But both had entirely different reasons for that. Osama's reason for clearly preferring martyrdom to imprisonment was obvious. Less obvious to many are America's reasons for not wanting to take the al Qaeda leader alive. For one, had America taken Osama alive it would have had to take him to court to prove his complicity in the 9/11 catastrophe.
Have not most of us already come to believe that allegation to be true? Such is the clout of the Western media that our people, including the "elite", tend to swallow the American line hook, line and sinker! Few bothered to consider the fact that those who had seized the American planes in mid-flight and were able to change their course towards the World Trade Center were pilots trained in America to fly sophisticated planes and had enough flying experience within the American air space to be able to make a beeline for their target.
Osama and friends (al Qaeda) were essentially ground fighters and at no time did they manifest an ability to carry out a 9/11 type of adventure. Even otherwise, an overabundance of credible pieces of evidence is already available which casts serious doubts on allegations of Osama's involvement in the 9/11 massacre. Why was not America able to establish for the world to see a clear linkage between the people who hit the WTC and Osama?
It would have been forced to try to do that before a discerning world audience if it took Osama alive? It is not beyond today's technology to present a superficially credible but factually false, manufactured confession on TV, face, voice and all. Does America have a credible record of speaking the truth?
Iraq: WMDs or Iraqi oil Take Iraq for instance. Fresh in my mind is the recollection of the speech the then US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, made with much aplomb in 2003 before the Security Council, showily based on a lot of research by American agencies and some red herring evidence provided by El Baradei the then DG International Atomic Energy Agency (remember he was subsequently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005?).
In that infamous speech, Powell had declared with much certainty that Iraq under Saddam had weapons of mass destruction piled up (what about America, Russia, China, UK, France, India, Pakistan and North Korea?) and thus posed a danger to the world. Much later in 2005, Powell was to admit "I feel terrible ... (giving the speech) ... It's a blot. I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and [it] will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now". Much good will that do now, except as a reminder that statements of Western powers in such matters are never to be taken at face value. But the harm was already done.
RETRACTION TO COME? Based on patently proven false claims, a war was unleashed on Iraq which killed half a million people, most of them non-combatants. Before America moved its main forces out of Iraq, it ensured that a subjugated Iraq entered into major oil deals with American oil companies, jointly dubbed BIG OIL on terms highly favourable to the latter. The terms of the deal are couched in such terms (by American law firms) as to make it impossible for a futureless pliant Iraqi government to get out of them. So much for the veracity and motivations of modern day America, be it under Bush or Obama! How many years will pass before we hear from America itself a retraction of the lies that were woven around the Osama saga?
NOW IT IS AFGHAN ENERGY Is it any surprise therefore that America, with an satiable thirst for control of world's energy and a greedy eye on Afghan gas and mineral reserves and the fact that the brave but hapless country sat smack in the middle of future oil and gas transportation routes, needed a pretext for invading Afghanistan. The handy reason was the necessity of "punishing" Osama for "killing thousands of innocent Americans". Now that Osama, according to America, is no more and the "back of al Qaeda is broken", the moment of truth is nigh. The world will now be able to see the truth behind the façade of American claims. In our view America is highly unlikely to leave Afghanistan without firm "agreements" with a pliant government, which would leave it in firm control of most of Afghanistan's energy and possibly other, newly discovered stupendous mineral resources.
THE DEFINING PICTURE A live footage panel on TV showing a tense Obama with his administrative and military bigwigs sitting as tense with him was, in my opinion, the defining picture of the Osama saga spread over several decades. Everyone looked like the embodiment of tension with Hillary Clinton, with a feminine touch, betraying her stress with her hand covering her mouth and chin just like any other woman would under great tension. What happened to all the years of her political background and equality-of-sexes-in-all-things philosophy, we wondered?
GLUT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS The air is full of unanswered questions. And hardly surprising given both American reluctance and that of our useless government to come clean!
WAS IT OSAMA WHO WAS REPORTED KILLED? Was Osama (if it was he) killed at Abbottabad or killed elsewhere and brought to Abbottabad as part of some far-reaching game plan?
--- In a departure from normal American practice why was not this particular high-profile target displayed in death for all to see?
--- Who actually killed Osama (if it was he) - his friends or Americans in cold blood after capturing him?
--- Why was the dead man's head covered with gruesome wounds and why was it only briefly shown and then hidden away?
--- What caused the wounds?
--- Why was not the body handed over to relatives for a decent burial? America forgot the norms of civilised behaviour?
--- What manner of burial was carried out at sea? Where exactly?
--- Who led the funeral prayers?
--- Why is America more afraid of Osama dead than Osama alive?
--- What exactly did we (the civilian and intelligence authorities) know that was happening and when?
--- Why was "Osama's" face disfigured?
When the face of the dead man was briefly shown (hastily withdrawn and never shown again) why was it so badly disfigured with deep wounds and an eye almost gone? A newspaper report quotes Osama's 12-year old daughter before whose eyes Osama was shot twice by American Commandos as saying that the Commandos kicked his face viciously with their heavy boots before dragging the body downstairs feet first which savagery probably caused the face gruesome injury. So much for civilised behaviour! America, now allegedly in possession of a lot of electronic records from the murder site, will set out to give and prove its own version of what happened before and during the supposedly drop scene of the Osama saga. Based on past experience, it will be foolish to believe everything you are going to hear.
OUR LEADERS: CAUGHT WITH THEIR PANTS DOWN The expression refers to a situation of acute embarrassment. This is not a lewd but an admittedly picturesque description of the state of mind of our rulers at this crucial time! The news burst on the scene just when President Zardari thought he had everything under control. With the erstwhile Qatil League now a close ally (while it lasts), the Finance Bill was sure to pass and another few months can now be whiled away by the master of procrastination (defined as postponing doing something, especially as a regular practice).
The Judiciary was held at bay by a series of manoeuvres (in which the master was ably supported by the wily ex-Law Minister) including the ploy of bogging the Supreme Court in the ZAB case, transfer to neutral positions, officials who were doing an effective job of investigations against the high and mighty or their corrupt offspring now facing Courts in various cases involving billions of the country's money and positioning in their place pliable and corrupt officials and so on. But Osama's death has changed the dimensions of the country's politics dramatically. It caught the government of President Zardari with its pants down as the proverb says!
STUPID TALK FOLLOWED HOWLING SILENCE! Nothing exposed the ineffectiveness of our federal government and its irrelevance to the issues faced by the country as its paralysis and incoherence following the reported killing of Osama. For hours there was silence, while humiliating accusations rained down on Pakistan. When the silence was finally broken by the Foreign Secretary it contained many contradictions.
Crucial times find our President and PM either already out of the country or scurrying for a trip abroad. The PM who was in France with stand-in Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar (the pair cutting a pathetic duo figure) should have known better than to talk on a crisis which was totally beyond his mental capacity to even understand leave alone clarify to a bewildered nation. But he could not resist the temptation to hold the whole world responsible with Pakistan for failure to detect the alleged presence of Osama in Abbottabad.
Eventually after several days, it was the Army which came back with a definitive "hands off" statement for the Super Power and declaring rightly that it had the power to shoot down the Drones, but orders for that had to come from Civilian authority. A President-PM-Army Chief meeting took place and the PM was to address the nation on Monday to hopefully allay the apprehensions of a shocked and disoriented nation. Does it surprise you that there were calls for the President and PM to resign over the US raid.
(owajid@yahoo.com)