Introduction
In April 2011, Obama authorized the military operation that killed Osama bin Laden (Geronimo), Al-Qaeda’s co-founder and leader who claimed responsibility for several attacks on American targets worldwide, including 9/11. Geronimo was the name used by the United States military as one of the first code names for Osama bin Laden, which was used in the early 1990s during Operation Restore Hope in Somalia. The operation was overseen by the then-sitting President, Barrack Obama. The operation resulted from joint efforts by various security forces, such as the CIA and the United States Navy sea. Operation Geronimo was supported by the government of Pakistan, which allowed the United States to station a team of Navy SEALs on its territory. The operation was conducted in Abbottabad, located 50 km northeast of Islamabad and within the vicinity of several military training facilities and academies. As the President of the US, Obama had legitimate authority to order Operation Geronimo and execute the plan.
The President, as the Commander-In-Chief of the United States Military Forces
According to the US Constitution, the President is the commander-in-chief of the United States military forces and can conduct military campaigns worldwide without prior authorization. Davis (2021) asserted that the President had proven the legal authority for Operation Geronimo. As Commander in Chief, the President possesses plenary power to carry out the laws of war and to order the use of forces in situations outside of recognized theaters of war (Davis, 2021). Specifically, Article II, Section 2 states that ‘[t]he executive Power shall be vested in a President…’ (Davis, 2021). As such, ‘the Constitution vests in the President the “hips” necessary to sit as Commander-in-Chief. This authority is not limited or modified by statute.
In addition to the point above, the President has discretion over the use of force and can, under certain circumstances, ‘deploy the armed forces to carry out the laws of war. While it is true that other Presidents, including former Presidents Bush and Clinton, have used military force to kill individuals with whom they had no legal quarrel, only two were in situations as dire as Geronimo’s execution (Davis, 2021). Obama had been executed on operational orders from his government. Davis (2021 ) claimed that killing Geronimo eliminated a potential international terrorist threat. Thus, Obama had the legal authority and responsibility to protect and defend the US against further terrorist attacks, and ordering Operation Geronimo and executing the plan was one of his legitimate authorities.
Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter
According to chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, “Actions concerning threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression a nation has the right to defend themselves from acts of aggression. Article 51 states, “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations. Until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security” (Damrosch, 2019). It gives the President of the United States of America the right to defend the United States against any further attacks by the parties that alleged responsibility for those actions on 9-11.
In addition, by employing the UN charter and the government’s backing, President Obama could defend the US in a legal manner and the demeanor of the United Nations (Damrosch, 2019). According to Damrosch (2019), the Geronimo Operation was approved by 90% of American citizens. Obama executed the plan intending to bring Americans peace and justice for the tragedy in the nation on September 11, 2001, in mind. This act brought a bit of closure to the families impacted by the tragedy and lost their loved ones on that day. Therefore, President Obama executed the plan to bring justice to Geronimo in accordance with the Charter of the UN.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, and Geneva Conventions
According to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, and Geneva conventions, in the case of self-defense and defense of fellow states, Article 51 allows nations to attack foreign countries that are planning to attack them. The target can be either a country or an individual. It shows that President Obama had the legal authority to order the mission. President Obama had the right to defend America from Osama bin Laden who was the enemy of the US and threatened more attacks (Trahan, 2022). President Obama had the responsibility to protect his country from its enemies. In this regard, he can use military force to eliminate any threat Bin Laden might pose to America and its people. Osama Bin Laden’s plan to attack the US was evident since he had conducted many terrorist attacks. President Obama needed to order a commando operation to kill bin Laden. Due to these reasons, Obama had the right to order a group of Navy Seals to attack Bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan. He was performing his duties as commander-in-chief of the US military forces.
In addition, the operation was planned so that it did not involve US troops directly entering Pakistan. According to Van Veeren (2019), President Obama ordered special operations teams from US Navy SEALs Team Six and members of Naval Special Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU) units based in Virginia and North Carolina to raid bin Laden’s compound. It was an operation conducted by US military forces and not a direct attack of the US against Pakistan (Van Veeren, 2019). Therefore, President Obama had multiple sources of authority while executing Operation Geronimo; his actions were legal as he acted in his duties as commander-in-chief of the US military forces.
NATO Charter
In addition, President Obama received authorization from the United Nations General Assembly for military action in Pakistan in 2010, which read: “the Assembly called on states to ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under applicable international law” (Trahan, 2022). Furthermore, Article 5 of the NATO alliance says all member countries must come to each other’s aid if attacked. Article V of the NATO charter further states that: “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or ATOorth America shall be considered an attack against them all, and as such, all member countries must come to each other’s aid (Trahan, 2022). It shows that President Obama had the authority to participate in Operation Geronimo because he acted under international law and within his duties as commander-in-chief (Trahan, 2022). President Obama acted within his authority when he ordered the mission, ending with Bin Laden’s body decapitated. Operation Geronimo had turned out successfully, and bin Laden was killed. Therefore, President Obama did Nothing wrong when executing this operation against bin laden because it was his right under US law.
Conclusion
In conclusion, President Obama acted within the law when he ordered the operation against Laden. He was fulfilling his duties as commander-in-chief of the US military forces. The Geronimo Operation was approved by 90% of American citizens; Obama executed the plan intending to bring Americans peace and justice for the tragedy in the nation on September 11, 2001, in mind. Geronimo Operation exposed bin Laden’s hideout and successfully killed him. Therefore, President Obama executed this operation against bin Laden; he did Nothing wrong; it was his right under US law.
References
Damrosch, L. F. (2019). Commentary on collective military intervention to enforce human rights. In Law and Force in the New International Order. (pp. 215-223). Routledge. Web.
Davis, J. (2021). Commander in chief authority and the original intent of the Constitution. Available at SSRN 3795552. Web.
Trahan, J. (2022). Vetoes and the UN Charter: The obligation to act in accordance with the ‘Purposes and Principles’ of the United Nations. Journal on the Use of Force and International Law, 1-35. Web.
Van Veeren, E. (2019). Secrecy’s subjects: Special operators in the US shadow war. European Journal of International Security, 4(3), 386-414. Web.