 |
| Osama bin Laden was killed by a US force 10 years after the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Photo Credit: AP |
The death of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden was received positively here in the United States as many rejoiced with the breaking of the news. Reactions of those in other countries around the world, though, showed a mixture of celebration and a sense of carelessness and even criticism. Along with the mixed reactions, countries differed in the way that the event was covered. Several countries lacked their own coverage of bin Laden’s death while others had a loud, local opinion. The variation in the reactions and coverage of bin Laden’s death, it seems, most likely has to do with the type of standing relationship between the country and the terrorist group, al Qaeda.
The night turned into a celebration for Americans moments after President Obama announced the news. Crowds gathered outside of the White House as well as at Ground Zero to express their excitement. Baseball fans turned all attention away from the game and towards their Internet-connected phones all while chants of “USA, USA, USA” rung out. “The news touched off an extraordinary outpouring of emotion,” a New York Times article said. The overwhelming majority of American news channels streamed information on the subject for hours and continued to do so for days following the killing. Never-ending new details emerged about the helicopter used in the raid, the place where bin Laden was shot, and speculations became popular, flooding the airwaves. The American media certainly took pride in this event, covering its details down to the bone and portraying Americans’ nationalism in a majority of its stories. But amidst the excitement, U.S. officials recognized that the killing of bin Laden doesn’t mean the end of al Qaeda, or even terrorism, which took a shot at the glorification of the event. Needless to say, Americans consider this an important event in history.
 |
| Americans celebrated the news of bin Laden's death at ground zero with chants of "USA, USA." Patriotism was seen all over the country moments after President Obama made the announcement. Photo Credit: AP |
In contrast to the media frenzy that occurred in America, North Korea offered close to nothing on the subject. This most likely has something to do with the extreme direct state control and censorship over the media. This concept is foreign to a lot of people, especially Americans, and almost impossible to imagine how the killing of one of the world’s largest terrorists doesn’t even have a sliver of significance. One of the only articles even related to the killing was published in the online newspaper The Asia Times. “Americans hunt down a terrorist for a crime done as far back as 10 years ago...We should learn the American way of implementing justice,” the article mentions. It goes on to defend America in the killing of bin Laden and says the U.S has understandable reason for not doing the same to North Korea’s “headache,” leader, Kim Jong-il. It’s difficult, though, to gather the true feelings of North Korea on the subject from just one opinion piece.
In Jordan, there was cause for celebration upon hearing the news, yet nothing like the celebration in the United States. An article published in the Jordan Times called the death of bin Laden a “sigh of relief” for Jordanians. The article put into perspective the reasons for the Jordanian jubilation, reminding the public of the attacks that bin Laden had ordered against them in past years. It calls attention to the fact that the death should be considered doubled in significance in Jordan because the country was among the first to feel the effects of bin Laden’s extremism. Also recognized is the ideology that Muslims are more likely to be suspected as terrorists in European countries and America because of the legacy that bin Laden has left behind. Bin Laden was blamed for this in the article. Jordanian press concerning the topic seemed in favor of the actions taken by the United States, and even had the same outlook on what the future of terrorism would hold. At the same time, though, articles called into question the U.S ‘s perceived “hostility” towards Muslim rights and interests.
An opinion article from a Thai source, The Bangkok Post, showed strong support for the killing as well, calling bin Laden’s reign “a legacy of shame” as he “dragged down” the religion of Islam to a “huge and tragic casualty.” The article even referred to members of al Qaeda as bin Laden’s “evil associates.” A sense of praise for the American unit that killed bin Laden was exhibited from this article as it names the team as an “elite” force that succeeded in a “singular achievement in the long fight against terrorism.” Again, as recognized by many, this Thai source mentioned that this event does not lead to an end of terrorism, but it is a “major advance in bringing terrorists to heel, and then to book.”
The Tehran Times, a news source from Iran, published an article that had a somewhat hostile tone to it, which can even be seen in its title, “Bin Laden is dead, leave Afghanistan now.” The article first talked about the war on terrorism rather than the actual death of bin Laden. Reporting that there are “still many unanswered questions about the direction of the so-called war on terrorism,” it seems as though the author of this article has little support for Americans being on Afghanistan soil. Quotes from the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman were included in the article, which also displayed a sense of disapproval for the war. He was quoted as saying, “This event [the killing of bin Laden] clearly shows that there was no need to launch a massive military campaign to deal with a single person.” This article then continued on to give details about the announcement and confirmation of bin Laden’s death, but in no way, praised the United States on a job well done like many other sources did.
 |
| The death of Osama bin Laden leaves many questioning what that means for the war on terrorism. Is this the end? Photo Credit: Corporal Jamie Osborne |
In Afghanistan, an article posted in The Daily Outlook took an approach to the story that managed to cover sympathies for the situation. Quotes from the Taliban were included, saying “deep condolences” are sent out to the family of bin Laden on “this occasion of the great tragedy.” The main point of the article was to state that bin Laden was not running this terrorist organization alone and that “there are far more evil leaders for his succession.” The U.S was quoted as saying that the death is a “game-changer” in Afghanistan, but the author of this article begs to differ. The article ends by saying, “Osama's death is a blow to Al-Qaeda for organizational reasons, but it won't affect their operations, and [it’s] certainly not a game-changer in Afghanistan.”
The Independent Online, a news source from South Africa, also lacked a celebratory response to the death. Department of International Relations and Co-operation spokesman Clayson Monyela said, “Peace cannot be achieved though violence anywhere in the world. We find no joy in any death, even of people who call themselves terrorists.” The article continued on to harshly criticized the U.S., noting the “brutality” exerted through the war on terrorism. “Our view is that all these things seek to prove to the entire world the brutality of the US. They claim to be the champion of peace and democracy but they are nothing but invaders and their anti-terrorism campaign is the greatest cover-up of their own terrorism…”
Needless to say, the reaction in South Africa was anti-American.
Throughout worldwide news sources, there is a combination of both support as well as criticisms concerning the death of Osama bin Laden. Not all countries were as joyous as the United States, yet not all were silent about the situation. It seems that there is a common understanding in the death, though; the understanding that bin Laden’s death is not the end of terrorism.
