Last Thursday was one of the good days. The TV came on, news headlines flashed and in a second the synapses fired registering that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had been killed. Just like Gene Chandler said, there?s a rainbow in my soul.
A colleague didn?t share the mood, and she asked why they had to keep showing his corpse. Of course, it is to prove to everyone ? especially the average Iraqi ? that it?s really Zarqawi and that he?s really dead.
Zarqawi was able to survive this long because he and his gang were loved by some, but feared by far more. To gain street credibility, Zarqawi?s men passed out video tapes of their successful beheadings and bombings.
Lots of what we think we know about Zarqawi and his influence on events in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq ? whether or not he personally beheaded American businessman Nick Berg, for example ? may actually be part of the Robin Hood-like legend he cultivated. Some of it may be bad intelligence or deliberate disinformation. But the death portraits are final, the modern equivalent of his head on a pike at the gate to the city.
A combination of high-tech surveillance and human intelligence caught him. According to reports, a handful of American Special Forces operators were nearby and were considering a raid on the hideout to try and arrest Zarqawi. When it becameclear that sufficient backup wouldn?t arrive soon enough, they ordered the bombing. Among those killed was one of Zarqawi?s wives, just 16 years old.
Until just a few years ago, targeting a single individual for death like this would not have been an option. Presidents Ford, Carter and Reagan all issued executive orders prohibiting assassination by the U.S. government.
But in 1998, President Clinton authorized covert lethal action against al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden. The missiles missed, but a sound precedent was set. Post-Sept. 11, the Bush administration has concluded that the ban on assassination should not apply when it comes to terrorists.
Prior to President Ford?s ban, the U.S. government considered it an option. Leaders targeted for assassination include dictators Fidel Castro of Cuba and Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, according to congressional investigators.
Now may be an opportune time to consider lifting the assassination ban entirely. It would be a useful tool for President Bush and his successors to have when confronted with heads of state like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
That?s not to say that Ahmadinejad ? Holocaust-denying, nuclear weapon ambitious fascist that he is ? should be assassinated. But it would let the world know we?re serious if we openly announced that assassination is one of many options that the United States could consider to prevent Iran from attacking Iraq, Israel or anyone else.
Bullies thrive on the weak-willed, but sometimes they are cowed by strength. Bin Laden became more aggressive after seeing Clinton?s weakness in Mogadishu. By contrast, Bush?s follow-through on Iraq convinced Libya?s Moammar Gadhafi to hand over his weapons of mass destruction in a remarkably timely and agreeable manner.
But we?re supposed to settle things like enlightened, civilized people, aren?t we? We should look to sanctions, take steps to encourage democracy, or send Jimmy Carter. We don?t want international politics to turn into the Old West, especially with a cowboy like Bush in office.
Reality, though, intrudes. If a civilization wants to survive real threats to its existence, sometimes violence is the only civilized response. And killing a man who possesses both the inclination and the ability to credibly threaten thousands ? or even millions ? of innocents is humane and just.
No one knows this better than the Iraqi politicians and journalists who cheered and applauded the announcement of Zarqawi?s death.
Aaron Keith Harris writes about politics, the media, pop culture and music and is a regular contributor to National Review Online and Bluegrass Unlimited. He can be reached at [email protected].
