President Barack Obama went on national TV late on May 1 to announce that al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden had been killed in a US raid on a “compound deep inside Pakistan.” Media reports indicated the target was a mansion in the Bilal area of Abbottabad, about 100 kilometers north of Islamabad. What Obama called “a small team of Americans”âpresumably Special Forces troopsâwas apparently flown to the site in four helicopters. In a brief firefight, bin Laden was shot in the head, and his body in said to be in US custody. Three others were reportedly killed, including a son of the al-Qaeda leader. Also killed, according to unnamed Pakistani officials, was a woman who was being used as a human shield. Obama said there were no US casualties. However, an anonymous Pakistani intelligence official said one of the helicopters crashed after it was hit by fire from the ground. Another anonymous Pakistani security official told AFP: “Yes, I can confirm that he was killed in a highly sensitive intelligence operation.” Asked whether Pakistani intelligence participated in the operation he would only reiterate: “It was a highly sensitive intelligence operation.” (AFP, AP, Radio Australia, BBC World Service, May 2; VOA, May 1)
Bin Laden was widely believed to be in Pakistan‘s remote tribal territories along the Afghan border. Instead, he was apparently in Abbottabad, a military garrison town in the country’s administrative center. Ironically, just a week earlier, a regional army chief had spoken in Abbottabad to boast that his forces had “broken the back” of Islamist militants in response to US criticisms of Pakistan’s efforts to crack down on Taliban and al-Qaeda-linked rebels. “The terrorists’ backbone has been broken and God willing we will soon prevail,” Gen. Ashfaq Kayani said at the Pakistan Military Academy in Abbottabad. The chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, had accused Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency of having ties to the Taliban. (AFP, April 23)
See our last post on the politics of the GWOT.
Please leave a tip or answer the Exit Poll.
More details emerge on Osama hit
The intelligence that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden apparently first emerged from detainees at GuantĂĄnamo Bay, who provided the alias for one of bin Laden’s couriers, through whom he communicated with his followers (as the mansion apparently had no telephone or Internet access to prevent surveillance). Four years ago, intelligence agencies uncovered the courier’s real identity, and last year he was traced to the Abbottabad mansion. In Washington, President Obama led five National Security Council meetings on the information in March and April. Last week, he gave the final go-ahead for the “surgical” attack, which was carried out by the Navy’s SEAL Team 6. (NJ Star-Ledger, AP, May 2)
Bin Laden was buried at sea from the deck of a US aircraft carrier. A Department of Defense official said: “When there is no land alternative, Islamic law dictates that the body be buried within 24 hours, and that was the basis.” Another defense official said says there was no country willing or able to accept the body for burial, and US forces “took pains to observe Muslim law.” Koranic verses were read in Arabic at the brief ceremony. (CNN, May 2)
Reports are not making explicitly clear that an effort was made to take bin Laden aliveâor what are the implications under international law if he was not. Bin Laden’s handlers offered resistance, although reports have not made clear that bin Laden himself handled a weapon in the firefight. “If we had the opportunity to take bin Laden alive, if he didn’t present any threat, the individuals involved were able and prepared to do that,” said John Brennan, the top White House counter-terrorism official, in a slightly equivocal statement. (WSJ, May 2)
Did waterboarding make Osama stool-pigeons sing?
The Miami Herald on May 2, citing a “secret GuantĂĄnamo assessment file” (that the newspaper gained access to thanks to WikiLeaks), names Abu Faraj al-Libi as the al-Qaeda operative whose interrogation yielded the information that led the US to Osama bin Laden:
Britain’s right-wing Telegraph meanwhile names Khalid Sheikh Mohammedâand implicitly loans legitimacy to the practice of “waterboarding“:
However, the Telegraph also notes that “The courier’s name does not appear in KSM’s Guantanamo file.” Both KSM and al-Libi were apparently subject to waterboarding, in any case. The account states (with a barely concealed sneer): “Amnesty International has already warned that the killing of bin Laden must not be used as evidence that torture is ‘justifiable’.”
Daily Kos blogger by Joan McCarter meanwhile asserts “Waterboarding did not reveal Osama bin Laden trail,” noting that KSM or al-Libi, or whoever it was, only revealed a “nickname” (probably better rendered “alias”). McCarter also notes that Dick Cheney told Fox News: “I would assume the enhanced interrogation program we put in place produced some of the results that led to bin Laden’s ultimate capture… We need to keep in place those policies that made it possible for us to succeed in this case.” But McCarter states:
McCarter further notes that al-Libi’s interrogations also divulged the completely fictitious tale that Saddam Hussein had offered to train al-Qaeda operatives in the use of chemical and biological weaponsâlater recanted by al-Libi, but only after it had made its way into Colin Powell’s UN address making the case for war. Concludes McCarter: “What torture got us, in practical terms, was the Iraq debacle. And the complete and well-deserved debasement of our international standing. And a hell of a lot more anti-American terrorists.”
Did WikiLeaks prompt Osama raid?
From The Guardian, May 3. Note the last sentence.
WikiLeaks: Pakistan “protected” Osama
From The Telegraph, May 2:
Did Osama sea burial really “observe Muslim law”?
From The Guardian, May 2:
White House changes story on Osama hit?
From The Guardian, May 3:
Pakistan (semi-)protests raid on Osama
From AP, May 3:
Zardari equivocates on Pakistan role in sheltering Osama
Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari has an op-ed in the Washington Post May 2, in which he states:
Note that this actually falls short of a flat denial that Pakistan was sheltering bin Laden.
Where did the helicopters take off from?
The New York Times on May 2 quotes John Brennan on the operationsâsaying one of the helicopters “stalled” in the operation, but not that it crashed:
No mention is made of where the helicopters actually took off from. Information on this has been vague and sketchy at best. Typical is this bit from Radio Australia, heavy on drama and light on facts:
Meanwhile Pakistan’s