When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
Geopolitics

Is Killing Bin Laden Worthy Of A Great Democracy?

Opinion: As the U.S. celebrates the killing of its No. 1 enemy, one German commentator says Americans should ask themselves: was it worth it?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/58964293@N00/5681399919/sizes/z/in/gallery-60393420@N04-72157626512551675/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/58964293@N00/5681399919/sizes/z/in/gallery-60393420@N04-72157626512551675/

New York celebrates Osama's death (davem_330)

The images coming from the U.S. were reminiscent of the scenes following Saddam Hussein's capture in December 2003, when he was hiding in a hole in a farm near the town of Tikrit. What followed was a degrading treatment of the Iraqi president on the world's stage, allegedly to determine his identity. In fact, the show was meant to demonstrate the power of the United States.

The message was clear: we can catch anyone, and no one is safe. This time, it was Osama Bin Laden who had his turn – the Al Qaeda leader was the No. 1 public enemy in the United States. A $50 million bounty had been issued for his capture: "dead or alive."

President Obama personally gave the order for the mission, and Americans are now celebrating as if killing Osama Bin Laden had solved all of their problems in one stroke – high unemployment, runaway national debt, failed health care reform, the country's tarnished prestige in the world.

The execution of Osama Bin Laden – or it is better to speak of murder? – allows Americans to forget their troubles for a moment. It is like a balm on the wounds of the nation. In the rush of emotion, no one is asking the questions that need to be asked. For example – was it really Osama Bin Laden who was killed? Is it possible that it was one of his doubles?

In the United States, the accused have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Guilt or innocence can only be decided in a proper court of law. Osama Bin Laden was given the "short shrift". He did not have the opportunity to defend himself from the accusations made against him, he had no fair trial, no lawyer. He was probably not even asked to surrender. Such a procedure is unworthy of a constitutional state. Even Adolf Eichmann, the architect of the Final Solution of the Jewish question, was given due process before he was sentenced to death.

If we ask ourselves, "cui bono?" ("who benefits?"), the answer is clear: the United States. The superpower was caught cold by the recent uprisings in the Arab world, it has failed to solve the Palestinian question, it has not even come to terms with inflation at home. Something needed to happen.

The timing was not perfect, but apparently no one wanted to wait until the tenth anniversary of 9/11. As Americans celebrate in the streets, they forget that violence often produces counter-violence in turn. The execution of Osama Bin Laden will have consequences; it will undoubtedly set a new spiral of violence in motion again.

Was it worth it? Could the United States have made an extradition request to the Pakistani government? After all, the action grossly violated Pakistan's sovereignty. The government in Islamabad has no choice but to make the best of a bad game, but its reputation in the country is not getting any better. It is already seen as an agent for the United States. This in turn will give new impetus to the radical Islamists.

At the very least, we should now demand the creation of an independent commission to investigate whether or not, and under what circumstances, Osama Bin Laden was killed. Only then will we know for certain and prevent the spread of conspiracy theories like the ones that have developed about events such as the moon landing and 9/11.

The leader of such a commission would need to be an experienced and impartial jurist. For example, Richard Goldstone, the former Chief Justice of South Africa, who investigated Israel's latest operation in Gaza.

Read the original article in German

photo - (davem_330)

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Economy

Lex Tusk? How Poland’s Controversial "Russian Influence" Law Will Subvert Democracy

The new “lex Tusk” includes language about companies and their management. But is this likely to be a fair investigation into breaking sanctions on Russia, or a political witch-hunt in the business sphere?

Photo of President of the Republic of Poland Andrzej Duda

Polish President Andrzej Duda

Piotr Miaczynski, Leszek Kostrzewski

-Analysis-

WARSAW — Poland’s new Commission for investigating Russian influence, which President Andrzej Duda signed into law on Monday, will be able to summon representatives of any company for inquiry. It has sparked a major controversy in Polish politics, as political opponents of the government warn that the Commission has been given near absolute power to investigate and punish any citizen, business or organization.

And opposition politicians are expected to be high on the list of would-be suspects, starting with Donald Tusk, who is challenging the ruling PiS government to return to the presidency next fall. For that reason, it has been sardonically dubbed: Lex Tusk.

University of Warsaw law professor Michal Romanowski notes that the interests of any firm can be considered favorable to Russia. “These are instruments which the likes of Putin and Orban would not be ashamed of," Romanowski said.

The law on the Commission for examining Russian influences has "atomic" prerogatives sewn into it. Nine members of the Commission with the rank of secretary of state will be able to summon virtually anyone, with the powers of severe punishment.

Under the new law, these Commissioners will become arbiters of nearly absolute power, and will be able to use the resources of nearly any organ of the state, including the secret services, in order to demand access to every available document. They will be able to prosecute people for acts which were not prohibited at the time they were committed.

Their prerogatives are broader than that of the President or the Prime Minister, wider than those of any court. And there is virtually no oversight over their actions.

Nobody can feel safe. This includes companies, their management, lawyers, journalists, and trade unionists.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

The latest