George Bush wished for that moment, when he would appear before the American people and the world to announce that America had killed the man who had killed the Twin Towers. Bush was able to kill the Taliban regime, which had refused to surrender a costly visitor called Osama Bin Laden. He also was able, without any convincing pretext, to kill Saddam Hussein's regime and observe his swaying corpse [after his execution]. He used to dream of the third big killing. Indeed, like individuals, empires need revenge to wash away their wounds. But he had neither luck nor time by his side. This appearance was the lot of Barack Obama, the different president with the different approach. Who knows, perhaps the coming days will show that Obama is more dangerous than both Bush and Bin Laden combined because of his ability to kill regimes and governments. A decade ago, Osama Bin Laden rocked the world when he moved war to US soil. He targeted the symbols of the US success and stature in New York and Washington, and the world was stunned by the “invasions”. The empire came out wounded from that day. It launched its great military machine and showed an unprecedented ability to strike blows, and make mistakes. America needs to achieve victory against an enemy with a known address. Bin Laden depleted it, as he was an obstinate enemy with no address. He could be in any cave, any house, and there was nothing that could lead to him. He dealt neither with phones nor with the internet. How difficult it is to fight a ghost. Every time you try to get closer, you find nothing. Meanwhile, the man was costly. Huge amounts were spent on improving security in airports, ports, and embassies in the United States, the West, and their allies. He was also costly to the world from which he came and against which he had vowed to lift the injustice. Before he was killed, Bin Laden lost his battle. He lost it in Saudi Arabia, which he had attempted to destabilize. The full-fledged confrontation approach with its security, intellectual, and religious dimensions reduced the man's popularity and isolated the thought stemming from despair, gloom, and extremism. He also lost his battle in Pakistan, whose location and nature of regime he dreamt to change, and got nothing but indifference from its intelligence services. Osama Bin Laden suffered in the past months a great loss that revealed al-Qaeda's isolation. The protesters in Tunisia did not raise his pictures, and his portrait did not appear on Tahrir Square in Cairo. The protesters in Yemen or Libya did not try to affiliate themselves with him. The revolutions and protests came from another dictionary, and demanded pluralism, the transfer of power, transparency, the respect of the other's opinion, belonging to today's world, and taking part in building it. This dictionary is in complete contradiction to his own one. Osama Bin Laden tried to ignite the demarcation lines between the Muslims and the West. He achieved success, particularly among some communities. However, the winds of the past months showed the wish of Arabs and Muslims to enjoy freedom, dignity, and progress, and to belong to the present era rather than excluding themselves from it. The killing of ben Laden does not imply the end of al-Qaeda or the end of terrorism. It can be considered an important event in the battle of symbols and the confirmation of the rule of punishing the perpetrator, whoever he is. The battle against terrorism will remain open. Bringing it to an end requires fighting injustice, poverty, marginalization, and occupation. It needs freedom, open horizons, development, reform, and participation. Perhaps this is why Obama may be more violent than Bush and more dangerous than Bin Laden. Osama Bin Laden has come and gone. He was suicidal in his line of thought, approach, and discourse. He ignited fire in this or that capital, and yesterday he was its victim. His companions might avenge him, but this does not mean that he is a page that has been turned. Osama passed by.
