Exit - Stage Left

By Martin Schatz

My friends and co-writers Eric and Andrew agree that the importance given to the death of Osama Bin Laden has been greatly overstated.  From a strictly strategic view, I can understand their points.  Eric cautions that the death of Al Qaeda's (AQ) inspirational leader will lead to retaliatory strikes on U.S. and other Western targets.  This is certainly correct.  Andrew points out that Bin Laden was no longer the strategic leader behind AQ, and had not been for some time.  Also true.  Both are embarrassed by the displays of triumph in New York and Washington D.C. after the news broke.  On this point I am more willing to forgive the people celebrating in the streets.

People are people and it is not realistic to expect that everyone should be sombre and reflective in the wake of this kind of news.  Bin Laden was the face of the worst attack on our country since Pearl Harbor, and in terms of destroying our sense of security, it was even greater.  Thousands were killed in the center of our most important city, and it was done in a way that struck at the very core of our identity.  The images of men and women joining hands and jumping from the burning upper floors of the towers is very clear to me today.  Even as someone who is fundamentally opposed to our continued occupation across large stretches of the Middle East, my first thoughts upon hearing the news was "We got that son of a bitch."

I can't stand WSJ columnist Bret Stephens and think he's a war-mongering, jingoistic and smarmy prick, but I found myself agreeing with him in his letter today.  I quote:

"...you can trace the decline of [President Bush's] presidency from the moment he said that "I don't really care [where Bin Laden is].  It's not that important.

Wrong.  It was of the essence.  Americans didn't merely want to be secured against another attack - an achievement experienced only in the absence of fresh outrages and appreciated only in hindsight.  Americans wanted vengeance.  It's what they had wanted after Pearl Harbor, too: what took the Marines up Mt. Suribachi, the Rangers up Point du Hoc.  Revenge is a glue that holds a fractious nation together in the service of a great and arduous cause."

The argument goes that justice is greater than vengeance, and perhaps that is true.  Certainly it is desirable in a perfect world.  However, with Guantanamo Bay still operating and the idea of open and civilian trials a lost cause due to the capitulation of Mayor Bloomberg and others, do we really think that capturing Bin Laden alive would have led to a trial where justice could even be served?  From all accounts that I have read, Bin Laden fought back and "taking him alive" was not possible.  Sometimes vengeance will have to suffice where justice is not viable.

So now what?

Handled appropriately, this may be the excuse to redefine our Middle Eastern policy.  As CNN correspondent, Fareed Zakari correctly noted, this mission shows that "we do not need to occupy vast tracts of Afghanistan in perpetuity to keep Al Qaeda at bay."  If we are smart, we can use this to emphasize a strategy that emphasizes counter-terrorism instead of nation-building.  President Bush's strategy of nation-building is larger, more visible, and far more likely to incite nationalism and patriotism within the occupied country.  It is impossible to not be seen as an occupying and imperialistic force, especially when our presence spans a decade (and going). 

As Eric correctly points out, this is a phenomenon that we in the U.S. are completely sheltered from.  Wars are something that take place "over there" on some distant battlefield in some exotic country that most of us have never been to.  Our geographical isolation has sheltered and protected us from the cruel realities of what war means, and that has led to a very blase attitude towards military action.  Consider that the U.S. has engaged in over 200 military interventions since World War II.  Whether you call it a war or not, war-like actions feel the same to those who are on the receiving end.  

It is long past time to rethink our strategy.  A global war on "terror" is ludicrous and baldly impossible.  How does one wage war on a tactic?  That is like saying that we are declaring war on flanking maneuvers.  Guerrilla tactics are and always will be the strategy used by a group that is over-matched.  In our own history, look at the success of Francis "Swamp Fox" Marion against the larger and better-equipped British forces.

We need to stop creating new terrorists and stop making ourselves a target for those that exist.  How do we do this?  We could start by refusing to cast the lone dissenting vote that vetoes any action or judgement against Israel in the United Nations.  We could drop the vitriolic rhetoric against any so-called "evil-doers."  We could stop invading sovereign nations and occupying them for years while the civilians are starved and killed in "collateral damage." 

Unfortunately, we will be targets for a long time.  I am picturing my family murdered by a foreign army and trying to decide if I could ever forgive.  The answer is a resounding "No," and we can't expect others to feel differently.  This is where the counter-terrorism strategy comes in.  While Eric will strongly disagree with this, we will need to monitor and act in areas where training camps and terrorist plots are hatched.  These should be purely military strikes against specified targets, and NOT an excuse to set up a new government that is more "friendly" to western business interests.  By dramatically reducing our presence in the Middle East and Northern Africa, we can avoid much of the hate and hostility that comes from seeing foreign troops every time you step outside of your ruined hut. 

Unlike in Iraq, the stated goals of Afghanistan have largely remained the same since the beginning.  Capture or kill Osama Bin Laden and cripple Al Qaeda.  With the death of Bin Laden, and the numbers of Al Qaeda in the country rumored to be under a hundred members, we may finally have the opportunity to declare victory and go home.  If Bin Laden's death provides us that opportunity, then it is every bit the big deal that it is being made out to be.