Recent Post

August 12, 2013

Essay on Bin Laden Death

The perception that the end of Osama Bin Laden will soon conclude the war on terrorism is misleading. One should understand that the killing of Bin Laden, though a vital blow to the integrity of Al-Qaeda and terrorists but still remains as means to an end, not an end in itself.
 In fact, the death of Bin Laden will inspire his aides to carry out more terror attacks across the world. The point that needs to be emphasized here is that Bin Laden has become a symbol for his followers. Ironically, his death will bring more people to the fold of Al-Qaeda. The victory that was claimed soon after his death loses significance because the war on terror is far from over.
Washington and major media groups have used the killing of Osama bin Laden to launch a strident celebration of American militarism. But what is lacking, both in speeches and press comments, it is an assessment of the decade-long "war against terrorism ', instead the execution of bin Laden in Pakistan is hailed as a historic victory. Unarguably, it is a move in the right direction but it is not an end.

Sunday, at the time of his death, however, Osama bin Laden was not practically a figurehead of Al-Qaeda. He was more of a sick old man who, obviously, was under house arrest under the protection of Pakistani military intelligence service. The strategic importance of his disappearance is generally recognized as being zero.

It was undoubtedly a deeply reactionary and whose perspective was imbued with anti-communism and religious fanaticism. It is this ideology that bin Laden has made a valuable agent for the U.S. intelligence agency CIA in the catastrophic war that Washington has committed against the Afghan government supported by the Soviet Union in early 1979.

In announcing the death of bin Laden, President Barack Obama said "justice is done."The Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also said" justice was done. "

His execution by the Navy Seal Team [the elite of the elite U.S. Army] has nothing to do with an issue of justice. It had been decided in advance that he would be killed in circumstances where he could be captured and brought before a court on charges related to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Behind this decision lied the determination to prevent the long history of relations with bin Laden U.S. government agencies going public. This relationship began with the arming and financing by CIA to so-called Mujahideen - Islamist guerrillas fighting Soviet troops in Afghanistan - and whom President Ronald Reagan described as "moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers [United States].

Osama, son of a wealthy businessman from Saudi Arabia, has played a key role in recruiting and training Arab volunteers to support the Mujahideen by the CIA and who eventually gave birth to the Taliban. Al Qaeda in Arabic "the base" was established during this period with the aid and weapons from the CIA.

This collaboration has continued after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan or the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Bin Laden and Al Qaeda have once again served as a U.S. military intelligence assets in the wars that tore apart Yugoslavia, first in Bosnia and then in the late 1990s, in Kosovo.

As happens so often in American foreign policy, today's allies become tomorrow's enemies. The Islamist uprising encouraged by Washington as a means of undermining the Soviet Union eventually became hostile to the growing U.S. presence in the Middle East including Saudi Arabia.

The history of these long and close relationship between an individual portrayed as the number one mortal enemy in the United States and U.S. intelligence agencies is systematically concealed by the media.

The events of September 11 which until now have not been seriously discussed and explained provided the pretext for launching the global war against terrorism.

What is striking about Washington's response to the tragic events of September 11, 2001, is that this response has never flowed logically from the events themselves. Thus, fifteen of the 19 accused hijackers of Sept. 11 - just like the so-called brain Osama bin Laden - were citizens of Saudi Arabia. Yet Saudi Arabia has been spared from acts of reprisal. None of them were from Afghanistan or Iraq, yet these two countries soon after were plunged into a whirlwind of violence and death.

As bin Laden was based in Afghanistan, relations between al Qaeda and the Taliban government have always been fragile. In October 2001, Taliban ministers were reported for the first time they were ready to hand over bin Laden if Washington supplied evidence of his involvement in the attacks of September 11. The request was rejected. The Taliban said to be so willing to discuss the surrender of bin Laden to a neutral country if the United States stopped bombing Afghanistan. Once again, the Bush administration said it was not interested. What he wanted was a change of regime.

After invading Afghanistan under the pretext of capturing bin Laden, the Bush administration allowed him to escape during the fighting at Tora Bora in December 2001, the U.S. military has essentially been ordered to withdraw while the leader of Al Qaeda were on their way to cross the Pakistani border.

Bush quickly indicated that he had no particular interest in capturing bin Laden. He acknowledged that the leader of Al Qaeda was not playing a particularly important role in terms of opposition to the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan. Indeed, it was useful as a living symbol of the "war against terrorism" in general, and especially for its disclosure of videotapes threatening at times politically expedient as the eve of the 2004 elections.

Depending on the version of Obama, the U.S. Secret Service in August 2010 had located the residence of bin Laden. The reason it took nine months to prepare a commando operation cannot be explained solely by technical preparations. Clearly, they were involved in political issues involving the relationship of bin Laden not only with the Pakistani secret services, but with elements within the U.S. intelligence services themselves.

Nearly a decade after the launch of the "war against terrorism," 100,000 American soldiers are still fighting against a growing armed resistance movement and fueled to a large extent by the hundreds of thousands of Afghans killed and wounded in the American colonial war.

At the same time, the so-called war against terrorism took a sharp turn one and a half after September 11th with the launch of the assault "Shock and Awe" ("Shock and Awe") against Iraq. Again, the goal was regime change - justified by lies about "weapons of mass destruction" - although the target, Saddam Hussein has been a recognized enemy of bin Laden and Islamist terrorists. Over one million Iraqis have died because of the war of American aggression against Iraq, and 47,000 American soldiers continue to occupy that country.

Now, the Obama is engaged in another military intervention to overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi - a former ally in the fight against Al Qaeda - to establish a puppet regime more servile towards Washington and conglomerates Western energy. In this conflict, the United States and its European allies to provide close air support, weapons and advisers to a force "rebel" including Islamist elements whose training has been in the camps of bin Laden in Afghanistan.

All this clearly shows that Washington has never seen the so-called "war against terrorism" as something other than a useful pretext - and Osama bin Laden a thorn in handy - for selling what the U.S. military refers to This "long war" in Central and South Asia and the Persian Gulf.

What were the real targets of this war? Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser in the government of President Carter, who had designed the intervention of the CIA in Afghanistan in the 1980s, had provided clear strategic considerations of American imperialism.

In his book The Grand Chessboard, published in 1997, Brzezinski described Eurasia as "the chessboard on which unfolds the struggle for global primacy. He stressed that with the end of Soviet power in the region, the challenge that faces imperialism was to prevent "the emergence of an antagonistic Eurasian power and domination.”

The Caspian Basin energy resources were of vital importance, because in terms of global significance behind those of the Persian Gulf. Afghanistan provides the main corridor of pipelines to transport these strategic resources to the West and is more close to the three powers regarded as probably the most antagonistic to American hegemony in the region: China, Russia and Iran.

The attacks of September 11 have provided precisely such a "sudden threat" and were immediately exploited by the Bush administration to implement projects of military interventions in Central Asia and the Persian Gulf, previously developed. The American ruling elite has sought to counter the crisis of American capitalism militarily seizing strategic positions in these two regions, both with large energy reserves. It remains to conduct a serious investigation into the question of whether elements within the agencies of the state and U.S. intelligence services were aware that such a "sudden threat" was imminent and left to materialize.

Wars of aggression in the past decade have been accompanied by terrible crimes against the democratic rights at the national level and abroad. The systematic use of murder, torture, indefinite detention and the practice of extraordinary rendition (rendition) against suspected terrorists has gone hand in hand with the establishment of the scaffolding of a State police within the United States.

In their speeches, Obama as Clinton made it clear that the death of bin Laden will not stem the global eruption of American militarism. Obama insisted that "the path to greater security for our country is still long," while Clinton has vowed, "The struggle continues and we will never surrender."

Like the so-called hunt for bin Laden has been a pretext for the invasion of Afghanistan, his death may be used to perform a number of tactical changes in what has become for the U.S. military in that country growing debacle. In his remarks, Clinton suggested that there could be a negotiated settlement with the Taliban.

And yet, the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, U.S. imperialism is facing an enemy more powerful than he has attempted, with Al Qaeda and bin Laden, to present it as such. The uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain and elsewhere have been generated by the first tremors of a working class committed to the fight against mass unemployment, poverty and social inequalities imposed on it by global capitalism and national elites.

United States itself, the crisis of American capitalism has further deepened ten years since the start of the "war against terrorism" and the American working class endures a serious deterioration in living conditions and social conditions and despite of this, politicians of both major parties are demanding new social cuts.

The momentary euphoria and manufactured by the media about the killing of Osama bin Laden will soon be eclipsed by the inexorable growth of terrorists and revolutionary confrontations between American imperialism both inside outside the country.


Post a Comment