Friday, April 16, 2004
Osama Bin Laden offers Europe 'truce', Europe tells Beardy where he can stick his truce.
If nothing else, on a purely practical level, how could we trust Bin Laden to keep his word? He's got Allah on his side, did God tell him to offer a truce, what if God tells him the week after a freezing of hostilities to bomb somewhere in Germany? And even if Bin Laden were sincere, the Al Qaeda cells are supposed to operate with a certain level of autonomy so as to be difficult for intelligence agencies to locate, if he says "stop" and means it, could we be sure all those cells will hear it, listen and obey?
But he's committed crimes or been directly implicated in them, which means he doesn't get to say "I got to the tree! White rabbits, fayneights, you can't get me!", the end comes with his death or, more preferably, capture and trial.
The BBC claim this message is aimed at European left-wingers but while people might agree with his analysis of the situation I don't think that it will win him much support, or do much to further widen the gulf of popular opinion between the Left and their leaders. They disagree with Bush and Blair going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan as a response to Sept. 11th 2001, it doesn't mean they think it was an awful and cowardly act of terrorism that Bin Laden was involved with. Fridgemagnet on Barbelith thinks that, as ever, it's really a message for his fans in the Arab world, if countries such as Spain and Poland do pull out of Iraq he gets to claim "It was international terrorism wot won it".
If Bin Laden really wanted to cause trouble in Europe he should surrender to the European Union, preferably France or Germany, and demand that he have the chance to defend himself at the International Criminal Court. The United States would tear the United Nations apart to try and get at him, both so that they can bung him in Guantanemo Bay and in the hopes that they can get him out of the spotlight before he reminds the world how it was the CIA that got him started in the Eighties. The problematic idea of putting Bin Laden on trial should probably be thrashed out now even though it seems unlikely to happen, rather than waiting for the chance it happens.
The ICC wouldn't be acceptable to the current US administration, it's slow, not sexy enough for Fox News cameras and he wouldn't get the death sentence that the US would want him to get at the end of it. But the US trying him would be unacceptable to the rest of the world, many other countries have crimes to charge him with and what about those that don't have the death penalty? While the US may like to tell itself it can be self-sufficient the West Wing has had to work hard to ensure that people didn't see Bush (and Blair, though they don't care about him) going cap-in-hand to the UN for help after his 'victory' as the humiliation it was. It would probably be better for the US if Bin Laden decided to retire, get himself a little cottage somewhere called 'Dunterrorising' and concentrating on bee-keeping or something.
If nothing else, on a purely practical level, how could we trust Bin Laden to keep his word? He's got Allah on his side, did God tell him to offer a truce, what if God tells him the week after a freezing of hostilities to bomb somewhere in Germany? And even if Bin Laden were sincere, the Al Qaeda cells are supposed to operate with a certain level of autonomy so as to be difficult for intelligence agencies to locate, if he says "stop" and means it, could we be sure all those cells will hear it, listen and obey?
But he's committed crimes or been directly implicated in them, which means he doesn't get to say "I got to the tree! White rabbits, fayneights, you can't get me!", the end comes with his death or, more preferably, capture and trial.
The BBC claim this message is aimed at European left-wingers but while people might agree with his analysis of the situation I don't think that it will win him much support, or do much to further widen the gulf of popular opinion between the Left and their leaders. They disagree with Bush and Blair going to war in Iraq and Afghanistan as a response to Sept. 11th 2001, it doesn't mean they think it was an awful and cowardly act of terrorism that Bin Laden was involved with. Fridgemagnet on Barbelith thinks that, as ever, it's really a message for his fans in the Arab world, if countries such as Spain and Poland do pull out of Iraq he gets to claim "It was international terrorism wot won it".
If Bin Laden really wanted to cause trouble in Europe he should surrender to the European Union, preferably France or Germany, and demand that he have the chance to defend himself at the International Criminal Court. The United States would tear the United Nations apart to try and get at him, both so that they can bung him in Guantanemo Bay and in the hopes that they can get him out of the spotlight before he reminds the world how it was the CIA that got him started in the Eighties. The problematic idea of putting Bin Laden on trial should probably be thrashed out now even though it seems unlikely to happen, rather than waiting for the chance it happens.
The ICC wouldn't be acceptable to the current US administration, it's slow, not sexy enough for Fox News cameras and he wouldn't get the death sentence that the US would want him to get at the end of it. But the US trying him would be unacceptable to the rest of the world, many other countries have crimes to charge him with and what about those that don't have the death penalty? While the US may like to tell itself it can be self-sufficient the West Wing has had to work hard to ensure that people didn't see Bush (and Blair, though they don't care about him) going cap-in-hand to the UN for help after his 'victory' as the humiliation it was. It would probably be better for the US if Bin Laden decided to retire, get himself a little cottage somewhere called 'Dunterrorising' and concentrating on bee-keeping or something.
