End of bin Laden or End of Civilization?

Obama versus Osama

The scene outside the White House in Washington DC a few days ago – young Americans, mainly white, celebrated the death of Osama bin Laden. It made me feel sick. How little have they understood!? It is not difficult though to understand that those who have lost loved ones in the attacks of Sept/11 easily could feel they were now justified in feeling a sense of revenge; but to celebrate somebody else’s death? Is Osama bin Laden an example of prime evil? Is he a modern day Hitler? One should have to admit that in all societies there would be a large group strongly supporting the existence of and the need for vengeance when the time comes, and equally, a substantial part of humanity would, if faced with the facts, agree that “it is better for you to have one man die for the people, instead of having the whole nation destroyed” (John 11.50, Good News Bible). But the question is, will we all have peace after this seemingly justified action of retribution? I do not think so. In addition, in an interesting way we are here up against the all powerful America and its culture of violence, where the possession of a gun is seen as a human right and where capital punishment is well entrenched in law. The former Mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, could serve as a good example and as a good loyal citizen when he says with reference to those who lost their lives in the World Trade Centre twin towers cut through by two hijacked aeroplanes: “People are human. When you take away their loved ones in a brutal way like that, the person who did it is someone you want to see – you want to see vengeance, you want to see retaliation, you want to see satisfaction. Those are raw, human emotions. And having lived through Sept 11, you either have all those emotions, or you’re living in denial” (Time, May 20, p 11). But even if it is justified to have such emotions in terms of retributive justice one would have to ask: are we helped by this, are we getting anywhere when it comes to dealing with any kind of post-conflict situations? Or is the US long term policy that there never is going to be a so-called post-conflict phase in world politics?

Barrack Obama also in a way just did what definitely would be expected from a President of the United States. And he has now shown that he is a patriot, and through his action it is “proved” beyond any reasonable doubt that he certainly was born on US territory, and even the Republicans are proud of him.

My argument is that despite and even not least because of the expectations on the presidency, Obama’s action was wrong and a big mistake that the world, not only the US, will have to pay for, for a long time to come. To take somebody’s life, regardless on whose behalf, creates a void that cannot be filled by anybody else. A basic truth for those who believe is that every human being is created in the image of God. So also Osama bin Laden. I admit that it is a very uncomfortable truth, but it is there. And what follows is that no person, regardless of the crimes or deeds that have been committed, is beyond redemption. This could be taken to mean quite a loose and laissez-faire kind of attitude to crime, but not necessarily so. There are other ways of containing violence and crime than taking somebody’s life. To argue against taking the life of bin Laden could also be seen as very naïve; not necessarily so. Without in any way belittle the deeds of bin Laden and his disciples, one should remember that schemes of the US and the rest of the West in other parts of the world aren’t that innocent either. But I will not here elaborate on the existing hatred that is a fact from those who perceive themselves as at the receiving end of Western power politics.

Rather I like to draw a parallel. Not so long ago South Africa got rid of apartheid, a system that meant suffering and death for many people over many years, directly and indirectly. Time had come to give account of past deeds, especially between the years 1960 – 1994. A state commission was instituted, on purpose called the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which served the country 1996 – 1998. The rest is history and people all over the world concerned with how we should learn to live together are grappling with the exact meaning of what took place, and still is taking place, in South Africa. The prospect of reconciling even with the bitterest of enemies must be taken into account. But make no mistake about it (as the late Dr Beyers Naudé used to say), the outcome in South Africa could have been very different. The new government could have kept capital punishment, but it didn’t. They could also have applied this punishment on key persons who were real perpetrators and still alive to state an example. They could have hanged people like President P W Botha, General M Malan and ideologues and theologians like F J M Potgieter, all of whom supported and applied apartheid ruthlessly throughout their life time (apartheid South Africa used to hang more than a hundred a year). But this did not happen, because all the people in the country, including the perpetrators, had to continue living together. Is that not also the case on world level, in a post-Osama-assassination scenario? In South Africa, instead, the current President Thabo Mbeki, attended the funeral of former President P W Botha and paid his respects, despite all that had been before.

It is perhaps easy to feel it is time for revenge when it comes to bin Laden, especially if you are American. It is perhaps easy also because the Osamas of this world seem so far away and their objectives seem so ludicrous. But is this true? Are they so far from us? Are we not doomed to live in one world? Are we not in fact becoming a more and more closely knit existence where we all belong whether we like it or not?

So, finally, what should have been done to Osama bin Laden? He and his adherents should have been contained and kept in check, and this is exactly what was happening for the last couple of years. If apprehended he should have enjoyed humanitarian treatment. If arrested, he should have had to face life imprisonment with highly humanitarian treatment, during which time he should have had the chance to articulate himself as to why he did what he did and in how far he in fact also was an articulation of frustrations and hatred that is far wider spread than many (in the West) want to be aware of.