CNN: “Yemeni al Quaeda angles for power after bin Laden’s death, source says”
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/05/18/yemen.al.qaeda/index.html?iref=allsearch
This story mainly focuses on the aftermath of the US’s relations with the Middle East post-Osama death. In a typical American-press fashion, it answers the question: “So what are the risks to us now?” A relatively short piece with very sparse sources, the article states simply that there are disputes between different factions of al Quaeda as to whether bin Laden’s successor is legitimate. It ends by essentially saying that Yemeni al Quaeda is a growing threat, and one more reason American’s should be afraid of terrorism and the Middle East.
FoxNews: “Should US Pressure Pakistan?”
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4691370/
I couldn’t really write about bin Laden’s death without something from Fox, because I grew up watching Fox talk about Osama bin Laden as Enemy #1. This video talks about how the US should relate to Pakistan. KT Mcfarland says that we are in a good position to use Osama’s death in Pakistan to force Pakistan to cooperate more. The entire video lays out how bin Laden’s death is beneficial for the US in the Middle East.
KT McFarland believes the US can use finding Osama in Pakistan as leverage against the country.
Non-Western
The Political Focus
Al-Jazeera: “The mythos of Obama and Osama.”
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/201152121358887979.html
In coverage of Osama’s death, Al-Jazeera ran an intriguing article comparing Osama (the villain in Western media) and Obama (the hero to the United States). Both are men ideals, says the article, though diametrically opposite in the end. Both men understood that they must wield power to establish their idea of an ideal society, and that power manifested itself violently for both men. Though Al-Jazeera condemns Osama bin Laden’s ideology and actions, saying, “Many Muslims did celebrate when Osama inflicted pain on the US. That was wrong,” the article is also very critical of Obama’s presidency, and his supporters, pointing out the similarity in today’s celebrations in the US. Unlike most of Western media, this article does not laud Osama’s death as a huge military victory, but nor does it say that retaliation is highly likely, saying instead that Osama’s Islam was not in alignment with much of the Middle East. Instead, the Muslim world is moving toward a new, freer Middle East, with the revolutions that have already been in progress before the death of Osama bin Laden, a fact that was not connected in Western media. As a news outlet based out of the Middle East, it makes sense that the article would carry such a Middle East-focused article.
More than any other source, Al-Jazeera made strong comparisons between Obama and Osama and their combative ideologies.
The Jakarta Post: “Bin Laden’s ghost to haunt world”
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/05/14/bin-laden%E2%80%99s-ghost-haunt-world.html
This Jakarta Post article picks up where Al-Jazeera’s left off. It mentions right from the outset that retaliation is a possibility, but not the important part of the story when discussing bin Laden’s death. Instead, it is important to consider the revolutions taking place Egypt and Tunisia. These revolutions, it says, “before the US operation to kill Bin Laden…the emerging democratic Arab revolutions had already, in just a few short months, done as much to marginalize and weaken his terrorist movement in the Islamic world as the war on terror had achieved in a decade.” Now, instead, the article states, the US needs to stop fighting in the Middle East, as well as stop funding religious extremists like the Wahhabi in Saudi Arabia. Instead, the US should let the revolutions run the natural course and bring democracy to the area. Seeing as Jakarta is based in Indonesia, the in-depth understanding of the political systems in the Middle East surprised me. The article was subtly biased against the US, but well-supported.
All Africa: “What’s next for al-Quaida in the Horn of Africa?”
http://allafrica.com/stories/201105200245.html
Like Western media coverage, this article spins Osama’s death as a good thing, “a relief” to most of the Horn of Africa, which was deeply affected by bin Laden’s actions in the 1990s, the author says. Al-Quaida-inspired extremism among Somalis has been common in the area, with numerous terrorist attacks. The article concludes by saying that, though it is uncertain, bin Laden’s death could mean a more peaceful world. It’s obvious from the historical timeline given in the article that the author has a location-related bias. Their life has been affected by the two decades of violence under al-Quaida, and they are hopeful for relief. Just reading the history made this inevitably clear.
The Emotional
Japan Today: “Bin Laden’s death makes it harder to find truth: mother of 9/11 victim”
This article was very intriguing to me because of its deeply personal aspect, in comparison to the many other Western and non-Western articles, which centered on the political impact. In this article, the mother of a man killed in the 9/11 attacks says she first supported US involvement in Afghanistan, but “later changed her mind and came to think that violence only encourages retaliatory terrorism.” Now, the article says, she worries about bin Laden’s successor, and will never hear bin Laden testify as to why he encouraged the acts he did. The woman’s account clearly condemns the US for its actions, which is surprising considering that Japan is frequently in support of the US.
The "Who Really Cares?"
Georgian Daily: “South Caucasus Reactions—or the Lack of Them—to Bin Laden’s Death”
http://georgiandaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21424&Itemid=132
The article is a very short recap of the reactions to bin Laden’s death in Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia, but speaks volumes about the countries’ political situations. Georgia essentially said, “Go America!” while both Azerbaijan and Armenia, tensely trying to remain on good footing with the Middle East nearby and the United States, remained silent on the issue. The article succinctly explains that because of political tensions in the area, all three governments are more than busy keeping everything calm and have no time for the death of some distant terrorist figurehead.
Guadalajara Reporter: "Bin who? ‘El Chapo’ takes mantel of ‘world’s most wanted’"
This is an intensely Mexico-focused article, talking about how, with bin Laden gone, Joaquin “Chapo” Guzman is now Interpol and the FBI’s most wanted person, a drug runner with the cartels. Though it’s hugely different from the other articles, I loved it for its Mexico focus. It doesn’t talk about political impact of bin Laden’s death, or the nation’s reaction, or revolutions.
Mexican press focused on more important enemies to the country: drug cartels.
