"OSAMA BIN LADEN IS THE PAST…"

The life of Osama bin Laden was shrouded in secrecy, but his death proves to be full of questions and mysteries as well.

He is considered to be the mastermind of the worst act of terror in human history which claimed a huge number of lives. His face and image are among the most recognizable in the West even though few met him personally. He was wanted by the world's best secret services and millions of dollars were offered for any information about his whereabouts. He was said to be continuously stepping up his influence and, on the contrary, to have almost no power over Al-Qaeda militants and to be suffering from an incurable disease. He was killed several times, said to have died of "natural causes", but then another video message of his would emerge on one of the radical web-sites in which he would call for a continuation of the jihad against countries of the West, especially the USA. As a result, Osama bin Laden turned into something of a virtual character, a media personality whose name was cited by journalists, pundits, politicians, writers and film directors with and without pretext. 

For 10 years Osama bin Laden was considered "terrorist number one in the world". The mere mention of his name conjured in the minds of ordinary people the image of a menacing and ruthless universal evil, a contemporary Hitler dressed in traditional Arab costume and wearing a beard. Many people were sure that he lived in the manner typical of a leader of brutal thugs - in a fully equipped cave somewhere in the inaccessible mountains on the Afghan-Pakistani border. And what a surprise it was when he was found in an ordinary house, albeit with high walls and barbed wire, in the immediate vicinity of one of Pakistan's best military academies and right next to the home station of three Pakistani army regiments. 

Even more bewilderment was caused by the so-called "home video" from bin Laden's personal archive, captured by US paratroopers and released by the White House. The formidable Al-Qaeda leader appears in the video to be a crooked and grey-haired old man looking very much like Saddam Hussein in his last years. It was also reported that hair dye and a "herb-based Viagra" were discovered in the terrorist's house. This was quite a serious blow to the already controversial reputation of the Al-Qaeda leader.

The news of the killing of "terrorist number one" burst into the world media as a true sensation and triggered such a heated debate that the war in Libya and the wedding of Prince William in Great Britain were overshadowed for a time. Suffice it to say that the killing of the Al-Qaeda leader was officially announced by US President Barack Obama in a televised address.

And a real show began. Details of the special operation in the Pakistani town of Abbottabad, as well as preparations for it and reasons for the weird burial of bin Laden at sea, were revealed gradually, day by day.

And one can't help feeling astonished, in the good sense of the word, at the incredible ability of the Americans to produce out of anything a show with some luscious nuances. 

This time the show was interactive because it was gladly joined by many happy residents of the planet who have a computer and Internet connection in their homes. It is now possible not only to write commentaries, but also to engage in heated arguments with opponents, respond to them creatively and convincingly with the aid of "photo shops" and "movie makers" and leave articles in one's own blog.

In other words, Osama bin Laden's personality and the operation to kill him were scrutinized by millions of visitors to various news and analytical web-sites. Not all of them are supporters of the USA and share the joy that overwhelmed those who gathered outside the White House after Obama's announcement of bin Laden's death. 

It is therefore no wonder that a myriad of theories and questions soon emerged and Washington was either in no hurry to provide answers to them or was confused.

Did the USA have the right to conduct an operation to seize Osama bin Laden on the territory of another country, unbeknownst to the authorities of that country? How could Pakistani authorities have missed Osama bin Laden who had been living in Abbottabad for several years? Did the USA have the right to kill bin Laden? From the standpoint of international law he had the status of a suspect and should have been put on trial. How could Osama bin Laden's sons venture to publish an open letter in The New York Times accusing the USA of massacring their father? Why is the White House refusing to publish bin Laden's pictures? Images of a body shot in the head can barely shock contemporary viewers of news bulletins, not to mention Internet users. Why was bin Laden buried in such a strange manner? 

Various "conspiracy theories" to suit any taste have emerged on this prolific soil like mushrooms after rain. For instance, US paratroopers destroyed someone else, not bin Laden, while bin Laden died of natural causes long ago. Or that he was captured alive and is now in a secret prison. Or that he has undergone plastic surgery and is now living peacefully under a different name. Why not? He is a CIA agent after all! This is unlikely though, because if he is a US secret agent, it would have been a lot easier to make a scapegoat out of him and then, in full accordance with the laws of this genre, kill him. Or pass him on to other real terrorists and let them decide his fate.

Of course! But none of these theories has any proof. 

This is the deal. We have a multitude of views and opinions - from political analysts, experts and politicians. A huge number of people have expressed their views on the US special operation in Abbottabad and all of them are likely to stick to what they think happened. But it should also be remembered that there is the official position of the US government. 

This said, any of the views may be taken as a basis for a further debate: for instance, the official view, or the one that the Americans killed bin Laden back in 2001 and had been maintaining his virtual life since then "to justify", if necessary, their actions in the Middle East, Central Asia, North Africa and elsewhere. And now, when the image of "terrorist number one" seems to have outlived its usefulness, the time has come to stage his alleged elimination. The step is intended to boost Obama's chances of being elected for a second term in office, or to sidetrack the attention of the Americans from the domestic economic situation. Whether this is really the case or the current White House Administration has simply been very lucky doesn't really matter. What does matter is what conclusion is to follow from this. And the conclusion is that throughout his term in office Barack Obama has been clearly trying to get rid of George Bush's economic and foreign political heritage. And the current stage is simply hugely important because bin Laden is a symbol of the Bush times.

It is clear that the death of one man, even if we assume that bin Laden was indeed a prominent and strong leader, can barely contribute a lot to the "war on terror". Quite a few experts have already stated that Al-Qaeda is not an organization in the form of a pyramid, but a network of interacting groups. But Osama bin Laden was still at its centre. And this is a very important psychological aspect because as long as he was officially alive, the Americans could not leave Afghanistan which, as is known, is the objective of the incumbent US president. 

And it might be worth trying to find out what the Americans have gained from the Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda pretext, whether concocted or real.

They did not have military bases in countries of the Middle East even before. Neither have they been particularly successful lately in entrenching themselves in the countries of Central Asia in order to grapple with Russia for access to the region's energy resources. In fact, it may well be acknowledged that the rivalry between Washington and Moscow has resulted in the strengthening of China's positions in a number of Central Asian republics. Besides, US troops were deployed in Iraq under a completely different and prosaic pretext. In fact, Al-Qaeda emerged there already after the toppling of Saddam Hussein. There are no obvious successes in Afghanistan either, not least because the Taliban movement is still very much alive and, judging by the sorties of its militants, feels perfectly at ease. Meanwhile, US troops appear to have got bogged down there - billions of dollars continue to be injected into this "black hole" against the backdrop of a massive budget deficit, American soldiers continue to be killed, NATO partners have to be convinced of the need for assistance, and concessions have to be made to Russia in exchange for military and humanitarian shipments. 

At the same time, it is becoming increasingly obvious with every passing year and month that other ways of resolving the Afghan problem apart from military power should be sought as well. It seems unlikely though that if Osama bin Laden had been alive the talks with the so-called "moderate Taliban" would have produced the desired effect. Also, new methods of fighting terror should be sought in Pakistan, a country US secret services apparently have many questions to ask. And considering the huge funds Washington is allocating to Islamabad for the fight against militants, the White House has the right to demand an answer from its Pakistani partners. 

The elimination of bin Laden is unlikely to wave a magic wand and put an end to terrorist organizations based over a large area stretching from Africa to South-East Asia. In fact, the developments unfolding in various parts of the Arab world are providing terrorists with new targets and fresh opportunities. For instance, "Al-Qaeda on the Arab Peninsula" operates in Yemen, an ethnically and religiously diverse country engulfed in a popular tumult. Concerns have repeatedly been voiced that "Al-Qaeda militants in Maghreb countries" have infiltrated into the ranks of Libyan insurgents and are currently fighting against Muammar Gaddafi's troops with NATO's support from the air. This having been said, however, the elimination of Osama bin Laden clearly points to the end of a certain stage in the fight against international terrorism, especially in the rapidly changing Arab world. Very convoluted processes affecting numerous interests are unfolding in the Middle East today. These interests boil down to issues of religion, to the fight for power and to the traditional historical or perhaps artificial stand-offs between a multitude of forces. 

And even though the "Arab spring" is almost over, this appears to be only a beginning in the region, at least of the determination of the political future of Egypt, a country playing an important part in the Arab world and especially in the Arab-Israeli settlement. It was with Cairo's participation that reconciliation was reached by Fatah and Hamas, and this dictates new conditions to both Israel and the West. So is it likely that, considering the above, there are people na?ve enough to believe that the USA will keep out of all this without securing its own interests and control? Therefore, it is clear that there are much more important and difficult tasks in store for Washington than the hunt for the semi-mythical bin Laden.  

The New York Times writes that Barack Obama is going to take advantage of bin Laden's elimination to react to the Arab unrest differently. What is meant here is a single theory of popular uprisings from Tunisia to Bahrain. According to Obama's national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, the keynote of the American president's speech, which is likely to be delivered before the start of his European tour on 23 May, will be that "Osama bin Laden is the past, while the current developments in the region are the future". Rhodes is convinced that the current situation is conducive to changing the complex US relations with the Muslim world. 

According to Voice of America reports, White House spokesman Jay Carney has explained that the US president's speech will be aimed not only at the Arab world but at a wider audience. He will talk about political transformation ongoing in the Middle East and North Africa, about renewed efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In other words, a "re-set" of US relations with the Arab world is on the agenda.

But even this is not the most important aspect. Despite the lull surrounding Iran's nuclear program, it is Tehran that continues to be America's biggest problem in the region. In fact, Tehran is not on the sidelines of the developments in the Arab world at all, as it is trying to pursue its interests wherever possible. 

As compared to the Islamic Republic which has already grown into a headache for the West, the isolated "spare parts" of Al-Qaeda in some Central Asian, Middle Eastern and North African states look like child's play for the USA.