Why we haven't caught Osama Bin Laden: Words from a Solider, Student, and Scholar

The following essay was written by Damian Riccitelli, a veteran of the War on Terror. He is currently a student at Temple University and is a guest author on the Rovito Review.

"It’s been roughly seven years since 9/11, so where is he? Why don’t we have him? The short answer may come from a former CIA agent who spoke with National Public Radio. He believes Bin Laden is dead. He asks why there are no recent propaganda tapes. Not to mention, never in CIA history has someone completely slipped off the radar this long. This is to say that any human being is going to be subject to at least one mistake or something overseen operationally that would hint being alive. His interview can be heard at this web address http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95285396

It is my understanding that Pakistan is our “ally” in our war on terror. By definition, they are certainly a friendly nation to us and provide us with at least some sort of cooperation and assistance. But is this enough? When I asked my father why the world wasn’t taking military action in Sudan in response to the genocide, he suggested that Pakistan and China get their oil from Sudan and both of them are nuclear countries. He was hinting that we wouldn’t want to make waves with nuclear countries, I suppose. So the same thought applies to the Bin Laden in Pakistan question. We don’t want to make any waves with a country that carries a really big stick?

As for the war on terror, I remember having a friendly debate with CBS “60 minutes” reporter Laura Logan at a coffee shop on a base in Afghanistan as to what exactly the war on terror really is. She said “How can President Bush declare war on an ideal”? Because it’s not the war on “Al Qaeda” or the war on the “Taliban,” at least that not what they say. They say the “war on terror.” But that’s a whole different discussion. Here I want to shed light on why we haven’t been successful in capturing Osama Bin Laden.

After 9/11 the U.S. military had an immediate presence in Afghanistan. A Delta Force commander has just written a book called “Kill Bin Laden”; he cites that he believes he and his unit had Bin Laden on the battlefield in that infamous Tora Bora region battle. He also describes how hard it was to carry out the mission when relying on strict orders from the Pentagon to give most of the operational power to local national fighters. He also says leaders at the Pentagon for reasons unknown, denied his plan to attack Bin Laden from behind over the mountains. The local national fighters quit and went home. The Delta Force commander was only left with an option for a frontal assault on Bin Laden with only about 50 of his own men. He decided to not advance in concern for being extremely outnumbered. Anyone should be able to understand that this was the right thing to do. However, the decision still haunts him. The report can be seen here at this web address http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=56e_1223312875

After that initial encounter with Bin Laden, we direct our attention to Pakistan. After all, it’s the safest place for Bin Laden. Think about it, if you had the most powerful country in the world chasing you, where would you go? That’s right, the one place they’re not allowed to go! So the U.S. has a friendly relationship with Pakistan and tries its best to work with their army. But Pakistan is a deep rabbit hole with much to consider. For example, Pakistan’s version of our CIA is called the ISI. It is rumored that the ISI is corrupt and tried to assassinate the President and military dictator General Pervez Musharraf several times. So is Al-Qaeda in everything over there? How can we effectively work with the Pakistani Army if we can’t trust them?

When I was in that area about four years ago, I believe we had about a two-mile limit into Pakistan during operations. Anything past those two miles is forbidden. The demographics for that area consist of tribes, refugees, and Taliban, and Al Qaeda. But, no matter what you believe, I can tell you that no American can waltz into that area without being shot on sight or blown up. The Taliban are everywhere and Al Qaeda too. After 9/11 we smacked the beehive with a baseball bat spreading them out. But I know if I were Bin Laden, I would feel real safe in Pakistan. I also believe the strategy of the U.S. doesn’t include anything that could mirror a “Black Hawk Down” scenario. Surgical strikes like these are extremely risky. Someone suggested to me once that, “Instead of sending10 Blackhawks, why not send 100”? The point they’re trying to make is that we should somehow be granted to step into Pakistan full force. This might have been a possibility had we not gone into Iraq, but even then, the Pakistani government may not be to happy with thousands of troops in their country, and this is where the problem lies. Do we push diplomacy to try and achieve our goals of capturing high value targets such as Bin Laden? Or do we get rougher and demand more access? I say, if you can get undeniable intelligence, you can make a case to the Pakistani government and if their good on their word to help, it should work. But, solid intelligence information is the key. Commanders have said it millions of times around me, “Intelligence drives operations, not the other way around.”

One must also consider Bin Laden’s personal security structure. It was explained to me like this: Imagine you are Bin Laden right now where you are sitting. You would have 10 of your best guards armed to the hilt around your immediate area. Then you would have 20 more guys circling that area. Then, 50 more guys circling that circle, and so on. The idea is that as soon as someone penetrates one of those circles, the information of your presence gets relayed to the center, and just like that, the whole circle begins to move. An aggressor would probably encounter heavy fire while that circle is moving as well, just a thought. I also thought to myself one day in Afghanistan, maybe Bin Laden is worth more as a free man. What if they knew where he was and we’re listening to everything he said. If we monitored that, we would learn everything about Al Qaeda because a lot would come from him. If we killed him, we would lose that pipeline of information...again, just a thought.

So, of the times that we have gotten close, I take a step back and take everything into consideration. In Southwest Asia, there are plenty of places to hide forever if you keep quiet enough; especially if you’re trained by the very organization out to get you. Terrain is grossly underestimated when considering success in the war on terror. I don’t believe at this time we should aggressively enter Pakistan. I believe we need more of our assets there to collect sufficient intelligence so that would be our ticket in. This can be done with our Pakistani ally. So long as we have the intelligence information we need, accompanied by the military assets we need and Pakistan’s help, the capture or kill of Osama Bin Laden is possible. If we don’t receive Pakistan’s help when we have good intelligence, then we might want to radically rethink our relationship with them, because then they just might be accused of “hiding something.” (Wink, wink)

The 60 minutes special that Laura did on our units can be seen here at this web address http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9eebb4f06c."