and tried, as was justly done for Saddam Hussein? Or does the President believe that the U.S. has legal and moral rights to swoop into a foreign country, raid a private residence, then kill the occupants?
Attorney Glen Greenwald writes at Salon:
"I'd have strongly preferred that Osama bin Laden be captured rather than killed so that he could be tried for his crimes and punished in accordance with due process... But if he in fact used force to resist capture, then the U.S. military was entitled to use force against him... "
Given the fire-power of 25 highly-trained U.S. Navy Seals, how hard did U.S. forces try to take Osama bin Laden in a peaceable manner? Did they want him dead or alive and talking?
Why was Osama bin Laden's body quickly dumped at sea?
The Obama administration's lightning-quick dumping of bin Laden's body into the North Arabian Sea was jarringly convenient: Convenient to prevent independent parties from verifying the dead man's identity. Convenient to prevent independent medical authorities from verifying DNA results and mortal injuries.
It was also stupid, given that for more than five years, many world leaders firmly believed that Osama bin Laden was already dead, possibly deceased as early as 2002. The late Benazir Bhutto, former Pakistan Prime Minister, unequivocally confirmed months before her 2007 death that Osama bin Laden had been killed. (See HERE and HERE for more leaders who believed or were told that Osama was dead years ago.)
Why would President Obama clearly want absolutely no physical proof or independent testing that the U.S. military captured and killed Osama bin Laden?
Is it coincidence that Osama was killed at a political low-point for Obama?
President Obama reaps enormous political benefits for fulfilling his 2008 campaign promise to "kill bin Laden." Among the myriad of political pluses accruing to the President are:
- Conservatives openly praising President Obama, just as his approval ratings hit an all-time low, and just as he kicks off his 2012 reelection campaign.
- Credibility and support for his beleaguered war efforts in Afghanistan.
- Credibility and support for keeping the Guantanamo prison camp open.
- Credibility and support for his controversial proposal to meld Defense Department and CIA functions by assigning Army General David Petraeus to head the CIA and Leon Panetta, now CIA Director, to head the Defense Department.
Today, the morning after he directed the killing of Osama bin Laden, President Obama is hailed as a courageous leader, someone who lives up to the slogan "Mission Accomplished." Jack Bauer-aficionado Dick Cheney exuded to ABC News "The administration clearly deserves credit for the success of the operation... We all owe him the same sense of satisfaction that I'm sure they feel."
Would President Obama have undertaken this dazzling, silver screen-ready military raid and assassination if it wasn't guaranteed to boost Obama's approval ratings? Could the same result have been accomplished in a less showy, less expensive, less politically visible military exercise?
The World a Safer Place Without Osama bin Laden
The world is undoubtedly a safer place now that Osama bin Laden is unable to plot terrorist acts. But assassinating one ailing, sequestered has-been will have very little impact on United States national security.
President Obama is newly hailed today as a hero, a strong American leader, a President who fulfilled his campaign promise to protect our nation.
I quietly wonder, though: how much of Obama's bravado was clever, exquisitely-timed political showmanship, and how much was world-class leadership?
- Related Reading
- Is Osama bin Laden Dead? Are bin Laden Tapes Fakes?
- Eight mysteries about the killing of Osama Bin Laden (Salon)
- Osama Bin Laden Buried in the North Arabian Sea off the USS Carl Vinson (Chicago Sun times)
UPDATE ADDENDUM - Read Inside Sources: Bin Laden's Corpse Has Been On Ice For Nearly a Decade
Comments
“Would President Obama have undertaken this dazzling, silver screen-ready military raid and assassination if it wasn’t guaranteed to boost Obama’s approval ratings? Could the same result have been accomplished in a less showy, less expensive, less politically visible military exercise?”
Deborah, you ask exactly the right questions.
I don’t expect any answers but I do appreciate the questions.
I appreciate release and relief, but I have serious misgivings about an overly festive response. Even under inescapable conditions, killing is disagreeable.
After a few hours of reflection my own Twitter reaction took this form:
“From Christians who honor one man’s sainthood and the targeted assassination of another the same day, Good Lord deliver us.”
Thank you Ms. White. I agree completely…What a show our “leaders” have put on for all the world to see.
Yes I agree with the other above comments, Deborah, you are asking exactly the right questions. What we have here is no trial, no body, no evidence, and curious political timing. As you mentioned, there is the possibility that bin Laden was already dead. Also there is the possibility that there is no credible evidence linking him to 9/11, that would stand up in trial (if there were one). Regarding the timing, I have noticed that in the last few days, there has been a lot of (technically oriented) speculation over the authenticity of Obama’s “long form” birth certificate. Is Obama on a cover up mission? I’m not generally drawn to conspiracy theories, but these questions need to get out within visibility of the public eye.
No statute of limitations for murder applies to U.S. citizens, why should one apply to an admitted mortal enemy of the United States?
An argument could be made that he should have been captured alive, but it is so much more important that the families of his victims finally have some justice that this debate should wait till another day.
Anyone who suspects this could be fake doesn’t understand the political price Obama would have risked if a new video of bin Laden suddenly emerged after the fact. Obama would have looked like an idiot and he knows it.
No new video will emerge because Osama bin Laden is dead.
Are you serious? Osama was killed because there was no possibility of taking him alive without risk to the raiding party. Unless you were there, criticizing how our SEALS carried out their job is just plain wrong. They dumped the body at sea in accordance with Islamic law (within 24 hours of death etc.)so 1) there wouldn’t be a physical grave to rally around and 2) so we can say that we didn’t desecrate his body…which holds some importance to the religious fanatics, trust me. As for trials, I don’t recall any trials for those who Al-Qaeda beheaded alive, or for the innocent civilians that were murdered in attacks that have occured worldwide since the 1990′s.
To John Ballard: If the imaginary diety that you believe in can redeem an unapologetic mass murderer then that’s great, but for the rest of us, we’d prefer to fight our enemies rather than love them.
I personally don’t celebrate his death but I don’t mourn it either. A very dangrous man is no more, let’s at least recognize that.
Hi Deborah –
Let me try to provide some speculation to your questions:
1.”Why was bin Laden not taken into custody and tried?”
If the reports are true, he was firing back. Or, at the very least, in the middle of a crossfire. On a practical note, much of the key information about bin Laden was acquired via torture, and useless at trial.
2.”Why was Osama bin Laden’s body quickly dumped at sea?”
An excellent question. The Administration’s story is that no country would take the body. And that any land-based plot would become a jihadist shrine.
3. “Is it coincidence that Osama was killed at a political low-point for Obama?”
In 19 months, no one is going to remember bin Laden. Whatever bump Obama will get in the polls will quickly disappear.
They’ve known about the compaound since September. If he wanted a political bounce, might it not have been better to have dropped a Hellfire into the compound in late October, announced to the world that he had killed OBL, and have the Democrats retain the House. Instead, he waits 8 months, sends in a SEAL team, and gets DNA and intelligence. If it had gone wrong, the political downside would have been huge. Pakistan would have been up in arms. The right would have compared him to Jimmy Carter and the failed Embassy hostage rescue. And rightly so.
He just risked his reelection to kill OBL. There was no political upside.
Osama Bin Laden was raised as a devout Wahabi Muslim.
Wahabism dictates that all burial sites be at ground level and devoid of all ornamentation.
In their archives FOX NEWS site has him dead December 26, 2001…
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,41576,00.html
Maybe the reasons for killing an unarmed bin Laden have something to do with major political players in the USA and the bin Ladens having a joint interest in the Carlyle Group. Perhaps the the reason for not taking bin Laden alive have something related to the bin Laden family being air lifted out of the USA 9/12/01 when all other flights were grounded. Let’s face it, both political parties are as corrupt as the other and the only hope for America is the destruction of the two party system.
There is a lot of tin-foil hat wearing people commenting on this article. The same people who couldn’t believe that the U.S. has a government functional enough to check a president-elect’s birth certificate won’t believe that the military actually killed bin Laden.
Listen, (word deleted). We landed on the moon, our president is nowhere near socialist and bin Laden is dead.
Osama Bin Laden was ALREADY DEAD http://srggos.tk/h
The 10 key myths about Osama bin Laden
CIA project? Drug runner? Arsenal fan? Debunking the myths surrounding al-Qaida’s leader
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/03/osama-bin-laden-10-myths-cia-arsenal?CMP=twt_gu
It’s getting tiresome. Let’s move on…
Surely we have more important matters to discuss.
My answers:
1. The raid occurred at 2 am. If it occurred in darkness, it would have been difficult — unless someone turned on the lights — for the spec ops people to know exactly what the inhabitants were doing. Any gesture might have appeared to be a threatening one. BL perhaps could have been forcibly taken, but if all of this was happening quickly, it might not have been an easy call.
2. My initial thought about the burial at sea story was utter disbelief. I would have imagined that at least a full autopsy would have been performed to see if the reports of BL’s ill health panned out. I still have trouble believing it, though the idea of burying the body at sea to prevent the burial place from becoming a shrine sounds quite plausible.
3. The “raid as poll-booster” rationale is far-fetched. If this raid had failed, this could easily have been Obama’s Bay of Pigs. The raid seems to have had a lot of risk involved.
Obama has been nailed for not keeping his campaign promises. This one is one he kept, and he is getting nailed for it anyhow. Bin Laden murdered thousands of our countrymen and scores of others in other countries. Let us mark his passing with solemn gratitude.
What is the difference between justice and revenge is an issue that confuse and confound the law abiding people.
After all Americans say bin Laden was unarmed. The 80 American commandos could have simply kidnapped him, Eichmann-style, and brought him back to the United States alive rather than tossing his body irreligiously and disrespectfully into the ocean?
Examine the treatment of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the confessed mastermind of 9/11, who awaits a military commission in Guantánamo Bay. Most people would agree that bin Laden should have received similar trial not revenge. This is difficult to be reconciled with the system of justice that prevails in the egalitarian and enlightened West.
Take the case of Eichmann and Saddam Hussein. Did they receive true justice by appearing in courts of law and were they sentenced to death under the international rule of law? Was not Osama bin Laden unceremoniously treated to a revenge killing for his unproved crimes on 9/11 by meeting a violent and summary end without ever receiving his day in court? Many murderous leaders with an incalculable and un-washable amount of blood on their hands, and yet some received conventional justice, while bin Laden met his fate from a swifter and more wrathful style of biblical vengeance. Double standard is the order of the day.
Is the world we live in a moral universe or an oppressed one? In the moral universe, justice and vengeance are mirror images of one another. There can be no justice unless victims feel avenged, and revenge is never just unless it is proportionate. In cases of mass murder, retaliating “measure for measure,” an “eye for an eye,” “tit for tat,” is admittedly more difficult, but retaliation is still very visible as we in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. The sense of proportion is imprecise, regardless of what form it takes.