Britisk rapport: Drabet på Bin Laden varsler statsligt skydetelt

Hedebølge i Californien. Verdens klimakrise har enorme sundhedsmæssige konsekvenser. Alligevel samtænkes Danmarks globale klima- og sundhedsindsats i alt for ringe grad, mener tre  debattører.


Foto: Kevin Carter/Getty Images
Forfatter billede

Terrorlederens voldsomme død kan danne præcedens for andre dødspatruljer udsendt af statslige myndigheder

Osama Bin Laden’s death may come to be seen as a precedent for “targeted killings” by states in the future, a British report has suggested, writes BBC online Tuesday.

The report says the former al-Qaeda leader’s killing has “significant implications” for how the US and other countries deal with terrorist suspects. Such methods could be seen to be “accepted politically”, it argues. The US maintains it was lawful but critics say he should have been taken alive.

Questions have been asked about the legality of the US special forces mission after it emerged, contrary to initial claims by the White House, that although its operatives came under sustained fire Bin Laden was not armed at the time he was shot.

The internal report for MPs written by parliamentary staff in London says many of the outstanding legal questions are only likely to be resolved if the White House releases the instructions given to the US Navy Seals who carried out the operation and discloses what efforts were made to get Bin Laden to surrender and what threat he was believed to pose at the time.

But it says that “the nature of Bin Laden’s killing may be a sign the US is increasingly likely to kill rather than to capture al-Qaeda members”.

“A wider implication is that the killing may be seen as a precedent for targeted killings of individuals by any state, across international boundaries, at least where terrorism is involved.. The more states act in this way, the more likely it is to become accepted, at least politically if not as a matter of international law.”

Among those who have expressed reservations about the killing include the Archbishop of Canterbury who said it was “uncomfortable” and “did not look as if justice” was “seen to be done”.