After Osama Bin Laden, is the world a safer place?
Declarations of outright victory in the 'war on terror' may be premature
The killing of Osama Bin Laden provided a moment of catharsis that had eluded America for a decade. Flag-draped crowds spontaneously gathered outside the White House and at Ground Zero in Manhattan, singing the national anthem. On television, Peter Bergen, an expert on al-Qaida and one of few people in the field to have actually met its leader, declared: "Killing bin Laden is the end of the war on terror."
The mood this morning is likely to be more sober, as Americans cast their minds back on past premature declarations of victory, in Afghanistan at the end of 2001 and at George W Bush's infamous "Mission Accomplished" triumphalism over Iraq in 2003.
The struggle against terrorism does not give itself easily to neat beginnings and endings. In one sense, the "war on terror" ended in March 2009 when the incoming Obama administration decided it was a counter-productive phrase in the first place, bringing America's enemies together rather than dividing them.
After being driven from Afghanistan in 2001, al-Qaida's response was to transform itself into a far looser global network that would be harder to destroy. In its most dilute form, al-Qaida is little more than a franchise that alienated groups around the world can sign up for, exchanging formal oaths of allegiance for the dread that the name inspires in their enemies.
The most likely short-term impact of Bin Laden's death is an increase in al-Qaida attacks around the world, as the martyr effect kicks in and these disparate groups carry out attacks to ensure that the killing of their spiritual leader does not go unavenged. If they fail to do so, their supporters and enemies alike could rightly question whether they are still in business at all.
The biggest question is: how long will Bin Laden's martyrdom last? Will it flame out and die in a blaze of small attacks or will it feed on itself and create a new generation of committed jihadists?
Bin Laden's end comes at a time when al-Qaida's influence is on the wane in the Arab and wider Islamic world. It has been conspicuous by its absence in the Arab Spring. To most of the revolutionaries in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, Bin Laden was irrelevant. But the Arab revolt is still in its early stages and its outcome is unclear. It is still possible that disillusion, protracted violence and the failure of the Nato intervention in Libya could create an opportunity for jihadists.
If and when that moment comes, much will depend on whether the martyrdom of Bin Laden is a more powerful factor than the absence of any plausible successor. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the aged, mumbling Egyptian doctor who has fulfilled the role of deputy since he brought his Egyptian Islamic Jihad into the al-Qaida fold in 1998, has none of Bin Laden's charisma. The group's Libyan ideologue, Abu Yahya al-Libi, also lacks the stature and respect necessary to take up the mantle.
The most likely outcome is fragmentation, with the possible rise of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) as the leading 'brand' leader. The Yemeni-based group showed its ingenuity last November by smuggling pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN) bombs inside printer cartridges onto FedEx and UPS planes flying to the West.
AQAP's strategy is to attempt frequent small attacks, to inflict a death by "a thousand cuts" on its western enemies. But Yemen is a narrow base to operate from and easier to isolate.
What does seem probable is that al-Qaida is today less able to mount a spectacular mass-casualty attack on the West, because it has lost Bin Laden's grand ambitions and the necessary cohesion he instilled. Furthermore, as it now appears he was living in a well-guarded compound in the heart of Pakistan and not in a cave in the remote tribal areas, he may well have been playing more of an operational role than many observers had thought possible.
But while the threat of a devastating attack on the West, possibly involving a new weapon like a "dirty" radiological bomb, has almost certainly receded, there remains the constant menace of the bomb in a cafe, as in Marrakech last week, or once more on a plane. That threat may never go away.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2011/may/02/osamabinladen-al-qaida
Monday, 2 May 2011
After Osama Bin Laden…
May 2, 2011, 12:00 AM
After Osama Bin Laden…
By NICHOLAS KRISTOF
President Obama has just announced that the United States killed Osama bin Laden today in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and recovered his body. It has been nine years and seven months since Osama orchestrated 9/11, but an American team finally killed him. His body is in American hands. This is revenge, but it’s also deterrence and also means that bin Laden won’t kill any more Americans. This is the single most important success the United States has had in its war against Al Qaeda.
So what does this mean? First, it is good for the United States reputation, power and influence that we finally got bin Laden. Bin Laden’s ability to escape from the U.S., and his apparent impunity, fed an image in some Islamist quarters of America as a paper tiger — and that encouraged extremists. Bin Laden himself once said that people bet on the strong horse, the horse that will win, and the killing underscores that it’s the United States that is the horse to bet on. Moreover, this sends a message that you mess with America at your peril, and that there will be consequences for a terror attack on the United States.
That said, killing bin Laden does not end Al Qaeda. Ayman al-Zawahri, the Egyptian No. 2, has long played a crucial role as Al Qaeda’s COO. And Al Qaeda is more of a loose network than a tightly structured organization, and that has become even more true in recent years. AQIM, the version of Al Qaeda in North Africa, is a real threat in countries like Mali and Mauritania, and killing bin Laden will probably have negligible consequences there. The AQIM terrorists may admire Osama and be inspired by him, but they also are believed to be largely independent of him. And Anwar al-Awlaki, the Qaeda-linked terrorist in Yemen, likewise won’t be deterred by bin Laden’s killing — Awlaki’s ability to engage in terrorism will be affected more by the upheavals now taking place in Yemen and whether that country has a strong and legitimate government that takes counter-terrorism seriously.
It’s also true that bin Laden’s killing might have mattered more in 2002 or 2003. At that time in countries like Pakistan, many ordinary people had a very high regard for bin Laden and doubted that he was centrally involved in the 9/11 attacks. Over time that view has changed: popular opinion has moved more against him, and you no longer see Osama t-shirts for sale in the markets. Some people still feel a bit of respect for his ability to outwit the United States, or they are so anti-American that they embrace anybody we don’t like, but bin Laden has been marginalized over time.
Osama’s declining image also means that he won’t be a martyr in many circles (although if Americans appear too celebratory and triumphant, dancing on his grave, that may create a sympathetic backlash for Osama). Many ordinary Pakistanis, Yemenis and Afghans will simply shrug and move on. His death won’t inspire people, the way it might have in 2002. And Al Qaeda is already going through a difficult time because it has been sidelined by the Arab Spring protests; on top of that, losing its top leader will be a major blow.
It will be fascinating to see what the Pakistani reaction is to a U.S. military operation on their soil. It seemed to me that President Obama was going out of his way to sound deferential to Pakistan — and to emphasize that Osama was an enemy of Pakistan as well as of America — precisely because he was concerned that Pakistanis might react with outrage at an American military operation.
President Obama said that he had word last August that Osama might be in a compound in Abbottabad. It took a long time to evaluate that information, and last week it was confirmed enough to order a strike. Then today there was an assault by American forces (perhaps a C.I.A. team or special forces?) and after a firefight bin Laden was killed and his body recovered. I can’t help wondering if Raymond Davis, the American who was arrested by Pakistanis after shooting people in Lahore while apparently on a C.I.A. operation, was somehow involved in this operation to confirm bin Laden’s presence, and if that wasn’t a reason for the hush-hush nature of his work. And of course this also raises questions about how Osama got to Abbottabad from Afghanistan and what if anything the Pakistanis knew. President Musharraf and others always told me and others that Osama was in Afghanistan, not Pakistan, and even suggested that he might have died. So much for Musharraf.
One question is whether the Osama killing will lead to intelligence that will help track down Zawahri and other Al Qaeda leaders or operatives, whether in Pakistan or elsewhere in the world. It might also help work out terror financing networks. Imagine the effort to go through Osama’s laptop.
Will there be a reprisal attack by Al Qaeda? Maybe. But after all Al Qaeda has already been trying to hit us. It’s not as if it has shown any restraint.
The larger challenge is whether we can press this gain and further dismantle Al Qaeda in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. If so, it may be easier to end the Afghan war by working out a deal in Afghanistan between the Karzai government and the Taliban. For while they are noxious in a thousand ways, the Taliban themselves are inward looking and not linked to foreign terrorism except through their hosting of Al Qaeda; if foreign fighters like bin Laden are out of the picture, an agreement becomes more feasible.
The United States and Afghan governments alike pretty much believe that the only way out of the problems in Afghanistan is some kind of a political deal, in which the Taliban stops fighting and joins the government, and in turn is allowed a measure of influence in Pashtun areas. That will be more feasible if bin Laden is gone — and if other foreign fighters also fade from the scene.
Of course, allowing the Taliban a role in southern Afghanistan raises all kinds of questions, not least the impact on Afghan women. The Taliban would be a catastrophe for Afghan women. On the other hand, the war is also a catastrophe for Afghan women. And there are some indications that the Taliban are willing to compromise on some elements of policy toward women, such as girls’ schooling. That would all have to be negotiated.
Finally, what does this mean for President Obama’s political prospects? I don’t think very much. November 2012 is a long way away, and the main political issue is likely to be the economy. After all, George H.W. Bush was a hero after the Gulf War victory in early 1991, and by Nov. 1992 was defeated by Bill Clinton because of the economic slowdown.
These are my quick thoughts, rushed together as President Obama speaks. So what do you think this means? Your thoughts most welcome.
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/after-osama-bin-laden/?ref=opinion
After Osama Bin Laden…
By NICHOLAS KRISTOF
President Obama has just announced that the United States killed Osama bin Laden today in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and recovered his body. It has been nine years and seven months since Osama orchestrated 9/11, but an American team finally killed him. His body is in American hands. This is revenge, but it’s also deterrence and also means that bin Laden won’t kill any more Americans. This is the single most important success the United States has had in its war against Al Qaeda.
So what does this mean? First, it is good for the United States reputation, power and influence that we finally got bin Laden. Bin Laden’s ability to escape from the U.S., and his apparent impunity, fed an image in some Islamist quarters of America as a paper tiger — and that encouraged extremists. Bin Laden himself once said that people bet on the strong horse, the horse that will win, and the killing underscores that it’s the United States that is the horse to bet on. Moreover, this sends a message that you mess with America at your peril, and that there will be consequences for a terror attack on the United States.
That said, killing bin Laden does not end Al Qaeda. Ayman al-Zawahri, the Egyptian No. 2, has long played a crucial role as Al Qaeda’s COO. And Al Qaeda is more of a loose network than a tightly structured organization, and that has become even more true in recent years. AQIM, the version of Al Qaeda in North Africa, is a real threat in countries like Mali and Mauritania, and killing bin Laden will probably have negligible consequences there. The AQIM terrorists may admire Osama and be inspired by him, but they also are believed to be largely independent of him. And Anwar al-Awlaki, the Qaeda-linked terrorist in Yemen, likewise won’t be deterred by bin Laden’s killing — Awlaki’s ability to engage in terrorism will be affected more by the upheavals now taking place in Yemen and whether that country has a strong and legitimate government that takes counter-terrorism seriously.
It’s also true that bin Laden’s killing might have mattered more in 2002 or 2003. At that time in countries like Pakistan, many ordinary people had a very high regard for bin Laden and doubted that he was centrally involved in the 9/11 attacks. Over time that view has changed: popular opinion has moved more against him, and you no longer see Osama t-shirts for sale in the markets. Some people still feel a bit of respect for his ability to outwit the United States, or they are so anti-American that they embrace anybody we don’t like, but bin Laden has been marginalized over time.
Osama’s declining image also means that he won’t be a martyr in many circles (although if Americans appear too celebratory and triumphant, dancing on his grave, that may create a sympathetic backlash for Osama). Many ordinary Pakistanis, Yemenis and Afghans will simply shrug and move on. His death won’t inspire people, the way it might have in 2002. And Al Qaeda is already going through a difficult time because it has been sidelined by the Arab Spring protests; on top of that, losing its top leader will be a major blow.
It will be fascinating to see what the Pakistani reaction is to a U.S. military operation on their soil. It seemed to me that President Obama was going out of his way to sound deferential to Pakistan — and to emphasize that Osama was an enemy of Pakistan as well as of America — precisely because he was concerned that Pakistanis might react with outrage at an American military operation.
President Obama said that he had word last August that Osama might be in a compound in Abbottabad. It took a long time to evaluate that information, and last week it was confirmed enough to order a strike. Then today there was an assault by American forces (perhaps a C.I.A. team or special forces?) and after a firefight bin Laden was killed and his body recovered. I can’t help wondering if Raymond Davis, the American who was arrested by Pakistanis after shooting people in Lahore while apparently on a C.I.A. operation, was somehow involved in this operation to confirm bin Laden’s presence, and if that wasn’t a reason for the hush-hush nature of his work. And of course this also raises questions about how Osama got to Abbottabad from Afghanistan and what if anything the Pakistanis knew. President Musharraf and others always told me and others that Osama was in Afghanistan, not Pakistan, and even suggested that he might have died. So much for Musharraf.
One question is whether the Osama killing will lead to intelligence that will help track down Zawahri and other Al Qaeda leaders or operatives, whether in Pakistan or elsewhere in the world. It might also help work out terror financing networks. Imagine the effort to go through Osama’s laptop.
Will there be a reprisal attack by Al Qaeda? Maybe. But after all Al Qaeda has already been trying to hit us. It’s not as if it has shown any restraint.
The larger challenge is whether we can press this gain and further dismantle Al Qaeda in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. If so, it may be easier to end the Afghan war by working out a deal in Afghanistan between the Karzai government and the Taliban. For while they are noxious in a thousand ways, the Taliban themselves are inward looking and not linked to foreign terrorism except through their hosting of Al Qaeda; if foreign fighters like bin Laden are out of the picture, an agreement becomes more feasible.
The United States and Afghan governments alike pretty much believe that the only way out of the problems in Afghanistan is some kind of a political deal, in which the Taliban stops fighting and joins the government, and in turn is allowed a measure of influence in Pashtun areas. That will be more feasible if bin Laden is gone — and if other foreign fighters also fade from the scene.
Of course, allowing the Taliban a role in southern Afghanistan raises all kinds of questions, not least the impact on Afghan women. The Taliban would be a catastrophe for Afghan women. On the other hand, the war is also a catastrophe for Afghan women. And there are some indications that the Taliban are willing to compromise on some elements of policy toward women, such as girls’ schooling. That would all have to be negotiated.
Finally, what does this mean for President Obama’s political prospects? I don’t think very much. November 2012 is a long way away, and the main political issue is likely to be the economy. After all, George H.W. Bush was a hero after the Gulf War victory in early 1991, and by Nov. 1992 was defeated by Bill Clinton because of the economic slowdown.
These are my quick thoughts, rushed together as President Obama speaks. So what do you think this means? Your thoughts most welcome.
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/after-osama-bin-laden/?ref=opinion
The Post-Bin Laden World
The Post-Bin Laden World
By ROGER COHEN
Published: May 2, 2011
RECOMMEND
TWITTER
COMMENTS (9)
E-MAIL
PRINT
REPRINTS
SHARE
BENGHAZI, LIBYA — Osama Bin Laden is dead — and so is an old Middle East. That they died together is fortuitous and apt.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
Roger Cohen
Go to Columnist Page »
Related
Osama bin Laden, 1957-2011: The Most Wanted Face of Terrorism (May 2, 2011)
Bin Laden Is Dead, Obama Says (May 2, 2011)
Related in Opinion
Room For Debate: The War on Terror After Osama Bin Laden
Readers' Comments
Share your thoughts.
Post a Comment »
Read All Comments (9) »
Bin Laden lived to propel history backward to the reestablishment of a Muslim caliphate. He died a marginal figure to the transformation fast-forwarding the Arab world toward pluralism and self-expression.
He came of age as the Arab world shifted from Nasserite nationalism to the discovery of identity in political Islamism. It was a potent form of anti-Western defiance. His death comes as post-Islamist revolutions from Tunis to Cairo topple despotism in the name of democratic values long denied Arabs, who, in their vast majority, now seek a reasonable balance between modernity and their faith. Arab pride has disentangled itself from the complex of the West.
Bin Laden’s Holy War drew sustenance from “Westoxification” — the sense of humiliation among Arabs at perceived Western dominance and aggression. Bin Laden whipped that resentment into Al Qaeda’s capacity for nihilistic mass murder.
He died as Arabs en masse move away from the politics of rage and revenge, directed mainly outward, toward a new politics of responsibility and representative government, directed mainly inward.
It is not only the timing of his death at the hands of U.S. forces that is apt, but also its location — far from a Middle East with which he had lost touch. He died in Pakistan. Or rather he died in the so-called AfPak theater where a decade of war has fed jihadist ideology even as it has lost appeal for Web-savvy Arab youth in the region of its birth.
An era has passed. It was a painful decade of disorientation and American whiplash. The mass murder so agonizing it had to be distilled to three digits — 9/11 — poisoned a new century at its outset. Bin Laden was that poison’s slow drip.
I was in New York City that day, at the bottom of Atlantic Avenue, by the East River, when a guy next to me said, “Hey, look, the World Trade Center’s on fire.” So, on a clear day, began the pulverizing horror that turned human beings to dust and shook Americans’ most basic assumptions about the land that morphed into a “homeland.”
Today I’m in Benghazi, where brave Libyans determined to forge a decent society battle an Arab despot, Muammar al-Qaddafi, the sometime terrorist and slayer of Americans who then claimed anti-Qaeda credentials to secure the support of the West.
In fact, of course, his tyranny, which must end, has fed the very extremism he claimed to oppose. Bin Laden thrived on Arab despotism and on the American hypocrisy involved in supporting that repression.
He died as President Obama’s America has made democratization in the Arab world at least a semi-serious U.S. objective for the first time. Effective counterterrorism does not lie in starving a whole region of basic rights. That much has been learned.
There is hope in this passage from the suicidal Arab rage of 9/11 to the brave resistance of Libya’s 2/17 Benghazi revolution — and the other revolutions and uprisings sweeping the region. A long road is left to travel — Al Qaeda is not dead — but the first step was the hardest: the breaking of the captive Arab mind, the triumph of engagement over passivity, the defeat of fear. Bin Laden’s rose-tinged caliphate was the solace of the disenfranchised, the disempowered and the desperate. A young guy with a job, a vote and prospects does not need virgins in paradise.
America initially nourished Bin Laden’s ideology as a means to defeat the Soviet empire, before becoming its target. Neglect and end-of-history euphoria preceded devastating blowback. In the decade since then, there has been further blowback — from two punishing wars and from mistaken policy.
This is a triumphant day for a young American president who changed policy, retiring his predecessor’s horrible misnomer, the Global War on Terror or G.W.O.T., in order to focus, laser-like, on the terrorists determined to do the United States and its allies harm. Bin Laden had enticed George W. Bush’s flailing America into his web. Obama saw the need for extraction and engagement — extraction from the wars and engagement with the moderate Muslim majority.
The passage has been uneven but his achievements unquestionable. Open societies have this going for them over circles of fanatical conviction: they learn from mistakes.
How then to complete the work and make a corpse not only of Bin Laden but his movement? Oust Qaddafi with ruthlessness and in short order. Steer the Arab revolutions into port with consistent political support and funding. Arab democracy must also mean Arab opportunity.
End the war in Afghanistan as soon as America’s basic security requirements are met. Make America’s closest regional ally, Israel, understand that a changed Middle East cannot be met with unchanging Israeli policies. Palestine, like Israel, must rise to the region’s dawning post-Osama era of responsibility and representation.
The 2012 campaign just got less interesting. Obama, as I’ve written before, is a lucky man. I suspect luck and purposefulness do a two-term president make. Obama got Osama because he turned a wider tide.
You can follow Roger Cohen on Twitter at twitter.com/nytimescohen .
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/opinion/03iht-edcohen03.html?ref=opinion
By ROGER COHEN
Published: May 2, 2011
RECOMMEND
COMMENTS (9)
REPRINTS
SHARE
BENGHAZI, LIBYA — Osama Bin Laden is dead — and so is an old Middle East. That they died together is fortuitous and apt.
Damon Winter/The New York Times
Roger Cohen
Go to Columnist Page »
Related
Osama bin Laden, 1957-2011: The Most Wanted Face of Terrorism (May 2, 2011)
Bin Laden Is Dead, Obama Says (May 2, 2011)
Related in Opinion
Room For Debate: The War on Terror After Osama Bin Laden
Readers' Comments
Share your thoughts.
Post a Comment »
Read All Comments (9) »
Bin Laden lived to propel history backward to the reestablishment of a Muslim caliphate. He died a marginal figure to the transformation fast-forwarding the Arab world toward pluralism and self-expression.
He came of age as the Arab world shifted from Nasserite nationalism to the discovery of identity in political Islamism. It was a potent form of anti-Western defiance. His death comes as post-Islamist revolutions from Tunis to Cairo topple despotism in the name of democratic values long denied Arabs, who, in their vast majority, now seek a reasonable balance between modernity and their faith. Arab pride has disentangled itself from the complex of the West.
Bin Laden’s Holy War drew sustenance from “Westoxification” — the sense of humiliation among Arabs at perceived Western dominance and aggression. Bin Laden whipped that resentment into Al Qaeda’s capacity for nihilistic mass murder.
He died as Arabs en masse move away from the politics of rage and revenge, directed mainly outward, toward a new politics of responsibility and representative government, directed mainly inward.
It is not only the timing of his death at the hands of U.S. forces that is apt, but also its location — far from a Middle East with which he had lost touch. He died in Pakistan. Or rather he died in the so-called AfPak theater where a decade of war has fed jihadist ideology even as it has lost appeal for Web-savvy Arab youth in the region of its birth.
An era has passed. It was a painful decade of disorientation and American whiplash. The mass murder so agonizing it had to be distilled to three digits — 9/11 — poisoned a new century at its outset. Bin Laden was that poison’s slow drip.
I was in New York City that day, at the bottom of Atlantic Avenue, by the East River, when a guy next to me said, “Hey, look, the World Trade Center’s on fire.” So, on a clear day, began the pulverizing horror that turned human beings to dust and shook Americans’ most basic assumptions about the land that morphed into a “homeland.”
Today I’m in Benghazi, where brave Libyans determined to forge a decent society battle an Arab despot, Muammar al-Qaddafi, the sometime terrorist and slayer of Americans who then claimed anti-Qaeda credentials to secure the support of the West.
In fact, of course, his tyranny, which must end, has fed the very extremism he claimed to oppose. Bin Laden thrived on Arab despotism and on the American hypocrisy involved in supporting that repression.
He died as President Obama’s America has made democratization in the Arab world at least a semi-serious U.S. objective for the first time. Effective counterterrorism does not lie in starving a whole region of basic rights. That much has been learned.
There is hope in this passage from the suicidal Arab rage of 9/11 to the brave resistance of Libya’s 2/17 Benghazi revolution — and the other revolutions and uprisings sweeping the region. A long road is left to travel — Al Qaeda is not dead — but the first step was the hardest: the breaking of the captive Arab mind, the triumph of engagement over passivity, the defeat of fear. Bin Laden’s rose-tinged caliphate was the solace of the disenfranchised, the disempowered and the desperate. A young guy with a job, a vote and prospects does not need virgins in paradise.
America initially nourished Bin Laden’s ideology as a means to defeat the Soviet empire, before becoming its target. Neglect and end-of-history euphoria preceded devastating blowback. In the decade since then, there has been further blowback — from two punishing wars and from mistaken policy.
This is a triumphant day for a young American president who changed policy, retiring his predecessor’s horrible misnomer, the Global War on Terror or G.W.O.T., in order to focus, laser-like, on the terrorists determined to do the United States and its allies harm. Bin Laden had enticed George W. Bush’s flailing America into his web. Obama saw the need for extraction and engagement — extraction from the wars and engagement with the moderate Muslim majority.
The passage has been uneven but his achievements unquestionable. Open societies have this going for them over circles of fanatical conviction: they learn from mistakes.
How then to complete the work and make a corpse not only of Bin Laden but his movement? Oust Qaddafi with ruthlessness and in short order. Steer the Arab revolutions into port with consistent political support and funding. Arab democracy must also mean Arab opportunity.
End the war in Afghanistan as soon as America’s basic security requirements are met. Make America’s closest regional ally, Israel, understand that a changed Middle East cannot be met with unchanging Israeli policies. Palestine, like Israel, must rise to the region’s dawning post-Osama era of responsibility and representation.
The 2012 campaign just got less interesting. Obama, as I’ve written before, is a lucky man. I suspect luck and purposefulness do a two-term president make. Obama got Osama because he turned a wider tide.
You can follow Roger Cohen on Twitter at twitter.com/nytimescohen .
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/opinion/03iht-edcohen03.html?ref=opinion
Bin Laden’s Death Likely to Deepen Suspicions of Pakistan
Bin Laden’s Death Likely to Deepen Suspicions of Pakistan
By JANE PERLEZ
Published: May 2, 2011
The killing of Osama bin Laden deep inside Pakistan in an American operation, almost in plain sight in a medium-sized city that hosts numerous Pakistani forces, seems certain to further inflame tensions between the United States and Pakistan and raise significant questions about whether elements of the Pakistani spy agency knew the whereabouts of the leader of Al Qaeda.
Related
Bin Laden Is Dead, Obama Says (May 2, 2011)
Osama bin Laden, 1957-2011: The Most Wanted Face of Terrorism (May 2, 2011)
Related in Opinion
ROOM FOR DEBATE
The War on Terror After Osama Bin Laden
Al Qaeda's influence was waning, but will Bin Laden's death embolden a new wave of terrorists?
Post a Comment
The presence of Bin Laden in Pakistan, something Pakistani officials have long dismissed, goes to the heart of the lack of trust Washington has felt over the last 10 years with its contentious ally, the Pakistani military and its powerful spy partner, the Inter-Services Intelligence.
With Bin Laden’s death, perhaps the central reason for an alliance forged on the ashes of 9/11 has been removed, at a moment when relations between the countries are already at one of their lowest points as their strategic interests diverge over the shape of a post-war Afghanistan.
For nearly a decade, the United States has paid Pakistan more than $1 billion a year for counterterrorism operations whose chief aim was the killing or capture of Bin Laden, who slipped across the border from Afghanistan after the American invasion.
The circumstance of Bin Laden’s death may not only jeopardize that aid, but will also no doubt deepen suspicions that Pakistan has played a double game, and perhaps even knowingly harbored the Qaeda leader.
Bin Laden was not killed in the remote and relatively lawless tribal regions, where the United States has run a campaign of drone attacks aimed at Qaeda militants, where he was long rumored to have taken refuge, and where the reach of the Pakistani government is limited.
Rather, he was killed in Abbottabad, a city of about 500,000, in a large and highly secured compound that, a resident of the city said, sits virtually adjacent to the grounds of a military academy. In an ironic twist, the academy was visited just last month by the Pakistani military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, where he proclaimed that Pakistan had “cracked” the forces of terrorism, an assessment that was greeted with skepticism in Washington.
In addition, the city hosts numerous Pakistani forces — three different regiments, and a unit of the Army Medical Corps. According to some reports, the compound and its elaborate walls and security gates may have been built specifically for the Qaeda leader in 2005, hardly an obscure undertaking in a part of the city that the resident described as highly secure.
A Qaeda operative, Umar Patek, an Indonesian involved in the Bali bombings in 2002, was captured in a house in Abbottabad in February where he was protected by a Qaeda courier, who worked as a clerk at the city post office.
Almost instantly, the death of Bin Laden in such a place in Pakistan led to fresh recriminations from its neighbors.
“The fundamental challenge is how does the West treat Pakistan from now on?” said Amrullah Saleh, the former intelligence director for Afghanistan and a fierce foe of Pakistan.
Still, it was too soon to say whether Bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad reflected Pakistani complicity or incompetence.
The capture in Pakistan of other top Qaeda operatives, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, in the years immediately after 9/11 make it clear that Pakistan, a large country with a population relatively sympathetic to Al Qaeda, is easy to hide in, despite Pakistani denials. But those high-profile joint operations have declined in the last few years.
At the very least, Bin Laden’s death in Pakistan now will be highly embarrassing to the country’s military and intelligence establishment.
After the killing of Bin Laden became public in Pakistan, an ISI official confirmed his death but then insisted, contrary to President Obama’s statement, that he was killed in a joint United States-Pakistani operation, apparently an effort to show that Pakistan knew about the operation in advance.
On Monday, General Kayani, President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, and the ISI chief, Lt. Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha, met in Islamabad but had not issued any statement more than six hours after Mr. Obama’s announcement of Bin Laden’s death.
General Kayani appears to be less enthusiastic about the alliance with the United States because he is under pressure from his senior generals, according to Pakistani officials who keep in touch with the military. About half of the 11 corps commanders, the generals who make up the senior command, have questioned the wisdom of the alliance, according the officials. Some of the younger mid-ranking officers — majors and captains — seem to have more sympathy for the militants than for the idea of fighting them, they said.
The Pakistani government and the military have played a delicate balancing act since 9/11 between sometimes trying to overtly support the United States in its goal to get rid of Al Qaeda, and local popular Pakistani sentiment that seemed to, at the very least, tolerate the militants. A Pew poll taken in Pakistan in early 2010 showed that only 3 percent of Pakistanis believed that Al Qaeda was a threat and 68 percent held a negative view of the United States.
After a C.I.A. contractor, Raymond A. Davis, shot and killed two Pakistanis in broad daylight in January in the city of Lahore, the balance tipped against the United States in Pakistani statements and attitudes.
In the aftermath of the shooting, General Kayani asked the American military to draw down its Special Operations training contingent and asked the Americans to remove C.I.A. contractors from Pakistan, as well as C.I.A. personnel who operate the drone campaign from an air base in southern Baluchistan, an American official said. The drone strikes against militants in the tribal areas, which American officials say have been effective, will continue despite Pakistani objections, American officials say.
Another major irritant has been the failure of the Pakistani military to heed the calls of the United States to squash the Qaeda-linked militants known as the Haqqani network, which is given a free hand by the Pakistanis in North Waziristan.
Two weeks ago, moments before meeting General Kayani in Islamabad, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, publicly lambasted the Pakistani military for allowing the Haqqani network to freely cross the border from Pakistan’s tribal areas into Afghanistan and kill American and NATO soldiers.
Bin Laden was an irritant, too, now removed. American officials have speculated over the last few years whether some Pakistani officials in the spy agency knew the whereabouts of Bin Laden. When asked, many Pakistani ISI officials nearly always gave the same answer: Bin Laden was dead, or they insisted, they did not know where he was.
Alissa J. Rubin contributed reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan, and Pir Zubair Shah from New York.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/world/asia/03pakistan.html?hp
By JANE PERLEZ
Published: May 2, 2011
The killing of Osama bin Laden deep inside Pakistan in an American operation, almost in plain sight in a medium-sized city that hosts numerous Pakistani forces, seems certain to further inflame tensions between the United States and Pakistan and raise significant questions about whether elements of the Pakistani spy agency knew the whereabouts of the leader of Al Qaeda.
Related
Bin Laden Is Dead, Obama Says (May 2, 2011)
Osama bin Laden, 1957-2011: The Most Wanted Face of Terrorism (May 2, 2011)
Related in Opinion
ROOM FOR DEBATE
The War on Terror After Osama Bin Laden
Al Qaeda's influence was waning, but will Bin Laden's death embolden a new wave of terrorists?
Post a Comment
The presence of Bin Laden in Pakistan, something Pakistani officials have long dismissed, goes to the heart of the lack of trust Washington has felt over the last 10 years with its contentious ally, the Pakistani military and its powerful spy partner, the Inter-Services Intelligence.
With Bin Laden’s death, perhaps the central reason for an alliance forged on the ashes of 9/11 has been removed, at a moment when relations between the countries are already at one of their lowest points as their strategic interests diverge over the shape of a post-war Afghanistan.
For nearly a decade, the United States has paid Pakistan more than $1 billion a year for counterterrorism operations whose chief aim was the killing or capture of Bin Laden, who slipped across the border from Afghanistan after the American invasion.
The circumstance of Bin Laden’s death may not only jeopardize that aid, but will also no doubt deepen suspicions that Pakistan has played a double game, and perhaps even knowingly harbored the Qaeda leader.
Bin Laden was not killed in the remote and relatively lawless tribal regions, where the United States has run a campaign of drone attacks aimed at Qaeda militants, where he was long rumored to have taken refuge, and where the reach of the Pakistani government is limited.
Rather, he was killed in Abbottabad, a city of about 500,000, in a large and highly secured compound that, a resident of the city said, sits virtually adjacent to the grounds of a military academy. In an ironic twist, the academy was visited just last month by the Pakistani military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, where he proclaimed that Pakistan had “cracked” the forces of terrorism, an assessment that was greeted with skepticism in Washington.
In addition, the city hosts numerous Pakistani forces — three different regiments, and a unit of the Army Medical Corps. According to some reports, the compound and its elaborate walls and security gates may have been built specifically for the Qaeda leader in 2005, hardly an obscure undertaking in a part of the city that the resident described as highly secure.
A Qaeda operative, Umar Patek, an Indonesian involved in the Bali bombings in 2002, was captured in a house in Abbottabad in February where he was protected by a Qaeda courier, who worked as a clerk at the city post office.
Almost instantly, the death of Bin Laden in such a place in Pakistan led to fresh recriminations from its neighbors.
“The fundamental challenge is how does the West treat Pakistan from now on?” said Amrullah Saleh, the former intelligence director for Afghanistan and a fierce foe of Pakistan.
Still, it was too soon to say whether Bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad reflected Pakistani complicity or incompetence.
The capture in Pakistan of other top Qaeda operatives, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, in the years immediately after 9/11 make it clear that Pakistan, a large country with a population relatively sympathetic to Al Qaeda, is easy to hide in, despite Pakistani denials. But those high-profile joint operations have declined in the last few years.
At the very least, Bin Laden’s death in Pakistan now will be highly embarrassing to the country’s military and intelligence establishment.
After the killing of Bin Laden became public in Pakistan, an ISI official confirmed his death but then insisted, contrary to President Obama’s statement, that he was killed in a joint United States-Pakistani operation, apparently an effort to show that Pakistan knew about the operation in advance.
On Monday, General Kayani, President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, and the ISI chief, Lt. Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha, met in Islamabad but had not issued any statement more than six hours after Mr. Obama’s announcement of Bin Laden’s death.
General Kayani appears to be less enthusiastic about the alliance with the United States because he is under pressure from his senior generals, according to Pakistani officials who keep in touch with the military. About half of the 11 corps commanders, the generals who make up the senior command, have questioned the wisdom of the alliance, according the officials. Some of the younger mid-ranking officers — majors and captains — seem to have more sympathy for the militants than for the idea of fighting them, they said.
The Pakistani government and the military have played a delicate balancing act since 9/11 between sometimes trying to overtly support the United States in its goal to get rid of Al Qaeda, and local popular Pakistani sentiment that seemed to, at the very least, tolerate the militants. A Pew poll taken in Pakistan in early 2010 showed that only 3 percent of Pakistanis believed that Al Qaeda was a threat and 68 percent held a negative view of the United States.
After a C.I.A. contractor, Raymond A. Davis, shot and killed two Pakistanis in broad daylight in January in the city of Lahore, the balance tipped against the United States in Pakistani statements and attitudes.
In the aftermath of the shooting, General Kayani asked the American military to draw down its Special Operations training contingent and asked the Americans to remove C.I.A. contractors from Pakistan, as well as C.I.A. personnel who operate the drone campaign from an air base in southern Baluchistan, an American official said. The drone strikes against militants in the tribal areas, which American officials say have been effective, will continue despite Pakistani objections, American officials say.
Another major irritant has been the failure of the Pakistani military to heed the calls of the United States to squash the Qaeda-linked militants known as the Haqqani network, which is given a free hand by the Pakistanis in North Waziristan.
Two weeks ago, moments before meeting General Kayani in Islamabad, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, publicly lambasted the Pakistani military for allowing the Haqqani network to freely cross the border from Pakistan’s tribal areas into Afghanistan and kill American and NATO soldiers.
Bin Laden was an irritant, too, now removed. American officials have speculated over the last few years whether some Pakistani officials in the spy agency knew the whereabouts of Bin Laden. When asked, many Pakistani ISI officials nearly always gave the same answer: Bin Laden was dead, or they insisted, they did not know where he was.
Alissa J. Rubin contributed reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan, and Pir Zubair Shah from New York.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/world/asia/03pakistan.html?hp
Pakistan’s critics ask how bin Laden’s refuge went unnoticed
Pakistan’s critics ask how bin Laden’s refuge went unnoticed
By Karin Brulliard and Debbi Wilgoren, Updated: Monday, May 2, 5:15 PM
ISLAMABAD —Osama bin Laden’s slaying by U.S. forces in an easily accessible Pakistani city ended years of speculation that he was hiding in remote tribal areas and raised new questions about how his presence could have gone undetected by Pakistan’s powerful military.
U.S. forces for months had watched the luxury compound in Abbottabad, a city 65 miles from the capital that is home to two Pakistani army regiments. Early Monday morning (Sunday afternoon in Washington), troops stormed the compound via helicopter.
Four helicopters swooped in early Monday and killed Osama bin Laden in a fiery American raid on his fortress-like compound in a Pakistani town that is home to three army regiments. (May 2)
Video
U.S. soldiers and civilians alike are celebrating the U.S. military mission that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. Several soldiers from Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington state stood on an overpass and waved flags at passing motorists. (May 2)
More On This Story
Osama bin Laden killed in U.S. raid, buried at sea
Bin Laden's secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden's hideout better known as a tourism, military hub
Full coverage: The death of Osama bin Laden
View all Items in this Story
Bin Laden was shot dead inside a sprawling and heavily fortified mansion within walking distance from a premiere military academy. He joins a list of high-value terror suspects captured or killed in populous mainland Pakistan, far from the wild borderlands where U.S. intelligence officials had long believed bin Laden was sequestered.
The Pakistani government’s failure to discover bin Laden’s whereabouts quickly intensified suspicions in Washington and elsewhere that Islamabad is either uncommitted to the U.S.-backed fight against Islamist militancy or is playing a dangerous game by sheltering terrorists even as it pledges to fight militant groups. Pakistan for years had insisted that bin Laden was not on Pakistani soil.
“How could [bin Laden] be in such a compound without being noticed?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said on Fox News Monday morning. A Senate hearing on U.S.-Pakistan relations is scheduled for this week.
In India, Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram noted “with grave concerns” that “terrorists belonging to different organizations find sanctuary in Pakistan.” He said India still believes the people behind the Mumbai terror attacks in his country are being sheltered in Pakistan.
“It is a bit embarrassing, that even if he was hiding there, [the Pakistani army] would not know,” said Rahimullah Yusufzai, a Pakistani journalist who is an expert on militancy in the country’s northwest. “It means your intelligence is not good.”
Hussein Haqqani, Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, said his government “had no knowledge” that the long-hunted bin Laden was, essentially, living in their midst.
“If the Pakistani government had known that Osama bin Laden was there, we would have got him....We are very glad that our American partners did,” Haqqani said on CNN. “We did not know, we had no knowledge. And if we had knowledge, we would have acted on it long ago.”
Haqqani also noted that Pakistan is a large country that includes many people sympathetic to bin Laden and his cause.
President Asif Ali Zardari learned of bin Laden’s death in a phone call from President Obama, a foreign ministry statement said. The statement said the raid was carried out “in accordance with declared U.S. policy that Osama bin Laden will be eliminated in a direct action by the U.S. forces, wherever found in the world.”
The statement pointedly did not cite any Pakistani involvement in the operation, even though Obama, in an announcement from the White House, mentioned Pakistani assistance. The omission could reflect concern within the government here about a possible backlash from Islamist insurgents or Pakistan’s strongly anti-American public.
Depending on whether Pakistan was helpful, the success of the mission could ease growing tension between U.S. and Pakistani military and intelligence officials, who have sparred recently over America’s presence in Pakistan, CIA drone strikes, Pakistani reluctance to strike terror hubs and U.S. assertions that Pakistani intelligence operatives protect or assist insurgents.
Senior U.S. officials said no other government was informed of the raid ahead of time — including Pakistan’s.
Video
Four helicopters swooped in early Monday and killed Osama bin Laden in a fiery American raid on his fortress-like compound in a Pakistani town that is home to three army regiments. (May 2)
Video
U.S. soldiers and civilians alike are celebrating the U.S. military mission that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. Several soldiers from Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington state stood on an overpass and waved flags at passing motorists. (May 2)
More On This Story
Osama bin Laden killed in U.S. raid, buried at sea
Bin Laden's secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden's hideout better known as a tourism, military hub
Full coverage: The death of Osama bin Laden
View all Items in this Story
Although one Pakistani intelligence official at first called the raid a joint mission that “primarily” involved Pakistan’s top spy agency, he later corrected himself to say the operation was “based on intelligence input from us,” but Pakistan did not participate.
The official said the discovery that Bin Laden was living very close to Pakistani military installations was embarrassing “to an extent, yes.”
“Had we known,” the official said, “we would have taken him out.”
On Monday, the Pakistani army cordoned off the neighborhood surrounding the house where bin Laden was killed. The newly developed area is within a military-residential zone where many officers live. But most houses in the immediate vicinity were occupied by civilians, residents gathered at the scene said.
Even by the standards of the relatively posh neighborhood, the three-story house where bin Laden was killed stood out, senior U.S. officials said. The structure was roughly eight times larger than those nearby, and was surrounded by 12- to 18-foot walls topped with barbed wire. Its occupants burned their trash, unlike their neighbors.
Though the six-year-old house was valued at $1 million, it had no connected phone or Internet service, the official said — apparently an attempt to avoid surveillance. But photos of the property appeared to show a satellite dish — a discrepancy that was not immediately explained.
A U.S. official said the Obama administration was “very concerned” that bin Laden was located in such a well-populated part of Pakistan. “This is something that we’re going to continue to work with the Pakistani government on,” the official said.
Abbottabad, which is also known for its high-quality schools and medical facilities, has become a melting pot of sorts following Pakistani military operations in the tribal areas and the nearby Swat Valley, said Gohar Ayub, a former Pakistani foreign minister who is from the city. Refugees from those conflicts, as well as from Afghanistan, have made it a city where few people know their neighbors, he said.
“That’s one reason why he possibly went there,” Ayub said of bin Laden.
Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan’s military chief, visited the military academy in Abbottabad just over a week ago and, in a speech, said his troops had “broken the backs” of militants. His comment followed a White House report that criticized the Pakistani military for lacking a clear strategy to defeat insurgents.
Pakistan’s cooperation with the U.S. war on terror is extremely unpopular among the public, and its powerful army has long been sensitive about U.S. military presence inside its borders. While it has allowed U.S. Special Forces to offer training, it publicly denies that it permits U.S. ground operations or CIA drone strikes, calling both a violation of national sovereignty.
Following the arrest in January of a CIA contractor who fatally shot two Pakistanis, bilateral military and intelligence relations dropped to what some officials in both countries called an all-time low. Pakistan recently demanded that the United States scale back its military presence and the number of drone strikes, and a Pakistani intelligence official said not long ago that joint intelligence operations had been halted.
On Monday, that official said the bin Laden killing symbolized that “sanity had prevailed and we continue to work together.”
Earlier this year, Pakistani officials said they arrested Umar Patek, an Indonesian militant with ties to al-Qaeda. Last year, a joint CIA-ISI operation netted Abdul Ghani Baradar, a senior Afghan Taliban leader. In 2002, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, an architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, was arrested in Rawalpindi. Haqqani cited these operations as proof that Pakistan is serious about fighting terror.
Yusufzai, the journalist, said it was unlikely Pakistan had not assisted with or approved of the bin Laden operation in some way. “Americans would be hard-pressed and face difficulties operating in a place like Abbottabad without the army’s help,” he said.
Wilgoren reported from Washington. Special correspondents Shaiq Hussain in Islamabad and Haq Nawaz Khan in Abbottabad contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/pakistan-stresses-that-raid-was-a-us-mission/2011/05/02/AFd0eeXF_story.html?hpid=z3
By Karin Brulliard and Debbi Wilgoren, Updated: Monday, May 2, 5:15 PM
ISLAMABAD —Osama bin Laden’s slaying by U.S. forces in an easily accessible Pakistani city ended years of speculation that he was hiding in remote tribal areas and raised new questions about how his presence could have gone undetected by Pakistan’s powerful military.
U.S. forces for months had watched the luxury compound in Abbottabad, a city 65 miles from the capital that is home to two Pakistani army regiments. Early Monday morning (Sunday afternoon in Washington), troops stormed the compound via helicopter.
Four helicopters swooped in early Monday and killed Osama bin Laden in a fiery American raid on his fortress-like compound in a Pakistani town that is home to three army regiments. (May 2)
Video
U.S. soldiers and civilians alike are celebrating the U.S. military mission that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. Several soldiers from Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington state stood on an overpass and waved flags at passing motorists. (May 2)
Osama bin Laden killed in U.S. raid, buried at sea
Bin Laden's secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden's hideout better known as a tourism, military hub
Full coverage: The death of Osama bin Laden
View all Items in this Story
Bin Laden was shot dead inside a sprawling and heavily fortified mansion within walking distance from a premiere military academy. He joins a list of high-value terror suspects captured or killed in populous mainland Pakistan, far from the wild borderlands where U.S. intelligence officials had long believed bin Laden was sequestered.
The Pakistani government’s failure to discover bin Laden’s whereabouts quickly intensified suspicions in Washington and elsewhere that Islamabad is either uncommitted to the U.S.-backed fight against Islamist militancy or is playing a dangerous game by sheltering terrorists even as it pledges to fight militant groups. Pakistan for years had insisted that bin Laden was not on Pakistani soil.
“How could [bin Laden] be in such a compound without being noticed?” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said on Fox News Monday morning. A Senate hearing on U.S.-Pakistan relations is scheduled for this week.
In India, Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram noted “with grave concerns” that “terrorists belonging to different organizations find sanctuary in Pakistan.” He said India still believes the people behind the Mumbai terror attacks in his country are being sheltered in Pakistan.
“It is a bit embarrassing, that even if he was hiding there, [the Pakistani army] would not know,” said Rahimullah Yusufzai, a Pakistani journalist who is an expert on militancy in the country’s northwest. “It means your intelligence is not good.”
Hussein Haqqani, Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, said his government “had no knowledge” that the long-hunted bin Laden was, essentially, living in their midst.
“If the Pakistani government had known that Osama bin Laden was there, we would have got him....We are very glad that our American partners did,” Haqqani said on CNN. “We did not know, we had no knowledge. And if we had knowledge, we would have acted on it long ago.”
Haqqani also noted that Pakistan is a large country that includes many people sympathetic to bin Laden and his cause.
President Asif Ali Zardari learned of bin Laden’s death in a phone call from President Obama, a foreign ministry statement said. The statement said the raid was carried out “in accordance with declared U.S. policy that Osama bin Laden will be eliminated in a direct action by the U.S. forces, wherever found in the world.”
The statement pointedly did not cite any Pakistani involvement in the operation, even though Obama, in an announcement from the White House, mentioned Pakistani assistance. The omission could reflect concern within the government here about a possible backlash from Islamist insurgents or Pakistan’s strongly anti-American public.
Depending on whether Pakistan was helpful, the success of the mission could ease growing tension between U.S. and Pakistani military and intelligence officials, who have sparred recently over America’s presence in Pakistan, CIA drone strikes, Pakistani reluctance to strike terror hubs and U.S. assertions that Pakistani intelligence operatives protect or assist insurgents.
Senior U.S. officials said no other government was informed of the raid ahead of time — including Pakistan’s.
Video
Four helicopters swooped in early Monday and killed Osama bin Laden in a fiery American raid on his fortress-like compound in a Pakistani town that is home to three army regiments. (May 2)
Video
U.S. soldiers and civilians alike are celebrating the U.S. military mission that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. Several soldiers from Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington state stood on an overpass and waved flags at passing motorists. (May 2)
Osama bin Laden killed in U.S. raid, buried at sea
Bin Laden's secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden's hideout better known as a tourism, military hub
Full coverage: The death of Osama bin Laden
View all Items in this Story
Although one Pakistani intelligence official at first called the raid a joint mission that “primarily” involved Pakistan’s top spy agency, he later corrected himself to say the operation was “based on intelligence input from us,” but Pakistan did not participate.
The official said the discovery that Bin Laden was living very close to Pakistani military installations was embarrassing “to an extent, yes.”
“Had we known,” the official said, “we would have taken him out.”
On Monday, the Pakistani army cordoned off the neighborhood surrounding the house where bin Laden was killed. The newly developed area is within a military-residential zone where many officers live. But most houses in the immediate vicinity were occupied by civilians, residents gathered at the scene said.
Even by the standards of the relatively posh neighborhood, the three-story house where bin Laden was killed stood out, senior U.S. officials said. The structure was roughly eight times larger than those nearby, and was surrounded by 12- to 18-foot walls topped with barbed wire. Its occupants burned their trash, unlike their neighbors.
Though the six-year-old house was valued at $1 million, it had no connected phone or Internet service, the official said — apparently an attempt to avoid surveillance. But photos of the property appeared to show a satellite dish — a discrepancy that was not immediately explained.
A U.S. official said the Obama administration was “very concerned” that bin Laden was located in such a well-populated part of Pakistan. “This is something that we’re going to continue to work with the Pakistani government on,” the official said.
Abbottabad, which is also known for its high-quality schools and medical facilities, has become a melting pot of sorts following Pakistani military operations in the tribal areas and the nearby Swat Valley, said Gohar Ayub, a former Pakistani foreign minister who is from the city. Refugees from those conflicts, as well as from Afghanistan, have made it a city where few people know their neighbors, he said.
“That’s one reason why he possibly went there,” Ayub said of bin Laden.
Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan’s military chief, visited the military academy in Abbottabad just over a week ago and, in a speech, said his troops had “broken the backs” of militants. His comment followed a White House report that criticized the Pakistani military for lacking a clear strategy to defeat insurgents.
Pakistan’s cooperation with the U.S. war on terror is extremely unpopular among the public, and its powerful army has long been sensitive about U.S. military presence inside its borders. While it has allowed U.S. Special Forces to offer training, it publicly denies that it permits U.S. ground operations or CIA drone strikes, calling both a violation of national sovereignty.
Following the arrest in January of a CIA contractor who fatally shot two Pakistanis, bilateral military and intelligence relations dropped to what some officials in both countries called an all-time low. Pakistan recently demanded that the United States scale back its military presence and the number of drone strikes, and a Pakistani intelligence official said not long ago that joint intelligence operations had been halted.
On Monday, that official said the bin Laden killing symbolized that “sanity had prevailed and we continue to work together.”
Earlier this year, Pakistani officials said they arrested Umar Patek, an Indonesian militant with ties to al-Qaeda. Last year, a joint CIA-ISI operation netted Abdul Ghani Baradar, a senior Afghan Taliban leader. In 2002, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, an architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, was arrested in Rawalpindi. Haqqani cited these operations as proof that Pakistan is serious about fighting terror.
Yusufzai, the journalist, said it was unlikely Pakistan had not assisted with or approved of the bin Laden operation in some way. “Americans would be hard-pressed and face difficulties operating in a place like Abbottabad without the army’s help,” he said.
Wilgoren reported from Washington. Special correspondents Shaiq Hussain in Islamabad and Haq Nawaz Khan in Abbottabad contributed to this report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/pakistan-stresses-that-raid-was-a-us-mission/2011/05/02/AFd0eeXF_story.html?hpid=z3
Did Pakistan know bin Laden's location?
Did Pakistan know bin Laden's location?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/raw-footage-of-bin-laden-compound-the-day-after-the-raid/2011/05/02/AF0cpCYF_video.html?hpid=z3
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/raw-footage-of-bin-laden-compound-the-day-after-the-raid/2011/05/02/AF0cpCYF_video.html?hpid=z3
Bin Laden’s secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden’s secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
New York and the Pentagon.
Text Size PrintE-mailReprints
By Craig Whitlock, William Wan and Greg Miller, Updated: Monday, May 2, 5:30 PM
Osama bin Laden’s final resting place seems destined to remain a secret, just like his whereabouts for most of the past decade.
Hours after he was killed in Pakistan in a firefight with U.S. Navy SEALs, bin Laden’s corpse was flown to Afghanistan to be identified through DNA analysis, then transported to the northern Arabian sea.
U.S. intelligence officials are revealing some details of what led to the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. (May 2)
Video
Four helicopters swooped in early Monday and killed Osama bin Laden in a fiery American raid on his fortress-like compound in a Pakistani town that is home to three army regiments. (May 2)
More On This Story
Osama bin Laden killed in U.S. raid, buried at sea
Bin Laden's secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden's hideout better known as a tourism, military hub
Full coverage: The death of Osama bin Laden
View all Items in this Story
There, aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, the body of one of the world’s most feared terrorist masterminds was washed in accordance with Islamic ritual and lowered into the water.
Submerging the body at sea precluded the establishment of a gravesite shrine that could become a rallying point for bin Laden’s followers. It may have circumvented unseemly arguments over custody of his body or accusations of religious disrespect.
The rapid disposal of bin Laden’s body also adhered to the Muslim tradition of burial within 24 hours of death.
Bin Laden had predicted for many years that he would die as a “martyr” to his cause, and had instructed his followers to kill him rather than allow him to fall alive into enemy hands. It remains unclear if he was killed by American bullets or by friendly fire during a 40-minute raid on his heavily fortified compound in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad, about 65 miles outside of Islamabad.
His demise solved an immediate problem for U.S. officials, who had long debated what they would actually do with bin Laden if he were captured alive. Putting him on trial, some officials feared, would merely give him a fresh global platform to amplify his message. Similarly, locking him up for the rest of his life might only reinforce his importance as an inspirational figure for Islamic radicals.
Instead, President Obama announced late Sunday that bin Laden was dead. Word of the sea burial came hours later. The U.S. government did not immediately release any photographs or other visual evidence to confirm the death, but a Pentagon spokesman told reporters Monday that officials verified his identity through DNA testing.
Analysts predicted that al-Qaeda itself would soon confirm bin Laden’s death, as the network customarily has within short order after other top leaders have been killed. They said it was likely that bin Laden had pre-recorded a video or audio message that would now be released.
Burials at sea are highly unusual among Muslims, experts said. They normally would occur only if someone dies while on a voyage, to avoid keeping a decaying body on board, or if there is a fear that the body could be dug up and mutilated if it was interred in the ground.
Ebrahim Moosa, professor of Islamic studies at Duke University, said burying bin Laden at sea “appears to have been mostly a political decision.” The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. government asked Saudi Arabia, where bin Laden was born, to take his remains, but the government declined. “You’re certainly not going to bury him on U.S. land,” Moosa said. “And many countries may not have wanted to take the body in.”
The key question, Moosa said, is whether the U.S. strategy of sea burial will really work to defuse bin Laden’s potential as a cult figure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/bin-ladens-secret-sea-burial-adds-to-the-mystery-of-his-life/2011/05/02/AF4uEPZF_story.html?hpid=z2
New York and the Pentagon.
Text Size PrintE-mailReprints
By Craig Whitlock, William Wan and Greg Miller, Updated: Monday, May 2, 5:30 PM
Osama bin Laden’s final resting place seems destined to remain a secret, just like his whereabouts for most of the past decade.
Hours after he was killed in Pakistan in a firefight with U.S. Navy SEALs, bin Laden’s corpse was flown to Afghanistan to be identified through DNA analysis, then transported to the northern Arabian sea.
U.S. intelligence officials are revealing some details of what led to the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. (May 2)
Video
Four helicopters swooped in early Monday and killed Osama bin Laden in a fiery American raid on his fortress-like compound in a Pakistani town that is home to three army regiments. (May 2)
Osama bin Laden killed in U.S. raid, buried at sea
Bin Laden's secret sea burial adds to the mystery of his life
Bin Laden's hideout better known as a tourism, military hub
Full coverage: The death of Osama bin Laden
View all Items in this Story
There, aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, the body of one of the world’s most feared terrorist masterminds was washed in accordance with Islamic ritual and lowered into the water.
Submerging the body at sea precluded the establishment of a gravesite shrine that could become a rallying point for bin Laden’s followers. It may have circumvented unseemly arguments over custody of his body or accusations of religious disrespect.
The rapid disposal of bin Laden’s body also adhered to the Muslim tradition of burial within 24 hours of death.
Bin Laden had predicted for many years that he would die as a “martyr” to his cause, and had instructed his followers to kill him rather than allow him to fall alive into enemy hands. It remains unclear if he was killed by American bullets or by friendly fire during a 40-minute raid on his heavily fortified compound in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad, about 65 miles outside of Islamabad.
His demise solved an immediate problem for U.S. officials, who had long debated what they would actually do with bin Laden if he were captured alive. Putting him on trial, some officials feared, would merely give him a fresh global platform to amplify his message. Similarly, locking him up for the rest of his life might only reinforce his importance as an inspirational figure for Islamic radicals.
Instead, President Obama announced late Sunday that bin Laden was dead. Word of the sea burial came hours later. The U.S. government did not immediately release any photographs or other visual evidence to confirm the death, but a Pentagon spokesman told reporters Monday that officials verified his identity through DNA testing.
Analysts predicted that al-Qaeda itself would soon confirm bin Laden’s death, as the network customarily has within short order after other top leaders have been killed. They said it was likely that bin Laden had pre-recorded a video or audio message that would now be released.
Burials at sea are highly unusual among Muslims, experts said. They normally would occur only if someone dies while on a voyage, to avoid keeping a decaying body on board, or if there is a fear that the body could be dug up and mutilated if it was interred in the ground.
Ebrahim Moosa, professor of Islamic studies at Duke University, said burying bin Laden at sea “appears to have been mostly a political decision.” The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. government asked Saudi Arabia, where bin Laden was born, to take his remains, but the government declined. “You’re certainly not going to bury him on U.S. land,” Moosa said. “And many countries may not have wanted to take the body in.”
The key question, Moosa said, is whether the U.S. strategy of sea burial will really work to defuse bin Laden’s potential as a cult figure.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/bin-ladens-secret-sea-burial-adds-to-the-mystery-of-his-life/2011/05/02/AF4uEPZF_story.html?hpid=z2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)