As the week has gone by, more details have come out about the killing of Osama Bin Laden. I recently read that there was a safe house near the alleged Bin Laden compound where operatives had been watching the occupants for months. Though a definitive identification of the suspect had not been made, personnel were convinced this indeed was where Bin Laden was hiding out.
Once the go order was given, it turns out that the use of term "firefight" was a misnomer. Only one person in the compound fired a shot and he was quickly killed. Reuters reports that Bin Laden was unarmed and there is no indication he reached for a weapon. However, "the people familiar with official accounts said the attackers did not wait for much of a reaction, and almost immediately shot the al Qaeda leader dead."
As Glenn Greenwald aptly points out, many individuals who vehemently disagreed with the Bush administration's call to turn hunting down alleged terrorists into a military endeavor as opposed to the purview of law enforcement have dumped their principles overboard and applauded the summary execution of the terrorist "mastermind." In their minds, Bin Laden's alleged misdeeds meant that any and all rulebooks can be tossed out of the window and no one should lose a second of sleep over it.
One of the things that Americans pride ourselves on is the notion that the accused are innocent until PROVEN guilty. This is a nation of laws and we don't routinely allow the police to run around killing alleged rapists and murderers. Their job is to apprehend them and it is the job of the courts to adjudicate on their alleged crimes.
When we legitimize the ability of the state unilaterally to execute and assassinate people without the participation of the court system, we are creating a body that can ignore the law whenever they feel like it! Today it might be Osama Bin Laden, but tomorrow it might be an anti-war protester or a columnist who writes opinions that oppose the government.
What we are seeing is the proverbial slippery slope. Once we wink and nod about one exception, it sets a precedent. The next time around the authorities will try to expand on the precedent because that's what the authorities tend to do. In time, the one-time exception may become the general rule. It could well become a boulder rolling faster and faster down a steep hill.
And there is another issue to consider. As Ray McGovern notes,
On the whole, this whole affair reflects on the USA very poorly. We say we are a nation of laws, but we disregard those laws when it is convenient and serves our purposes. We say we want to promote peace, but we turn around to commit an act that will only stoke more hatred and the desire for retaliation.
Once the go order was given, it turns out that the use of term "firefight" was a misnomer. Only one person in the compound fired a shot and he was quickly killed. Reuters reports that Bin Laden was unarmed and there is no indication he reached for a weapon. However, "the people familiar with official accounts said the attackers did not wait for much of a reaction, and almost immediately shot the al Qaeda leader dead."
As Glenn Greenwald aptly points out, many individuals who vehemently disagreed with the Bush administration's call to turn hunting down alleged terrorists into a military endeavor as opposed to the purview of law enforcement have dumped their principles overboard and applauded the summary execution of the terrorist "mastermind." In their minds, Bin Laden's alleged misdeeds meant that any and all rulebooks can be tossed out of the window and no one should lose a second of sleep over it.
I think what's really going on here is that there are a large number of people who have adopted the view that bin Laden's death is an unadulterated Good, and it therefore simply does not matter how it happened (ends justify the means, roughly speaking). There are, I think, two broad groups adopting this mindset: (1) those, largely on the Right, who believe the U.S. is at War and anything we do to our Enemies is basically justifiable; and (2) those, mostly Democrats, who reject that view -- who genuinely believe in general in due process and adherence to ostensible Western norms of justice -- yet who view bin Laden as a figure of such singular Evil (whether in reality or as a symbol) that they're willing to make an exception in his case, willing to waive away their principles just for him: creating the Osama bin Laden Exception...From my perspective, there is a huge problem with this type of response: It reflects more poorly on us as a nation and a people than it does on Bin Laden himself!
One of the things that Americans pride ourselves on is the notion that the accused are innocent until PROVEN guilty. This is a nation of laws and we don't routinely allow the police to run around killing alleged rapists and murderers. Their job is to apprehend them and it is the job of the courts to adjudicate on their alleged crimes.
When we legitimize the ability of the state unilaterally to execute and assassinate people without the participation of the court system, we are creating a body that can ignore the law whenever they feel like it! Today it might be Osama Bin Laden, but tomorrow it might be an anti-war protester or a columnist who writes opinions that oppose the government.
What we are seeing is the proverbial slippery slope. Once we wink and nod about one exception, it sets a precedent. The next time around the authorities will try to expand on the precedent because that's what the authorities tend to do. In time, the one-time exception may become the general rule. It could well become a boulder rolling faster and faster down a steep hill.
And there is another issue to consider. As Ray McGovern notes,
If assassination becomes the preferred calling card of U.S. foreign policy, it also is a safe bet that the lines at al-Qaeda recruiting stations will grow longer, rather than shrink, and that more rounds of retaliatory violence will follow...In other words, when we refuse to try to live up to our own ideals, we go against our own best interests. If other nations and groups come to expect that this nation will assassinate anyone we don't like, you can bet their hate for us will burn ever hotter and they will aim to strike us first before we strike them. Killing Bin Laden (and I'm still not convinced he wasn't already dead years ago) was a stupid strategic move IF we genuinely want a more peaceful world.
On the whole, this whole affair reflects on the USA very poorly. We say we are a nation of laws, but we disregard those laws when it is convenient and serves our purposes. We say we want to promote peace, but we turn around to commit an act that will only stoke more hatred and the desire for retaliation.
Probably not the first time however that the rules are put aside when you think about it.
ReplyDelete