Daniel Korski

The world’s most wanted terrorist, Osama Bin Laden, was shot Sunday morning in Pakistan by US special forces. But in reality he had died months ago. On the 25 of January 2011 to be exact. Or that is at least when Bin Laden’s power ended. For on that day millions of protesters — predominantly young Muslims — took to the streets of Cairo and demanded the overthrow of the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, and succeeded. With this act, they gave, for the first time since 9/1 and arguably for three decades, the Muslim world a more easily-understood and persuasive narrative than the one of anti-US resistance Al Qaeda had so successfully provided. After that, Bin Laden could carry out more attacks. He could kill more people.

With the newspapers still full of Royal Wedding pictures, I thought I’d draw CoffeeHousers' attention to something remarkable: a visit by Queen Margrethe II of Denmark (pictured, left, at Westminster Abbey last Friday) to Helmand Province. That’s right, the 71-year old Danish monarch visited the her country's troops in late March this year, accompanied by the defence minister. Crown Prince Fredrik persuaded her mother to visit the troops after his own previous trip to the region. In this YouTube clip recorded in Helmand, Queen Margrethe talks to the camera (sorry, it is in Danish) about her experiences in the war-torn province. She pays tribute to the two British soldiers who died while she was visiting, saying the loss is also her loss.

The situation in Syria seems to be on a knife's edge. Perhaps 80 protesters were killed by security forces during massive demonstrations yesterday. Checkpoints have gone up around all major cities, including Aleppo, Homs and Hama and of course Damascus. A friend who has been visiting the country this week says the situation is "pretty tense with police all around and no one, I mean almost no one on the streets. Taxis are not operating and there are no buses between cities." The road south from Damascus to Deraa is heavily guarded to prevent the protesters moving from one city to the next. The key problem for Bashri al-Assad's regime is that the protests have now spread to the middle classes and the government is constantly one step behind.

As the Libya crisis drags out, and Bashar al-Assad orders a crackdown in Syria, many have begun to doubt whether the changes seen in Tunisia and Egypt will actually spread to the rest of the Middle East. One former British ambassador recently suggested that perhaps the peoples of the Middle East preferred a mixture of authoritarianism and democracy — and that Britain should accept this; not impose its values and views.   But there is plenty of reason for optimism. The first is to look at the countries that have transformed themselves over the course of the last fifty years. Powerhouses like India and Brazil, but also smaller countries such as Vietnam, were mired in poverty, maladministration and the consequences of war.

I used to think that Syria was some way off a revolution. The protests were geographically limited; Bashar al-Assad was willing to use Libyan-style violence against them and the West seemed uncharacteristically mute. What's more, demands for the Syrian president to go were limited. And then there's the real fear that Syria, made up of so many different sectarian groups, would collapse into a vortex of internecine violence akin to the Lebanese civil war. But these arguments may be losing their weight. The current unrest is the most serious challenge facing Bashar al-Assad and his Alawite regime. And nothing the Syrian dictator has done so far has made a difference. Not lifting the emergency laws. Not shooting protesters.

Last week, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) found former Croatian General Ante Gotovina and a fellow officer, Mladen Markac, guilty of war crimes during the Yugoslav Wars. The news has been greeted with dismay in Croatia. Tens of thousands of war veterans and citizens rallied under the slogan "For the Country" in Zagreb's main square, Trg Bana Jelacica, over the weekend to express their outrage against the verdicts. The Croatian government has followed suit, calling the verdict "unacceptable" and vowing to "do everything in our power to change it." The verdicts are understandably difficult for some Croats to bear.

The conflict in the Ivory Coast looks as though it is now coming to and end. Former president Laurent Gbagbo was arrested yesterday by French officials supporting President Alassane Ouattara, after weeks of violent fighting. Gbagbo lost re-election last November to Ouattara but refused to give up power. Gbagbo, who was in office for more than a decade, will now be investigated for possible war crimes and crimes against humanity. This is a momentous event. The continent's post-independence "big men" had, over decades, become accustomed to permanent power. If they lost an election, they simply threatened (or encouraged) violence until a power-sharing deal was cobbled together which allowed them to stay in office. For examples see Kenya and Zimbabwe.

Just because Nicolas Sarkozy believes something does not make it untrue. The French president was adamant that Nato shouldn't take over the Libya campaign. He preferred to run an ad hoc coalition of the willing. Britain, however, was keen for the alliance to take control of a mission that seemed too loosely-organised. Once the United States decided to fade into the background of the military operation, the impetus for a switch to Nato grew. A few weeks into the transfer, people are beginning to wonder whether President Sarkozy was right in the first place. According to yesterday's Sunday Times, Nato is doing what it did in Bosnia: blocking the rebels from arming themselves.

Sometimes, just when you think that the craziest left-wing ideologues have gone off to tend to their gardens, up one pops. Meet Len McCluskey, the head of Unite, who tells The Times's Rachel Sylvester (£) that Fidel Castro has been a "heroic" leader of his people. That would be the same Cuban dictator who jails journalists and trade unionists. Odd choice of hero. But it gets better. McCluskey seems to think that MI5 encouraged violence at the last anti-cuts protest. I kid you not: "Mr McCluskey believes that the secret services, in particular MI5, may have been working under cover to encourage the violence as part of a conspiracy to undermine the peaceful message of the march.

Author Alison Pargeter picks up the debate about Libya and al Qaeda in this morning's Times (£), dismissing the idea that a new "jihadist hotspot" is being created. As I wrote some time ago, it is difficult even for people who have travelled in eastern Libya to know anything for sure. I hear from sources in Benghazi that the Islamists number among some of the better troops - having had training and experience in fighting. They offer what one person called "small unit cohesion", in contrast to poorly-organised rebel force. But they do not seem to run or even hold sway over the movement. The bigger question in Libya right now, however, seems to be this: who can survive a stalemate - Colonel Ghaddafi or the rebels? Both face serious problems.