Case Study
The success of Operation Geronimo, which killed Osama Bin Laden, represented a watershed moment in America’s war on terrorism. On 2nd May 2011 (Pakistan local time),
Osama bin Laden was killed in a military operation of the United States with the code name “Operation Geronimo”. While some people have questioned its legality, President Obama had both the legal authority, domestic and international to order the operation. Even though the actions noted in those documents, the UN Charter states that it is lawful for a country to defend itself in accordance with “the principle of national self-defense, the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), and the laws of armed conflict” (Chesney 117). That noted, not only was this action legal, but this action is necessary to protect American security and provide justice to the 9/11 victims.
After the attacks on the twin towers and Pentagon in the US, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which gave the President extensive powers to fight al-Qaeda and its leaders (this includes those guilty of the crimes). Above all, this resolution specifically authorized military action against Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind 9/11, and more so, provided the legal basis for Operation Geronimo. As stated by legal scholar Robert Chesney, "The intentionally broad wording of the AUMF enabled the President to take the required actions to counter the continued threats posed by al-Qaeda" (Chesney 117). That said, to ensure openness under U.S. law, President Obama followed the proper procedures when he informed congressional leaders that bin Laden was a valid military target. The months-long planning that went into the operation went on to ascertain that it complied with legal (including procedural) standards, and thus confirmed that bin Laden was a legitimate target under the AUMF as an active danger. All in all, through operating within this framework, President Obama upheld his statutory plus moral duties in the fight against terrorism while using his constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief.
Beyond domestic law, the principle of self-defense, which is established in Article 51 of the UN Charter and more so, acknowledges a nation's inherent right to respond to armed attacks, provided strong backing for Operation Geronimo under international law. That noted, Osama bin
Laden is considered a perpetual combatant under international law because, aside from masterminding the 9/11 attacks, he declared war on the United States (not only that but continued to plan acts of terrorism throughout the world). Notably, legal scholars note that "A state may defend itself by using force against non-state actors if the host country is unwilling or unable to deal with the threat," (O'Connell 219). The United States' unilateral action to minimize the threat was justified by Pakistan's incapacity (say unwillingness) to apprehend bin Laden in Abbottabad. In addition, the international agreement that al-Qaeda was a legitimate military target was strengthened by NATO's invocation of Article 5 collective defense following 9/11 and later UN Security Council resolutions (such as Resolution 1368). So, the US made their case that whatever their action was, it was legal and necessary. Why? These protocols will play an important role in maintaining global peace and security, and more importantly, the right to self- defence against terrorism.
Critics say that, since Operation Geronimo was performed without the consent of Islamabad, it violated Pakistan’s sovereignty. They claim that it can set a precedent for unilateral military actions to unfold in such a manner. According to some legal experts, the USA must have waited for more solid proof like real-time record of his presence before conducting the raid or pursuing him with the Pakistani authorities (Lahoud 320). However, we observe that such criticisms ignore important facts; reliance on Pakistan's cooperation could not be relied on because of its bad counterterrorism record, where there have been claims of intelligence connections to militant organizations. According to former CIA Director Leon Panetta, "If we disclosed the information, we were not sure that the Pakistanis would/aid in killing bin Laden" (Whipple 619). The complete, CIA tracking and confirmed interrogations of detainees demonstrate that no doubt lingered about the existence of bin Laden. That is to say, the uncertain mission was also in accordance with international humanitarian law and causing minimal collateral damage through surgical precision. Although concerns about sovereignty are justified, Article 51 of UN Charter states otherwise. When the host country fails to act, it allows for self- defence against imminent threats. The operation that eliminated a terrorist who was in demand in the world was successfully carried out without hurting civilians; this justifies the techniques used. Conclusively, Operation Geronimo was needed and legal even with criticisms. In keeping with the principles of self-defense recognized by the world community, President Obama assured that the operation respected the laws of war. More importantly, however, he was acting under the authority of the Constitution AUMF. The murder of Osama Bin Laden has made America safer and this is a smart move. Also, it has seriously weakened the Al-Qaeda group. America has also brought justice for the attack of 9/11. Both the law and the execution of the operation set the example for counter-terrorism operations.
