Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
President Obamas Actions Regarding Operation Geronimo
Introduction
In August 1998, U.S. President Bill Clinton declared Osama bin Laden public enemy number one. Then, the CIA began a large-scale hunt for the person, until then considered to be only a significant sponsor of extremists. It was possible to liquidate bin Laden almost in 13 years due to operations in Pakistan (Conley, 2017). During those years, the intelligence agencies were repeatedly close to catching or destroying the head of al-Qaeda, but each time they failed. According to official White House statements, U.S. intelligence agencies managed to find bin Ladens refuge by monitoring those few contact couriers (Conley, 2017). Accordingly, the world community had a chance to dispose of a man who stimulates and finances terrorism. Thus, it is imperative to establish whether President Obama had the authority to conduct Operation Geronimo.
The Background Information
Barack Obama has decided definitively to emancipate the world from the terrorist threat. The operation to eliminate Osama bin Laden was scheduled for Sunday, May 1 (Conley, 2017). The operation involved 12 members of an elite U.S. Navy unit known as Navy SEALs (Conley, 2017). They were not convinced that bin Laden will be in the residence when they assaulted it. There was still a risk that the al-Qaeda leader would be warned about the operation and again elude the intelligence services. However, once inside the mansion, the fighters sent their command a scrambled Geronimo signal, indicating that the target was inside the building. President Barack Obama observed the operation almost during live TV coverage (Conley, 2017). The process destroyed a man who was later identified as bin Laden, based on external features and then on computer analysis of the photograph.
Legitimacy of the Operation
It is essential to mention that a month before Obama issued the Geronimo order, lawyers were developing the legal justification for it. The legal backing for the deal made it possible to send troops to Pakistan without state consent (Conley, 2017). There is a debate about this because, in the absence of war, it is not permissible for any state to introduce troops into the territory of another country. Thus, in fact, international law prohibits the violation of the territorial value of Pakistan and military invasion. Under international law, it was appropriate to submit a request to the Pakistani government asking for the arrest of bin Laden (Conley, 2017). However, there was a serious threat that Pakistani authorities would not comply with the U.S. plea and assist Bin Ladens escape. Therefore, the lawyers justified the unilateral military invasion with a sovereignty exception from the usual unwilling or unable (Conley, 2017). Thus, the operation was legally conducted on the territory of another state because Pakistan could not destroy the threat on its own.
Another reason that opponents of Obamas decision cite is the right to surrender. Accordingly, bin Laden had the right to surrender voluntarily; therefore, the mission aimed at killing bin Laden excluded this power. Nevertheless, the military personnel involved in the operation claimed that the perpetrator had not expressed a desire to surrender. At the same time, there was a threat that someone from his entourage would start shooting (Conley, 2017). Hence, they were instructed to minimize the risks to themselves, even though they had a plan of action describing the option of capturing the living perpetrators. It is crucial to remark that the International Committee of the Red Cross indicates that it is forbidden to attack and kill the wounded (Conley, 2017). Accordingly, opponents of Obamas decision specified that bin Laden only needed to be injured. Although details matter for the legal justification, for example, it was assumed that the perpetrator would be equipped with a suicide vest or ready access to other rigged explosives (Conley, 2017). That way, bin Laden could have caused significant damage to the operations people and would have had a chance to escape again.
Another argument justifying the legality of the deal approved by Obama is that a reward was offered for information on the whereabouts of the criminal. Thus, it is fully in accordance with international law and national law because they forbid a reward for the head of the criminal, not for the details (Conley, 2017). At the same time, there was a court decision regarding the legal advice that opponents of the murder demanded to be published. The Court of Appeals affirmed that the lawyers reasoning and rationale must be kept confidential so that they are not afraid to disclose their opinions in emergencies (Conley, 2017). Moreover, the judges noted that transparency as one of the principles of a democratic society is not violated, and non-disclosure is required to preserve state secrets. Therefore, the decision to conduct the operation can be considered legally justified at the preparation stage, allowing to assert the operations legality.
Conclusion
Hence, despite the existence of opinions that Obama did not have the legal authority to conduct the Geronimo operation, it can be argued that the rules of law were complied with. This is explained by the meaningful legal support for the process and the justification and provision of a plan of action to the perpetrators. In view of the fact that bin Laden was harming the world by his terrorist actions, the decision to introduce the military into Pakistans theory is fully justified. However, bin Laden did not express a desire to surrender, and due to the danger of the situation, for the sake of minimizing the risks to the lives of the military, they were instructed to eliminate him. Thus, the conduct of this operation was justified under international law and contributed to the destruction of world terrorism.
Reference
Conley, R. S. (2017). Presidential Leadership and National Security. Taylor & Francis.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.