Debate continues over bin Laden's potential fate

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- As the search intensifies for Osama bin Laden, debate is building about what to do with the world's most wanted man if he is found: Taking him alive raises the risks of a trial, but his death could make him a martyr.

Since the March 1 arrest of key al-Qaida leader Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a manhunt has been under way in a remote 350-mile corridor near where the borders of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran meet, and officials believe they may be closer than ever to capturing bin Laden.

Sweeps are being made through the rugged tribal belt that separates Pakistan and Afghanistan and in the inhospitable peaks of Afghanistan searching for bin Laden and other terrorists who might attack in the event of war in Iraq.

The activity has resulted in reports of operations -- and even one report of bin Laden's capture.

Pakistani and U.S. officials denied Wednesday Iran Radio's report that bin Laden had been arrested in Pakistan but that his capture would not be announced until the outbreak of fighting in Iraq.

The Iranian state radio's external service quoted the deputy leader of the Islamic Awami Tahrik party in Pakistan, Murtaza Poya, who also made the same assertion to The Associated Press. Pakistani interior and information ministries denied bin Laden had been captured, as did the CIA and the U.S. military in Afghanistan.

Western intelligence sources said a raid last week in southwestern Afghanistan's Rabat region targeted one of bin Laden's eldest sons, Saad, a rising star in the al-Qaida network.

The home affairs minister in Pakistan's Baluchistan province, Sanaullah Zehri, announced that Saad bin Laden was wounded and captured at Rabat, but U.S. officials strongly disputed the report. Contacted two days later, Zehri stuck to his story, saying his information came from intelligence sources. However, he said he could not independently confirm it.

As anticipation builds over finding the al-Qaida leader himself, an awkward question is being raised: Would it be better to capture Osama bin Laden alive or ensure that he dies?

Both options pose serious problems for the Bush administration, especially as it tries to rally jittery Middle East allies for a war in Iraq.

'A tremendous debate'

"It's a tremendous debate. If you kill him you create a martyr, but if you capture him you have to go through a tribunal or a trial," said Michael Swetnam, a counterterrorism specialist at the Washington-based Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.

Many key Middle East allies, particularly bin Laden's native Saudi Arabia, fear bringing bin Laden to trial could prompt more violence from his followers.

The Saudis passed up a chance to put bin Laden on trial in 1996, when he was forced to leave Sudan. The African country was reportedly willing to accede to a U.S. request to turn bin Laden over to the Saudis, but the kingdom declined, afraid a trial would destabilize the country.

This time, many in Saudi Arabia feel the government would like a quick end to the story.

"It's a known fact that he is popular here, and capturing him and putting him on trial would create unwelcome attention and possibly anger that could spill into violence in the streets," said an editor at a leading Saudi newspaper who refused to allow his name of newspaper to be identified, citing the extreme sensitivity of the issue in his country.

In the Saudi government's eyes, "killing him would be better than capturing him, even if that means making him a martyr," he said.

But capturing bin Laden and convicting him of his crimes could send a powerful message, others say.

In recent days, U.S. intelligence and military personnel have poured into the remote tri-border region. Still, many doubt the United States will ever get a chance to choose bin Laden's fate.

"He is too proud a person to allow himself to be captured alive," said Hamid Gul, former chief of Pakistan's intelligence agency. He said bin Laden has likely ordered his bodyguards not to allow him to be captured.