Wheaton Studies Impacts of Osama bin Laden

In 1998, Osama bin Laden called a news conference to publicly declare war on the United States. He took responsibility for the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassy buildings in Kenya and Tanzania and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, as well as the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. And then of course was the attack on 9/11. As a result, the United States was on a mission against bin Laden, al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan, and the Taliban government sheltering them. On Sunday, the United States had a major victory.

When news broke out about the death of Osama bin Laden, many people celebrated. Tourists gathered in front of the White House chanting, “USA! USA! USA!” But behind that celebration, some took the time to really think about the implications of bin Laden’s death.

“During these nearly 10 years since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan, bin Laden had been able to remain in hiding, reappearing only now and again via videotaped or audio taped messages cheering would-be followers and taunting the United States,” said Dr. Gerard Huiskamp, associate professor of political science at . “The US mission culminating in bin Laden’s killing is unlikely to disrupt this pattern of violence in the short term. We may see attempted terrorist attacks in the following months and years, although this might have been true had bin Laden been killed for not.

Also weighing in on bin Laden’s death was the Roosevelt Institution group at Wheaton. Lead by Adin Lenchner, Roosevelt is a student policy organization that engages new generations in a form of progressive activism that empowers young people as leaders and promotes their ideas for change. During their last meeting of the year, they discussed how they felt about bin Laden’s death and if they think it will change anything.

“For people who were killed on 9/11, vengeance has been achieved,” said student Brian Jencunas. “Vengeance matters, vengeance is good, and at times like this, vengeance feels right, and it ought to feel right.”

Many others disagreed with Jencunas, saying that all the lives lost wasn’t worth it. Bin Laden is just one cog in a machine, and there are many in line to take his place.

“I couldn’t help but to feel very conflicted about the fact that so much celebration was going on,” said one student. “We’re celebrating the death of what was still a person. A human being. We’re celebrating the death of a human being, and that disturbed me a bit.”

“Yes, this might be vengeance but at the same time a person still had to die in order for that to happen,” said another girl. “I would have much rather had him captured and been prosecuted.”

“America didn’t ask to go to war,” Jencunas answered back. “We didn’t’ ask for the attack. But having had war thrust upon us, we will defend ourselves and we will do our best to win it, as nations do and have to do. Because there is no alternative. The alternative defense is dying.”

Shahjahan Burki, of Pakistan, also attended the Roosevelt meeting to see where his fellow students felt on the matter. 

“When I came here, I was kind of wondering what everyone would say, especially about Pakistan. I feel good about the general sentiments,” he said.

Now that bin Laden is gone, the world is waiting to see what happens next. Who will take bin Laden’s place? How soon will it be before more attacks are made? And what is next in the war on terrorism?

Huiskamp notes that in the last few months, bin Laden and al Qaeda have become increasing irrelevant, as ordinary citizens in North Africa and the Middle East have been taking to the streets to demand democracy and accountability.

“Perhaps the vibrant energy for change we see in countries might give the United States the strength and confidence to see a new way forward in Afghanistan,” he said. “With Osama bin Laden dead and gone, perhaps we can find our way to draw down our forces in Afghanistan, putting an end to the war bin Laden declared these many years ago.”