Military operations, like the latest one in Abbottabad codenamed Geronimo, are few and far between and leave lasting scars for those on whose soil they are executed. It is unfortunate that Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden (OBL) was in Pakistan and such a humiliating mission was conducted on our soil; the pride of a common Pakistani stands severely bruised. At the same time, this operation will always be cited by international jurists as a blatant violation of the UN Charter and international norms. For decades, it will be critically analysed at exalted military training institutions. Indeed, Osamas dramatic demise is likely to raise as many questions as it may be able to answer. It seems that the mission was designed to proclaim OBL as dead with no provision for capturing him alive. And the indecent haste in which his body was disposed of in the sea has left a question mark on the authenticity of the incident. In view of the assertions given previously about Osamas death, it would have been in the fitness of things to arrange at least a transparent funeral, if not a befitting burial for him. The operation has generated an impression as if the previously occurred/announced death has been regularised through a well planned action to create an aura of mission accomplished by Washington prior to the US troop drawdown in Afghanistan. Despite the fact that a former Marine Colonel, Bob Pappas, has been saying for years that bin Laden died in Tora Bora in 2001. Surely, one understands that conflicts like in Afghanistan dont end in neat; they do not give decisive victories for either side. And face saving extrication out of such wars is not an easy task - at times, it involves gimmicks. Nevertheless, the initial comments by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were prudent and well thought out; both acknowledged Pakistans cooperation in the event. And our political leadership joyously and insensibly jumped on the bandwagon to take the credit, as if it was a joint Pak-US venture. But the real punch was to come from CIA Chief Leon Panettas venomous assertion that they kept Islamabad out of the loop, since it could have jeopardised the Abbottabad operation and might alert the targets. Panetta, indeed, came out in true colours as an ugly American. Too eager to deny even an iota of credit to his arch competitor, the ISI, Panetta went ballistic to the extent of embarrassing President Obama by contradicting his statement. He did it earlier also when he made the US President publicly declare CIA operative Davis as a diplomatic. Of now, CIA Chief has settled the score with ISI, which was overdue since the Raymond Davis fiasco. In his fervour, Panetta has also dismantled the strategic gain by irreparably rupturing the alliance of the worlds two finest intelligence outfits; whether he has the last laugh is yet to be seen. With the likes of Panetta around, terrorist outfits do not need much else to survive and thrive. Furthermore, the strategic impact of this significant event was lost too rapidly. Instead of strengthening the relationship between the US and Pakistan, it turned out to be another Pakistan bashing spree. In the absence of any meaningful post mission brief, the media in both the countries went bizarre; anchors were too keen to scale new heights of speculative reporting and mudslinging. The Pakistans military leadership, however, chose to stonewall for over three days, which gave credence to the speculation that it is not on the same page with the political leadership. No one requisitioned the session of Parliament; battalions of new ministers kept taking oath. Interactions with the Americans continued uninterrupted, as if nothing had happened. It was indeed a strategic collapse of the Pakistani leadership that left the masses in a lurch, literally no one to turn to for a factual picture. No one was there to provide a healing touch to a common Pakistani whose ego had been severely hurt. During this critical moment, rumours were rife that the political leadership had entered into some understanding with Washington while circumventing the military leadership, and had covertly permitted the conduct of operation. But if Panetta is right and the entire operation was a unilateral action by America, those responsible for military response to such intrusions will have to answer many questions. And as it has been conceded that it was an intelligence failure, the ISI will have to work very hard to clear this ugly blot. Moreover, an incident of this magnitude was bound to create a spike in Obamas approval rating. However, this is not the beginning of the end of Al-Qaeda. Despite huge symbolic loss, Osamas death does not present an existential threat to the movement. In all probability, Al-Qaeda will not die with him. More than a physical entity, it is now a mindset and unless the causes are addressed the trouble will go on. As expected, the paper tigers of India are getting primed to claim credit that they can also emulate the American action. The Indian Army Chief, General V.K. Singh, said that his armed forces were competent to carry out a similar operation. I would like to say only this that if such a chance comes, then all the three arms (of the military) are competent to do this, Singh told reporters. The Air Chief, Marshal P.V. Naik, too said that India has the capability to carry out surgical strikes against the terrorists. India can do it, he claimed. Rhetoric apart, hopefully, the Indian Services Chiefs know the limitations of the forces they command. They need to take a cue from their Home Minster, who was more realistic in his approach. He conceded that India could not replicate the American performance. He said: Ill tell you why, we dont have our forces on the Pakistani soil. We are not invited there. We dont have any support from Pakistan. We are both nuclear weapons states. Likewise, the Home Ministers point was carried forth by a budding Indian strategist, who wrote anonymously on one of Indias defence related blogs: The Pakistan government will agree to US strikes, but not Indian because we are rivals. They will definitely engage us if we intrude into their airspace. Also, the Indian strategist community has widely questioned whether India has the capacity to do so. India is not America. Certainly, it does not have the capability, but it is suffering from an acute superpower complex. It tends to sleep walk American trajectories. It is likely to be tempted to behave in a similar way. Undoubtedly, in case of such a misadventure, India shall court disaster. And those responsible to generate a response to the Indian misadventure surely know their job well. n The writer is a retired air commodore of Pakistan Air Force. Email: khalid3408@gmail.com