• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Gilles Dorronsoro"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [
    "Eurasia in Transition"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "South Asia",
    "Afghanistan",
    "Pakistan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

The War on Terror After Osama bin Laden

While Osama bin Laden’s death will not put an end to jihadist groups, it could help facilitate a political solution in Afghanistan, offering President Obama the political capital and opportunity to begin negotiations with the Taliban.

Link Copied
By Gilles Dorronsoro
Published on May 2, 2011
Project hero Image

Project

Eurasia in Transition

Learn More

Source: New York Times

The War on Terror After Osama bin LadenOsama bin Laden’s death is a clear victory with greater significance for the war in Afghanistan than for the dynamics of radical jihadist groups around the world.

Under pressure, al-Qaeda has not been able to carry out major operations against Western countries for the last few years. Bin Laden had mostly taken on a symbolic role and his removal doesn’t directly affect an organization that is largely decentralized. The fate of Ayman al Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s second-in-command, remains unknown, but he will probably replace bin Laden and an internal crisis like the one that divided the Pakistani Taliban is unlikely.

Of course, the current events in the Middle East — from Yemen to Iraq — give al-Qaeda ample opportunities to recruit militants, and it is wishful thinking to believe that bin Laden’s death will cause a major shift in the perceptions of the United States. In addition, nothing indicates that other jihadist groups, for example Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan, will be affected by the killing of Osama.

The real impact could be on the Afghan war. On the military side, al-Qaeda has not played an important role and one should not wait for a different strategy or a less aggressive Taliban this summer. The “surge” has failed and the momentum is definitively with the Taliban. But on the political side, the removal of bin Laden from the political equation opens a window of opportunity for the White House to start negotiations with the Taliban’s leadership.

First, after such a victory, Obama has gained a great deal of political capital—he is immune for the moment from Republican criticism and can more easily negotiate with the Taliban. Second, it will be easier for the Taliban to distance itself from al-Qaeda after bin Laden’s death. Finally, the Pakistani military are now under pressure to explain how the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks was able to stay so deep inside Pakistan near a military academy. Whatever the answer—incompetence or complicity—this gives the White House some leverage in pushing Pakistan to make positive steps.

Osama bin Laden’s death will certainly not put an end to jihadist groups, but it could help facilitate a political solution in Afghanistan. With conditions on the ground making it obvious that a military solution doesn’t make sense, this is a chance for Washington to change strategy and do the sensible thing in Afghanistan after almost ten years at war. The question becomes: will President Obama use his newly acquired political capital to make a major diplomatic opening?

About the Author

Gilles Dorronsoro

Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program

Dorronsoro’s research focuses on security and political development in Afghanistan. He was a professor of political science at the Sorbonne in Paris and the Institute of Political Studies of Rennes.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    Waiting for the Taliban in Afghanistan

      Gilles Dorronsoro

  • Paper
    Afghanistan: The Impossible Transition

      Gilles Dorronsoro

Gilles Dorronsoro
Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program
Gilles Dorronsoro
SecurityForeign PolicySouth AsiaAfghanistanPakistan

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026

    This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTA

    The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead

      Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki

  • Article
    India’s Oil Security Strategy: Structural Vulnerabilities and Strategic Choices

    This piece argues that the present Indian strategy, based on opportunistic diversification and utilization of limited strategic reserves, remains inadequate when confronting supply disruptions. It evaluates India’s options in the short, medium, and long terms.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era
    Research
    India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era

    Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.

      • Sameer Lalwani
      • +6

      Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.