The sudden killing of Osama Bin Laden by US special forces is being celebrated all over the world, but especially in Afghanistan and Iraq which became, wrongly, the victims of American wrath following 9/11. The Afghans especially from President Karzai downwards are emphasizing their frequent past assertions that the source of global terrorist activities was Pakistan, not Afghanistan.
The question now is: what does Osama’s death mean for the threat of terrorism worldwide? The consensus seems to be that there is no single figure that can replace him, not with his reputation for the audacity of 9/11 and of having survived worldwide efforts at capture for ten years. However, since Osama has not actively led Al Qaeda operations for years, his death is unlikely to have any immediate effect on the organization’s ability to plan and conduct operations. In the long run terrorism will continue as a more decentralized activity unless the international community cooperates much more in intelligence sharing and joint operations.
In the immediate aftermath however, all western countries have heightened security-apprehending revenge attacks in the name of Osama especially by local sleeper cells.
For India, what matters is that Al Qaeda is not the only terrorist organization based in Pakistan. The Lashkar-e-toiba and the Jamat-ud-Dawa, for instance, remain active with continued support from sections of the Pakistan establishment. We can only hope that so massive an exposure of Pakistani complicity with terrorism, and the brazenness with which they provided safe haven to Osama Bin Laden, will force the international community to acknowledge India’s predicament in dealing with such a neighbor.
Many are wondering whether the death of Osama will have an impact on the ‘democratic’ upsurge currently spreading across Arab countries. This is unlikely because the demands of the protests have been against corruption which shrinks economic opportunity and the assault on individual dignity by security states. In Yemen, US efforts – in the guise of a Gulf Cooperation Council plan – to broker a relatively orderly transition of power from President Saleh to his deputy were made because of the cooperation he had extended to anti “Al Qaeda-in-the Arabian Peninsula” operations. Saudi Arabia will make sure that this will continue given it’s serious concerns regarding spill over their long common border. In Libya, fears about the possibility of Al Qaeda fighters being part of the “rebel” forces did not prevent the US from attacking Gaddafi. However that war has now become so intensely local that the death of Osama is unlikely to change its tortuous course.
Mostly, however, it seems that fears of Al Qaeda are over-shadowed by more local concerns. For instance in Egypt and Tunisia, anxiety about the success or otherwise of the Islamic brotherhood in forthcoming elections, is the primary concern. In the Gulf Sheikhdoms, the Shia-Sunni rivalry probably takes higher priority than does Al Qaeda’s ideology at this time.
The great unknown is what impact the end of Osama may have in his home country, Saudi Arabia, which actually has a significant number of Al Qaeda supporters. Some have gone through re-education campaigns with uncertain outcomes. But worrisome is the fact in Riyadh, that there is widespread sympathy for the beliefs and objectives of Al Qaeda and even some perverse pride in Osama’s prolonged defiance of the US.
Finally, it remains to be seen what impact this success of American persistence and disregard of Pakistani sensitivities, will have on the Taliban in Afghanistan – and at one remove, in Pakistan itself. There are already calls by Afghan Taliban spokespersons and ordinary Afghans for the US to now leave Afghanistan as their original mission to eliminate Osama bin Laden has been accomplished. Opponents of the engagement in Afghanistan will echo these calls in the US. But Osama’s exit is unlikely to have any effect on the Pakistani Taliban, which has now a momentum in its fight against the Pakistani state – not entirely unrelated to US activities in Afghanistan, including drone attacks in Pakistan.
A new delicate dance has already begun as Pakistan and the US try to salvage what is left of their tattered special relationship in the fight against terror, impelled by their shameful mutual dependency, mostly at the expense of India and Afghanistan. The US needs Pakistan to conduct and even wind down its war in Afghanistan. Pakistan, and in particular the army, wants American indulgence of its inexplicable but implacable enmity against India and continued aid, now more than $ 3 billion annually, to continually upgrade its armaments.
Economically, the end of Osama has brought good cheer, causing stock markets around the world to move up and the price of oil to decline by over a dollar. Even the price of gold and silver has fallen. Since most of the problems of the global economy are structural, don’t expect wonders: this spurt in stock values is likely to be short lived.
For India, there is once again an urgent need to heighten security against any violent reactions to Osama’s death inspired from across the border. Now is the moment, an unprecedented opportunity for India to highlight Pakistani complicity in global terror. Meanwhile, we should rapidly strengthen our own anti-terrorism forces and take a cue from American persistence in trying to resolve the many unsolved cases of terrorism sent in from across the border.
Neelam Deo is Co-founder and Director, Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations; She has been the Indian Ambassador to Denmark and Ivory Coast; and former Consul General in New York.
This article was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can read more exclusive content here.
For interview requests with the author, or for permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in.
© Copyright 2011 Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. All rights reserved. Any unauthorized copying or reproduction is strictly prohibited.