|Office of Research||Issue Focus||Foreign Media Reaction|
EUROPE: Sentiment remained strong in major NATO media outlets, particularly Rome but also London, Paris and Berlin, that Europe must show solidarity with Washington and answer its call to coalesce against terrorism. Noting yesterday's invocation of NATO's Article 5, London's conservative Times warned: "There must be no melting into the shadows when Washington makes political demands or takes military action." That said, many argued that Europe should counsel the U.S. against "a counterproductive thirst for revenge." Some saw irony in the fact that "Bush's America," which has "withdrawn from almost all international accords," is now "forced to return to the international arena and to ask long-time Allies to be by its side." Russian commentators were fairly uniform in asserting that the "fiends" must "be hunted down and punished." Official Rossiyskaya Gazeta added that the attack was perhaps "revenge for America's sins."
ISRAEL: Conservative, centrist and Russian-language papers advocated a measured, comprehensive anti-terrorism strategy. The independent Jerusalem Post judged, "A war against terrorism that avoids the issue of regime change in countries such as Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan cannot be won."
ARABS: Israel's Arabic press and dailies in the West Bank, Saudi Arabia and Egypt issued strong denunciations of terrorism and empathized with America's "grief." Some, however, also carried the subtext that the Bush administration--particularly its perceived endorsement of Sharon's policies--had "raised unprecedented anger." Israel's Arabic-language paper and Egyptian dailies--both pro-government and opposition--were most critical of the U.S. A Cairo paper suggested that the U.S. not rush to the conclusion that the perpetrators were Arab, arguing that the operation was beyond Arabs' capabilities.
NON-ARAB MUSLIM PRESS: In Malaysia, Bangladesh and Ibadan, Nigeria, writers voiced great sympathy for the victims and asserted that the U.S. had a right to seek out and punish the perpetrators. In Indonesia, support was present for punishing those responsible, but Muslim papers and a few independents saw the U.S.' "double standard" Mideast policy as having provoked the attacks. Most feared that the wounded superpower would overreact and, in anger, victimize innocent people. The majority of Pakistani editorials contended that the U.S. was too quick to finger Osama bin Laden as the architect, and held that Jewish Zionists--and even Hindus--were manipulating the news media. As did counterparts in Egypt, Pakistani dailies held that no Arab, including Osama bin Laden, was capable of masterminding such attacks.
EAST ASIA: Editorials from Japan, Australia, Singapore, South Korea and Thailand strongly supported America's right to punish those behind the hijackings and carnage, provided the U.S. pursues "justice, not vengeance." Concluding that the attacks "were aimed...at the entire world," most called for a concerted global effort against the scourge of terrorism. South Korean papers were prominent among regional voices urging the "U.S. to refrain from massive retaliatory attacks...because such acts could trigger a vicious cycle of bloodshed." Seoul also represented those advising Americans "to reflect on whether they have encouraged this desperate and hostile terrorism." An official Chinese commentary perfunctorily supported the terrorism fight, but still took an oblique swipe at "hegemony," a code word for U.S. foreign policy.
WEST. HEM.: Seeing no possible justification for the "satanic action," observers in Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and other Latam outlets reiterated their solidarity with the U.S., but differed over the degree and nature of support their own governments should provide. Some agreed with a conservative Brazilian daily that the attacks warranted a "prompt, efficient and energetic answer from the world." Others echoed an Argentine writer's warning that Mr. Bush's "cautiousness" might be interpreted as "weakness" by the enemy. A common concern was that "Black September" had "inaugurated a new world" unprepared to deal with an "invisible" enemy. And while most paid homage to the U.S.' "contribution to mankind," a cluster of liberal, left-leaning and nationalist papers in Ottawa, Sao Paulo and Mexico City--more concerned with the consequences a U.S. retaliation would have on their own national interests--warned against getting involved in a problem U.S. policies had "created," some predicting a U.S. "witch hunt" and a new "xenophobia."
EDITORS: Katherine Starr, Gail Burke, Stephen Thibeault, Kathleen J. Brahney, Irene Marr
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on143 editorials from 32 countries, September 12-13.
Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent date.
BRITAIN: "Still The Enemy"
From an editorial in the conservative Times (9/13): "Across the globe old rivalries have been buried, resentments of the sole superpower set aside and snide commentary abandoned.... Every Western leader has pronounced the appalling assaults on Washington and new York to be an attack upon all. This is not mere rhetoric. Under Nato's Article 5, invoked yesterday, America's European Allies have an obligation, not merely a moral duty, to stand with it.... There must be no melting into the shadows when Washington makes political demands or takes military action--and it now must do both--that will make Europeans unpopular with foul regimes.... To make a fine show of European support now for tough American action is easy; but that support must be sustained in a campaign ahead that will be long, costly and rough."
"Beating The Terrorists"
The liberal Guardian opined (9/13): "Pounding Afghanistan into dust with cruise missiles and long-range bombers might make Americans feel better about the Manhattan horror. But such cathartic vengeance would do nothing to curb the menace of transnational terrorism.... The plan under discussion last night by NATO ambassadors meeting in Brussels is more ambitious by far.... There is fierce pressure within the United States for quick air strikes on a massive scale.... Truly, there are no limits, if the United States were to take this path, turning from world cop to global hitman. But nor is there much rationality in such an approach.... No, these are the dangerous counsels of anger and thwarted power, urging Mr. Bush to lash out wildly. They should be ignored. The war on terrorism will not be won that way. Military action, especially a NATO assault, must be the option of the last resort.... Mr. Bush's apparent caution, coupled with his appeal for congressional funding and international support for a worldwide anti-terrorism drive, is impressive given the fearsome pressures upon him to hit back. But he is right to move carefully."
"Hold Fire Until We Have Seen Mr. Bush's Response"
The centrist Independent argued (9/13): "While we in Britain clearly 'stand shoulder to shoulder with our American friends' in their shock and their dread and in their determination to do what they can to avert further atrocities, we should see the nature of President Bush's response before identifying ourselves too closely with what might all too easily become a counterproductive thirst for revenge.... No one doubts the need for tighter security or for military action against identifiable threats, but Tuesday's barbarities exposed the extent to which U.S. policy towards the threat from 'rogue states' was misdirected. The obsession with a technological fix, the 'son of Star Wars' missile shield, has distracted attention from dealing with the religious and ideological basis of low-tech terrorism. As candid and loyal friends of the American people...Mr. Blair must speak for the British in counselling restraint and understanding rather than revenge."
An editorial in the independent Financial Times read (9/13): "The terrorist attack on Tuesday was an assault on the Western world of life, designed to shake the confidence of the American people and so of the Western world.... The world's monetary authorities, above all the Federal Reserve, need to act promptly in response.... Tuesday's outrage, however costly in terms of human life, is economically trivial. But such a delicate juncture, confidence may be damaged disproportionately. What was a good case before the attack has become an overwhelming one since. Central banks have been putting substantial quantities of liquidity into the market. They should go further. A concerted cut in interest rates, maybe only temporary, would show that they have recognized the fragility of the world economy and are prepared to do something about it. If concerted action cannot be agreed, the Federal Reserve should act on its own."
FRANCE: “We Are All Americans”
Jean-Marie Colombani commented in a front-page editorial in left-of-center Le Monde (9/13): “In this tragic moment, we are all Americans, we are all New Yorkers.... September 11, 2001 is the beginning of a new era… Those who lent a hand to this operation...want to destroy the world we know.... The reality is that we have a world without counterweight, physically unbalanced and therefore dangerous, because it lacks the balance of multipolarity.... America will be changing profoundly.… The future, which is etched in blood, already points to two clear consequences that have to do with alliances: it is the end of a strategy based solely against Russia. Russia will become Washington’s main ally. It may also be the end of an alliance which the United States established with the Islamic Sunni regimes, such as those of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan."
“A New World Disorder”
Serge July held in left-of-center Liberation (9/13): “All the failsafe systems failed: from the FBI’s impotence to the absence of reaction from the U.S. Air Force.... The terrorist offensive will also require a fundamental strategic change to deal with this new world dominated by disorder.... The United States is dying to counterattack. But here again it will be limited by the dangerous liaisons it has woven with Islamic movements since the war in Afghanistan.… The logical answer to war is war.... The situation is all the more complicated because Bush has been tempted by isolationism: America was hoping it could escape from world disorder, But isolationism is the first political victim of the terrorist attack.”
Michel Schifres opined in right-of-center Le Figaro (9/13): “Terrorism has become the number one threat to democracies.… Hence when President Bush speaks of ‘acts of war,’ he is not speaking rhetorically.… Changes will result from this attack: first, the United States will need to reorient its secret service surveillance to political issues as opposed to economic issues. And it will have to stop ‘playing’ with Islamic extremists and stop closing its eyes to the regimes that harbor terrorists.… It will also need to be truly present in the Middle East.… President Bush can no longer aspire to stay away from world conflicts. Even at the risk of being caught in the eternal situation of being accused of intervening too much or too little.”
Claude Imbert argued in right-of-center weekly Le Point (9/13): “All the nations of Europe have the obligation to put themselves alongside America.... As we contemplate the desolation of lower Manhattan, our Statue of Liberty remains imperturbable. Our place is by its side.”
GERMANY: "Doesn't Bode Well"
Werner Burchardt commented on national radio station Deutschlandfunk of Cologne (9/12): "It is all the more important...that...the community of nations that share the same values of freedom and justice, will now turn into a community that shows solidarity with each other. But this can function only if the U.S. leading power...sticks to these values. The 'massive retaliatory strike' which Washington announced does not bode well. We Germans who owe so much to the Americans after the end of WW II, should keep a critical distance to the United States and prevent it from making mistakes."
"Bush's Announcement To Fight"
Washington correspondent Leo Wieland noted on the front -page of center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine (9/13): "The core of Bush's address was a declaration of war.... Osama bin Laden will be difficult to fight against with cruise missiles and air strikes. That is why the political debate that has now begun in Washington should not result in fruitless talks about the pros and cons of a missile shield but on the notorious deficiencies with respect to investigations and the ways and means how terrorist gangs can be infiltrated. President Bush is now expected to act with circumspection when he retaliates."
"Target: Our Civilization"
Josef Joffe noted in a front-page editorial in center-left weekly Die Zeit of Hamburg (9/13): "If Osama Bin Laden is the source, as Washington believes, he would not have been able to carry out this sophisticated strategic operation without help of one or more countries. The leadership of those countries can no longer sleep at night, and that is the way it should be. After all, this is not an act of terror but of war.... This attack on civilization will not remain unpunished. George Bush has shown a high degree of restraint in his public remarks, giving rise to the hope that the U.S.' holy wrath will not turn to undirected fury. And the Allies have to help in this context, especially those countries who have downplayed the issue of terrorism in the past.... The more outside support there is for the United States, the more the political thinking inside the country will stay cool. But the issue is not only solidarity within the Alliance, but also the fight against attacks on civilization."
Stefan Kornelius asserted in center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (9/13): "Even a rational mind calls for retaliation in view of this tragedy. And there is also a broad agreement that a terrorist war of this dimension cannot be fought with the means of police but requires the combined power of the military and politics.... This requires the willingness for a military confrontation.... That is why the United States, not only for reasons of self-respect but also as a precautionary measure, must set in motion its forces.... Terrorists and fellow travelers can be driven apart only with military means. The second front in the fight against terror is of a political nature. The solidarity of nations must lead to a political isolation of the global terror environment. Trade, assets, communication, mobility--countries associated with terrorism should experience the full power of international ostracism."
ITALY: "The Eternal Spirit Of The Day After"
Washington correspondent Ennio Caretto observed in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (9/13): "America, struck by the bloodiest tragedy in its history, is giving a lesson of great dignity to the world.... The legendary American spirit was immediately reborn."
A front-page article by New York correspondent Anna Guaita in Rome's centrist Il Messaggero noted (9/13): "President Bush made very clear yesterday that America does not consider last Tuesday's attacks as a simple act of terrorism, but a real war. A clarification that indicates how much Washington expects support from its European Allies: if this is a war, it cannot be fought by America alone.... Thus Bush's America, which in just eight months of presidency has withdrawn from almost all international accords, refused to sign agreements on the environment, limitations on chemical weapons and mines and, more recently, walked out of the conference on racism--this America is now forced by the blood of its citizens to return to the international arena and to ask its long-time allies to be on its side."
"Terrorism Is The Common Enemy Now"
An analysis by Ugo Tramballi in leading business Il Sole-24 Ore argued (9/13): "Europe and America are rediscovering their long-time alliance in the wake of the tragedy in Manhattan....
But we would not be serving our cause properly if we concluded that the differences that characterized trans-Atlantic relations until the day before yesterday no longer exist as a result of those tremendous explosions in Washington and New York. The gap remains, notwithstanding the tragedy and the pledge to participate in the war that America will wage as soon as it has identified those responsible for the attacks. Yet this tragedy, and the instinctive solidarity that it creates, the feeling of being all Americans...represents a big historic occasion. Not only because a common enemy has now emerged--terrorism. We also have common values that should again be filled with political and economic content."
"The West And Its Re-Found Identity"
Lucio Caracciolo commented on the front-page of left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (9/13): "The West. It is only one family. Our Alliance's decision to consider the attack against America as an attack against all of us is a signal that is both solemn and overwhelming.... Today Europe is called upon to rediscover the depths of our transatlantic bond, its historic dimensions and its identity.... Today, America and Europe must be able to convince the world that the battle against terrorism is not theirs only, but a struggle that in the end will determine the freedom and prosperity of everyone."
RUSSIA: “An Almost Nuclear Strike”
Vladimir Kucherenko said on page one of official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta (9/13): “Those who planned it are fiends, of course.... With the perpetrator unknown, the United States, were it to strike back at random, would risk embittering the Muslims, embroiling itself in a protracted war. The attack might have been in revenge of America’s sins: the atomic bombings of Japan, raids on Libya in 1986, strikes against Iraqi cities in 1990s, the beating of Yugoslavia in 1999, support for Albanian separatists in Macedonia, the pounding of Sudan and Afghanistan, and a ‘misguided’ attack on the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade.”
“With Whom Russians’ Sympathies Are”
Maksim Yusin remarked in reformist Izvestiya (9/13): “Differences among civilizations are not in what politicians say. They are in how ordinary people act in a crisis. The moment of truth has put everything in its place. No matter how much some of our politicians speak of a ‘strategic partnership’ and near-friendship with Saddam, Qaddafi and Iran’s ayatollahs, the world knows now with whom we really are--as people bring flowers to U.S. diplomatic missions in Moscow and other Russian cities.”
Under this headline, reformist Vremya MN carried a page-one commentary by Gennadiy Gerasimov: “The idea was to humiliate the nation.... The first conclusion to be made is that there is a need for all countries to work together to promote nuclear and rocket nonproliferation. Second, the Americans should review their military doctrine. Now is the time for them to think about what makes anti-American sentiment so strong in the world, why the Great Satan is hated so much, and if the late Senator William Fulbright was right about the ‘arrogance of power.’”
Aleksandr Frolov stated in nationalist opposition Sovetskaya Rossiya (9/13): “Early commentaries clearly overdid it, speaking about an ‘unprecedented’ event. All commentators suddenly ‘forgot’ about precedents such as Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, and Yugoslavia, all set by America. People remember that. Even so, if the attack is retribution, it is unjust. It has missed those who are really responsible for the war that has been going on in the world for the past 50 years. Therefore, those who stand behind this terrible crime deserve no mercy. They need to be hunted down and severely punished.”
ISRAEL: "Defining The Enemy"
Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (9/13): "As Americans try to recover from and comprehend the most devastating terrorist attack ever, it is not surprising that U.S. leaders are groping for a new language and way of thinking to confront the new reality. There is general agreement that America is and must be 'at war.' The distinction between fighting a war and bringing criminals to justice is not a merely semantic one. It is a distinction over the nature of the enemy.... The enemy is not merely Osama bin Laden or whatever terrorist organization carried out the monstrous attack. The enemy is the states that sponsor terrorists and the ideology that animates them.... The free world must recognize that is in a war of self-defense whose goal is victory. The concept of a war against terrorism is meaningless without the goal of removing terrorist regimes.... A war against terrorism that avoids the issue of regime change in countries such as Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan cannot be won, because it has not even really been joined."
"The Toughest Test Since Vietnam"
U.S. politics expert, Bar-Ilan University Professor Eytan Gilboa wrote in independent, pluralist Maariv (9/13): "The United States found it difficult to overcome the trauma of Vietnam, and there is a danger that it will also find it hard to liberate itself from this terrorist attack. There is no doubt that the U.S. will define the war against international terrorism as the primary objective of its internal and foreign policy, but this obligatory step has no guarantee of success. This will not be the first time that the U.S. behaves in this manner, and its previous attempt [U.S. involvement in Lebanon in the '80s] is not encouraging.... The time has never been riper to wipe out terrorism entirely. The question is whether the present U.S. leadership will prefer a tougher strategy, which might only bring results in the long term, or will it be tempted to mete out a punishment that is easier to achieve, but is not effective, like a military strike on several terrorist camps in Afghanistan. This is the hardest test of the president and of the entire American society since Vietnam."
"The World Will Open Its Eyes"
Diplomatic correspondent Efraim Ganor wrote in popular, pluralist Russian-language Novosty Nedely (9/13): "Israelis hope that the Western world will start an uncompromising war against Islamic terrorism, because if this doesn't happen now, it will be too late afterwards. What happened in the United States will appear infinitesimal, should these barbarians acquire nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.... It's difficult to say whether and to which extent the Palestinians, and [P.A. Chairman] Yasser Arafat personally, are involved in [the terrorist assault on the U.S.], but, hopefully, under the effect of this terrifying tragedy, the world will review its position toward Arafat's hypocritical behavior."
"America Is Bleeding And Terrified"
Far-left, Arabic language Al-Ittihad held (9/12): "Despite the fact that this newspaper strongly denounces the imperial, aggressive American policy of power, it condemns the criminal attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.... In order to fight terrorism, one needs to look for its background ... and its causes. The U.S. administration should stand in front of the mirror and ask itself questions about organized state terrorism it has carried out against Cuba, Libya, the Iraqi people and many others. [It should consider] its crimes in support of Israeli terrorism against Palestinians. It should ask itself about its armed support and arms trade to exploitative forces and its encouragement of ethnic wars.... It needs to question its own role in exploiting nations' resources and increased poverty under the shadow of globalization, which forms the social and economic background of terrorism.... The establishment of bases for international security and stability requires a new world order, free of exploitation of numerous nations by imperial forces."
WEST BANK: “Palestinians And Americans Share The Same Grief”
Chief editor Hafiz Barghouti of semi-official Al-Hayat Al-Jadida opined (9/13): “It is absolutely not in the Palestinian interest to express any complacency [regarding the attacks on America]. Those ignorant few, who did that, do not represent our public opinion. In fact such an ignorant behavior might have happened in other parts of the world, but, unfortunately, the cameras did not reach them and the media did not really care about those.... I call upon our people, the oppressed and the educated, to stand by the American people in these hard times that they are going through, despite the [Israeli] occupation. Let’s deny that occupation from taking advantage of those few dozens amongst us for its media propaganda. We are victims of terrorism, and victims should stick together. We and the Americans share the same grief and ‘evacuation.’”
"In The Same Boat"
Abdullah Awwad of independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam opined (9/13): “The Palestinians and the Americans find themselves in the same boat. The American officials in the White House have been showing understanding to the attacks perpetrated by the Jewish State… It is not clear that, having the Americans suffer from what the Palestinians have been through for the last year, such an understanding can continue."
"Israel Is No America"
Independent, moderate Al-Quds editorialized (9/13): “The tragic events that shook the United States, destroying several of its economic and military landmarks, have caused anguish all over the world. The scenes of destruction reminded the Palestinian people of their own scenes of destruction and death following each shelling, assassination or invasion of Palestinian towns and cities. The irony of the situation is that Israel is exploiting what is going on in the United States to claim that it stands behind America in its fight against terrorism. This is a twisted logic, considering that Israel is an occupying country that is oppressing the Palestinian people. It is important that the United States realize the big difference between the American case and the Israeli case. The Palestinian people only expect Washington to understand their situation and defend the principles of justice and freedom. Israel, on the other hand, is demanded to withdraw its military and settlement installations from the occupied territories. It’s at that time when all sensitivities and grudges must disappear and peace prevail in the region and in the world.”
EGYPT: "The Perpetrator Is American"
Columnist Anis Mansour wrote in leading pro-government Al Ahram (9/13): "I say the perpetrators are Americans, not Arabs or Palestinians for these reasons: 1. Not a single alert from airports where the planes were hijacked indicated the presence of an Arab passenger. 2. An American journalist called her husband from the hijacked plane to Pentagon, and, if she suspected an Arab, she would surely have mentioned it. 3. In the communications s between the hijacked plane and the tower, there wasn't a change in the voice tone of the pilots, which demonstrates that the perpetrators are not strangers and maybe the pilots themselves. 4. About Palestinians, they are capable only of limited sabotage operations? 5. Planning these attacks required months and months and hi-tech methods which exceed the capabilities of any Palestinian or Arab inside the U.S. In addition, they are all under surveillance in the U.S.
6. The pilots knew exactly their way and targets and have been spotting them for a long time, they flew the planes through high buildings which none but an American could do. 8. These acts happened Sept 11; and on June 11 McVeigh was executed. This is very close to the thinking behind the Oklahoma bombing."
Mahmoud Abdel Moneim Mourad, senior columnist for aggressive pro-government Al Akhbar held (9/13), "Undoubtedly, what happened in America is the most horrible kind of terrorism in history? However, writers should not rush to false analysis. The incident is vague and complicated?. Truly, the U.S., in Bush?s era, raised unprecedented anger among humans? He revealed his foolish, failure policy, which shows the arrogance of military, economic and human power?. However, this great America, with the strongest intelligence organization in the world, is the one that suffered such act?. The gravest mistake is that he U.S. and other countries direct accusations without proof. Arabs, who are mostly accused, cannot do it.?
"Fear Of The Reaction"
Abbas Al-Tarabily, editor-in-chief of moderate opposition Al-Wafd said (9/13): "The United States has become a victim, paralyzed with horror. Is there a party that is instigating American thinking to rush after a certain reaction? In 1954, only coincidence revealed an Israeli plot to strike at American interests in Egypt to harm American-Egyptian relations. The operation is beyond the capability of any Palestinian, Japanese or Afghani organization, or even Bin Laden. The entire fear is that the Middle East becomes a victim because unfortunately, the United States sees that violence is imbedded in this region. Israel will certainly propagate serious ideas that may push the United Staes to the reaction Israel wants. Our hearts goes with all the civilians in America. We reject violence. There is great hope that the United States will act as befitting its status, power, and wisdom."
SAUDI ARABIA: "The Ugly Face Of Terrorism"
Makkah-based, conservative Al-Nadwa opined (9/13): "The attacks on the United States were certainly another hideous face of terrorism. Terrorism knows no values, no ethics and no religion. No doubt, to target civilians is an act of brutal aggression, which all nations decided to fight. Terrorist actions have always proved that they know no home, no morality and no conscience.... Although this catastrophe is very dangerous, it does spur all nations to greater and wider coordination in developing a global strategy to combat terrorism."
"Eliminate All Forms Of Terrorism"
Jeddah-based, moderate Okaz maintained (9/13): "The international community must work today, more than at any time, collectively and seriously to eliminate all forms of terrorism. However, this must take place within the framework of international agreements as embodied in the UN Charter, which call for respect of nations' sovereignty and national character, without intervening in the domestic affairs of sovereign nations."
"Israel Missed No Opportunity To Take Advantage Of World's Shock"
Jeddah-based, moderate Al-Bilad remarked (9/13): "Until now, the key beneficiary of yesterday's horrible catastrophe against the American people is Israel. The leadership of Israel missed no opportunity to take advantage of the world's shock, and the intensive media attention on the catastrophe, to sneak into the Palestinian city of Jenin and overwhelm it with destruction, killing ten Palestinians at least.... The Arab media must now, after smoke and ash began to fade away from the United States' sky, monitor more closely what is going on in the Palestinian occupied territories. The Arab media must pay more attention to incidents of killing, demolishing of houses, homelessness and torture which the Palestinians suffer under the oppression of occupation."
"U.S. Zionist Lobby Will Mobilize To Support Sharon's Policy Objectives"
London-based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat editorial (9/13): "Disagreements over politics are one thing, but terrorism is something else. Our worry is that the Zionist lobby will mobilize all of its resources, confusing the issues of terrorism and politics to the detriment of the Arabs, especially inside the United States itself, and will accomplish Sharon's policy objectives which have already greatly harmed U.S. policy and the peace negotiations without achieving any long-term benefit to Israel."
JORDAN: “Condolences To The America people”
Daily columnist Mohammad Subeihi stated in independent, mass-appeal Al-Arab Al-Yawm (9/12): “Whatever injustice was suffered by people at the hands of the U.S. foreign policy and whoever was responsible for the attacks against the American institutions, no one can accept that innocent American civilians be the victims of vengeance. As we, Arabs and Muslims, had raised our voices against Israeli terrorism directed at the Palestinian people, we also denounce the fact that the American people be the victims of terrorism. We also realize that the American people, now fallen to grief, will find the chance to review its administrations’ policy that has made the United States a target for terrorist organizations that are increasingly growing inside and outside America.”
“The Malicious Instigation Against Arabs And Muslims”
Center-left, influential Al-Dustour editorialized (9/12): “We are shocked at the horrific events witnessed in a number of American states. However, we realize that some parties are already pointing the finger at Arabs and Muslims, with no evidence whatsoever, holding them responsible for the attacks for which no one declared responsibility yet. The ugliest form of manipulation of these attacks that horrified the Americans and all the human race came at the hands of Sharon as he maliciously said that America and Israel are facing the same terror, in a clear attempt at describing the liberation efforts of the Palestinian people as terrorism. We strongly denounce the attacks against civilians and innocent people. We offer our condolences to the families of the victims. We also warn against any attempt to take advantage of this tragic situation to put the blame on the Arabs and the Muslims.”
“A Human Tragedy And Condemnable Actions”
Semi-official, influential Al-Ra’i declared (9/12): “No one can but condemn and denounce the terrorist attacks… Whoever is responsible for these condemnable actions, it would be wise to take a step back before launching judgment and blame or even gloat. We should not succumb to Israel's publicity that tries to take advantage of this disaster to blame Islam for this terrorism. We should also differentiate between the U.S. administration’s policies that are generally biased in favor of Israel and the American people who seek world peace on the basis of justice and progress.”
INDONESIA: "Black September In U.S."
The leading, independent, English-language Jakarta Post (9/13) commented: "It is not too difficult to surmise that the masterminds of the terrorism had at least two goals: to humiliate the United States before the world and to psychologically cripple the American people and government. We believe the terrorist group behind Tuesday's attacks miscalculated the psyche of American culture and the dynamism of the U.S. political system. This terrorist group is not the first to make such a grave miscalculation.... Pearl Harbor, [for example,] became a battle cry, and the U.S. war machine was put in high gear.... It is a matter of principle that we should condemn any form of terrorism, especially when it reaches a level of cold-blooded mass killing such as in Tuesday's attacks in New York and Washington.... [Statements by Indonesian officials] emphasize Indonesia's longtime stance against terrorism. We join the world community in conveying our deep condolences to the relatives of the victims of the Black September attack in the United States."
"Amid Mourning, U.S. Should Also Question Itself"
Leading, independent, Indonesian-language Kompas opined (9/13): "At this difficult moment, the American people--particularly the U.S. government--should ponder on the course of its life and on its identity. If the U.S. likes to associate acts of violence with fanatics and fundamentalists in the Middle East, is it not a good idea to think why there are parties who detest the United States? We know that the U.S. stance toward the Middle East cannot be called 'credible.' For as long as the United States can still take advantage of vast resources and great influence to change the course of history, the United States appears to choose to continue defending Israel without reservation until there is more Palestinian bloodshed. The United States needs to realize that it has been unfair in the Middle East, at least by allowing Israel to continue its persecution.... [It also] needs to reflect on the idea of building a national anti-missile defense system to make itself more powerful. Aggrandizement creates not only arrogance, but it will eventually trigger opposition from other nations, of which the United States is suspicious."
Independent Koran Tempo clallenged (9/12): "What is all this destruction and killing for? [Why should] the workers in the two tallest buildings in New York...and the airliners' passengers...be sacrificed for a terrorist shock with no clear purpose? Let us say that the acts were made in retaliation to American government policies felt unfair thus far. Still such senseless actions could not be justified. Whoever was behind these acts will only reap the world's condemnation...[while] the United States will reap sympathy from all over the world and the mistakes it has made thus far will be less visible. Indeed, [although] anger should be directed to the real perpetrators, we should be careful not to blame without evidence. The United States must also be reminded that American public officials once readily blamed Arab terrorists for the Oklahoma bombing some years back. However, it was found that local terrorists committed this senseless act that took hundreds of children's lives. We convey our deepest sympathy...but at the same time, we call on the U.S. government not to hastily retaliate, let alone be trapped in terrorist-like acts of destruction. Terrorism can only be annihilated by building a civilized society, which will not allow its government to commit uncivilized acts, no matter the reason."
According to Islamic-oriented Pelita (9/13) commented: "We are also sad and deeply sorry, and...we condemn the really inhumane terrorist acts. Indeed, we do not know for sure who the perpetrators were and what the motive was behind the actions. However, what is obvious is that the actions have shaken the world. The tragedy did not only befall the United States...it will also affect the whole world, which is deplorable. We cannot predict how much longer the impact of the tragedy of the Pentagon and the World Trade Center will last. But to us in Indonesia, should it last long, it would bring much difficulty our efforts to restore the economy, or at least slow us down.... Regardless of all of this, the tragedy could become a lesson, both to the United States and other countries as well, that we should always exercise caution against terrorism."
"Measured War Against Terrorism"
Independent, Media Indonesia judged (9/13): President George Bush Jr...has asked Congress to authorize him to punish the perpetrators. A typical U.S. spirit was emerging. There was raging fury. Spirit was reviving. From the U.S. point of view, this is natural. But the world should be worried. Because the U.S. considered the attacks on WTC and the Pentagon an act of war, we can imagine what the retaliation will be, and the target for the retaliation can already be guessed. We again agree with the U.S. that terrorism is not acceptable in any form. However, at the same time we are nervous that vengeance and the fighting against terrorism will, in the end, victimize innocent people.... Terrorism is the enemy of the world. But the world must not be victimized by a war against terrorism that cannot be predicted."
"Mourn For America"
Islamic-oriented Republika intoned (9/13): "It could be assured that the perpetrators, the people and groups [behind the attack] have had deep resentment of the United States. They could well be those feeling marginalized by the U.S. government. Hasn't the United States been ambivalent in dealing with conflicts around the globe? The double-standard policy--either for geopolitical and economic or human rights reasons--may well be legal in U.S. government perspective. But United States' ambivalent acts--whether we agree or not--have caused deaths, loss of property, and unmeasured suffering among people, groups, or countries that by chance are not in line with the country's policies.... We agree that the perpetrators of these inhumane attacks have to be punished. But we have renewed fear when we realize that...the United States may be trapped in its anger by retaliating under the very rules it creates. Should this be the case, the United States would become a terrorist too, not a terrorist group but a terrorist state."
"The U.S. And Terrorists"
Independent Media Indonesia emphasized (9/12): "We deeply sympathize over the hundreds and even thousands of innocent people buried under the rubble of the World Trade Center. And, for sure, our sorrow will escalate, for usually within a short time the United States will retaliate in its own fashion. And certainly more innocent people will fall victim. Terrorism and superiority both have some kind of deadly arrogance."
"Tragedy In U.S."
Independent afternoon Suara Pembaruan stressed (9/12): "The United States, which emerged from the Tuesday tragedy, is a country and people with no patient stance, tending to put aside international legal courtesy in findings its targets. We should bear in mind that the terrible terrorist acts in the United States are not the problem of the United States alone. These actions have broken the human civilization. Hereby, we would like to convey our deepest condolence to the families of the victims in New York and Washington."
"Monroe Doctrine Syndrome"
Christian-oriented, afternoon Sinar Harapan stated (9/12): "Above all else, we express our heartfelt condolences for the victims of monstrous terrorism among the American people. Terrorism, whatever form it assumes, is a great sin in the eyes of God."
JAPAN: "Don't Fall Into Terrorists' Snare"
Liberal Asahi observed (9/13): "The aim of these terrorist actions is undoubtedly to create worldwide confusion and terror. If the world loses its cool, it is certain that terrorist groups will take advantage of it.... It is difficult to understand why the U.S. could not detect this well-organized and -planned terrorist plot well in advance.... President Bush hinted at military retaliation against those responsible. But we wonder whether such action will only result in causing a vicious circle of attacks and counterattacks. The world community needs to use wisdom more than ever before to fight acts of terrorism in a more effective manner. The U.S. should work closely with its allies, the U.N., and regional organizations to study ways to deal with the issue."
"Combating Terrorism 'None Of Our Business'"
Business-oriented Nihon Keizai editorialized (9/13): "Tuesday's simultaneous terrorist attacks were aimed not only at the U.S but at the entire world as well. I n a sense, the victim of these attacks is the international community, including Japan. The GOJ needs to share our horror and anger (over terrorism) with the U.S. and start concrete cooperative measures to address the problem in a manner that befits the closeness of the Japan-U.S. alliance.... It has become all the more necessary for members of the world to exchange intelligence to help the U.S. find those responsible."
"U.S. To Crack Down On Terrorism"
Conservative Sankei's Washington correspondent Komori observed (9/13): "Washington's tougher stance against terrorism will also have a major impact on Japan's foreign policy. The question is how and to what extent Japan would be able to act with the U.S. in combating terrorism."
CHINA: "Serious Threat To World Peace, Civilization"
Official English-language commented China Daily (9/13): "The international community was shocked at what happened in the U.S. on Tuesday.... There can be no excuse for such inhumane and spiteful acts against innocent civilians. Terrorist crimes must be condemned by the world community and the perpetrators brought to justice.... China, like other peace-loving countries, has always made clear its strong opposition to, and condemnation of, all forms of terrorism. It has been China's consistent stance that...differences and disputes should be resolved through dialogue and negotiation rather than by resorting to force or terrorist actions.... Regrettably, such perceptions have not been fully understood by all. The world is still afflicted by man-made scourges such as hegemony, power politics, racism, border conflicts and regional wars. This makes it more urgent that the international community move to wage all-out war on terrorism, by establishing a new world order that can ensure lasting peace and prosperity for all.
HONG KONG SAR: "Time To Reassess"
The independent South China Morning Post noted (9/13): "It would be opportune for the U.S. to take a realistic look at its relationship with the rest of the world.... If the U.S. is to continue to exercise its global role, it is important that besides handing out retribution to those involved in the terrorist attacks it also pays attention to the causes for this resentment and to try and understand it. The security of the US cannot rest solely on the power of its armed forces. It also needs a new diplomacy to reach out to those who feel alienated from a US-led global order."
"Seeking Peace And Not Confrontation"
The PRC-owned Wen Wei Po wrote in its editorial (9/13): "Terrorist activities are basically related to U.S. hegemonism in its dealing with world affairs. Peaceful methods and dialogue should be used to solve international disputes. There is an old Chinese saying: 'Peace is valuable.' It means that in the struggle between confrontation and peace, peace is the best way out. Adopting force will only trigger unceasing revenge.... Before the U.S. has sufficient evidence, it would only intensify contradictions if it attacks a suspected country. The issue will become more complicated and it may even come to a deadlock."
"Terrorist Attacks Will Only Have Limited Impact On Economy"
The independent vernacular Apple Daily News had this editorial (9/13): "The U.S. economic system is very mature and developed. Production and consumption centers are all over the country. Hence, terrorist attacks in an individual city, such as an important city like New York, will not have a great impact on the nation's economy. In addition, the U.S. Federal Reserve has already shown that it will make an effort to ensure that the market has a sufficient flow of capital. If it is necessary, the Federal Reserve can cut interest rates on a large scale to minimize market shock. While there is sufficient capital flow, the U.S. economy will not slow down. As long as the U.S. economy returns to normal in a short time, the shock to the global economy will be limited."
"Terrorists Have Underestimated Americans' Will"
The independent Hong Kong Economic Journal had this editorial (9/13): "Terrorists and their masterminds who launched attacks on the U.S. are like Hitler and Stalin. They think that people in a democratic country are loosely governed and are selfish and weak-willed. However, from the calm reaction of the Americans who queued up to donate blood, we can see that they are strong and determined. They show no fear in the hour of danger.... '911' attacks have revealed the loopholes in the U.S. intelligence network and its anti-terrorist activities. However, the attacks have awakened the U.S. administration. The U.S. administration has to seriously consider its internal security. They are also facing the pressure to find the prime culprit and punish him."
AUSTRALIA: "The World's New Balance Of Terror"
The liberal Age editorialized (9/13): "Whatever explanations of this crime might be offered in the coming days and weeks, and whether or not its perpetrators are eventually called to account for what they have done, the peoples of the world have been made chillingly aware of the fragility of civilized existence.... When the initial shock at what has happened begins to subside...the quality of America's political leaders, especially President George W. Bush, will be measured by their responses to those demands. But the more profound test of leadership, and of American society, will lie in whether the US succumbs to the anxieties that the terrorist attacks have unleashed. President Bush should keep his promise to bring to justice the terrorists and those who harbor them. The U.S. must remain an open and tolerant society."
"Terror Needs Justice, Not Vengeance"
An editorial in the nation's capital Canberra Times had this: "The victims demand justice. But justice is not achieved by acts of retribution as arbitrarily focused as the acts of the terrorists which inspired them. It is the authors and collaborators of the terrorists who must be brought to justice and punished, not innocent people living in the environment in which they move. Otherwise, the irrational hatreds and unreasoning resorts to violence involved will fester and probably be repeated in the future. One does not negotiate with terrorists, but nor does one foster the conditions in which it thrives. The U.S., President George W. Bush said in a calm but grimly determined speech, was attacked because it was a beacon of freedom and opportunity, in acts intended to frighten it into chaos and retreat. He pledged that this intention would fail. Americans are justifiably angry, but their wrath must reflect the civilization under attack, not the barbarity which would bring it down."
"Strike Hard To Win The War Against Terrorism"
Editorial in the national conservative Australian (9/13) was strident: "As we agonize over this depraved new world, our instincts say: 'Lash out at the perpetrators'--and so we must, hard and unrelentingly, to send a message reasserting the primacy of civilization over bastardry.... George W. Bush is fully justified in using all the military force he can muster against 'the terrorists who committed these acts, and those who harbor them'.... Legitimate governments worldwide must rally behind the U.S. resolve to fight the scourge across borders. Here is an unprecedented opportunity for countries of all ideologies and creeds to stop treating the U.S. as a foe and start focusing on the true enemy--the evil and inhumanity lurking within the minds of terrorists and the despots who harbor them."
MALAYSIA: "Violence is not the solution"
Government-influenced, Malay-language Berita Harian observed (9/13): "The main question as to who committed this heinous act has yet to be answered, but America appears to be keen to believe it is the militant Saudi exile Osama bin Laden, though at this point evidence is still being collected.... This act of terrorism was one which was planned and refined over many months and not simply random. Whatever their motives were, this act is one to be condemned for its inhumanity.... There are many reasons why countries can get upset with America: its dabbling in domestic affairs of other countries, its support for the Israeli regime.... However, this act is not condoned as civilians have been killed and injured, and the world economy jeopardized. President Bush has promised Americans that there will be retaliation. Many are keen to believe that Muslim terrorists are at fault. This raises fears among Muslims in the world community because there may be revenge attacks on innocent people. Our hope is that not one community or ethnicity will be punished for the acts of a few. If it is true that Islamic militants are behind this, believing it is jihad (holy war), then they are the ones who have deviated from the true teachings of Islam. Proof is the messages of sympathy and the condemnation of the act from Muslims and Muslim leaders all over the world. If America wants to take revenge, it should be done with wisdom and absolute proof, and not following emotions. Violence will not amount to anything but more violence and grief."
SINGAPORE: "Act With Caution"
The pro-government Straits Times (9/13): "The terrorists who carried out the heinous attacks on New York and Washington on Tuesday made a colossal error in judgment. Far from being cowed, the United States will respond vigorously to the attacks. That is how the country has responded in the past; that is how it will respond now.... In this case, the US will have the support of the civilized world, as it ferrets out the criminals who planned the dastardly acts and brings them to justice. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not just attacks on the financial and military symbols of American power, they were also attacks on the very idea of civilization itself. Civilization will and must retaliate; terrorism will and must be fought globally. President George W. Bush's statement that the US will not distinguish between the terrorists and those who harbor them, has this newspaper's full concurrence. The US, however, must first determine the identity of the culprits before acting, and its response must not only be military, but also political and diplomatic."
SOUTH KOREA: "Broken Myth, Uncertain Future"
Moderate Hankook Ilbo editorialized (9/13): "The myth of U.S. invincibility has been broken. The unprecedented terrorist attacks revealed that the U.S. is no longer a fortress of non-aggression.... The world order of the early 21st century will most likely face uncertainty and turbulence as the U.S. repositions itself.... The terrorist attack is being evaluated as an expression of hostility against the prevailing power and values of the U.S. and as a declaration of war against U.S. system.... There is a high possibility that the U.S. will target its outside enemy and retaliate in order to restore its dented pride and boost morale. In that case, many regions, including the Middle East, may trigger a vicious cycle of bloodbaths by launching massive air raids and carrying out retaliatory acts of terrorism. Then, the U.S., which has had its heart struck for the first time since it was established, will likely return to isolationism and strengthen its missile defense system and military."
"Synchronized Terrorist Attacks At Heart Of U.S."
Pro-government Hankyoreh Shinmun editorialized (9/13): "Given that the U.S. has been under fire from the international community for its power-based, arrogant attitude, the Americans need to take this incident as an opportunity to reflect on whether they have encouraged this desperate and hostile terrorism.... Although it is understandable that the Americans would vow retaliation, we urge the U.S. to refrain from massive retaliatory attacks against those responsible because such acts could trigger a vicious cycle of bloodshed."
"We Condemn Terrorism Against Civilization"
The government-owned Daehan Maeil declared (9/13): "This kind of terrorism is not only a crime against humanity but also an act against civilization that cannot be tolerated in international society. International organizations including the UN should launch a 'war against terrorism.' In addition, the international community should work together with the U.S. to bring those responsible for these terrorist attacks to account, based on thorough investigations.... We hope that the U.S., as the world's sole superpower, will show its strong leadership and eradicate terrorism on the international scene after a cool-headed review of its national strategy."
THAILAND: “This Barbarity Must Spur Us To Action”
Lead editorial of top-circulation, moderately conservative, English language Bangkok Post commented (9/13): "Despite the overwhelming chorus of condemnation against the attacks, there are still voices that say: serves you (the U.S.) right. This is unacceptable. There is no reason, political cause or dispute whatsoever that can justify the use of terror resulting in death and destruction.... This most recent act of terrorism deserves total condemnation and those responsible for the murderous acts must be stopped and punished.... Now is the time to say: No more. It is also high time to take collective global measures because we have a right not to be threatened by fear from terrorists and those who harbor them.”
“It’s Not The First Lesson. America Should Listen To All Sides”
The lead editorial of sensationalist Phujatkarn commented (9/13): “We ask all Thais to be neutral and listen to all parties. We should particularly listen more to what the Muslims have to say. Because the U.S. media have been unilaterally waging psychological warfare and painting terrorists singularly as evil-minded rogues. But has the U.S. ever looked at itself to see how it has interfered with, instigated and abetted (certain regimes), and tried to comprehensively dominate the whole world?”
INDIA: "Economic Aftershocks"
An editorial in the centrist Times of India (9/13): "From the economic point of view, the attacks have come at the worst possible time. The U.S. has stayed out of recession thus far largely because of consumers' willingness to keep their wallets open.... Some analysts are already speculating that this may be the event that will finally push the U.S. into recession. India's biggest worry, though can be summarized in one word: oil.... A calm, measures response by the Bush Administration today would help revive public confidence and get America back to business. It would also preserve the health of the global financial system, a far better way of getting even then getting thoughtlessly mad."
"Roots Of Terror"
An editorial in the centrist Pioneer asserted (9/13): "Osama bin Laden's...Frankensteinian entity was largely created by none else than the U.S. (CIA) to counter the Soviet occupation troops in Afghanistan.... According to some estimates, the U.S. spent more than $600 million in this operation, which has now come back to haunt America with its worst nightmare. This is the link that U.S. policy makers need to understand before they embark on any retribution in the form of retaliatory attacks. Pakistan and Taliban are the creation of U.S. foreign and military policies that have now backfired, creating in the process enemies of humanity like Laden ... The nexus that exists between the Taliban, Laden and Pakistan cannot be brushed aside. This deadly triangle of terror has been spawning a wave of attacks across the globe."
An editorial in the pro-economic-reforms Business Standard held (9/13): "A hope has been kindled in some Indian hearts that the U.S. has at last experienced at first hand the senseless horror of terrorism ... In short, they are hoping to see a new tilt in U.S. policy. It is a foolish hope for two reasons ... because everyone except our government can see that India's enmity with Pakistan gravely weakens India as a regional power - that a settlement with Pakistan will multiply India's weight in world affairs ... Instead of looking for an international anti-Muslim front, India should learn from the heavy cost America has paid for its espousal of Zionism, and learn to target its enemies more precisely."
"The Clock Can't Be Turned Back"
The nationalist Hindustan Times stressed (9/13): "Since no single country is formally involved, it will be extremely difficult for the United States to strike back with precision.... The terrorists of today, however, are beyond the pale of civilization.... It is evident enough that if these insane groups are to be stopped, the intelligence agencies of all the countries, especially those which are targeted by the terrorists, have to step up their levels of cooperation. The United States has to take the lead in this matter."
PAKISTAN: "It is Terrorism Only, Not A Crusade"
According to an editorial in mass-circulation, Urdu-language Jang (9/13): "Muslim fundamentalists were blamed for the Oklahoma Trade Center bombing, but a disappointed American youth was found to be responsible for the attack and was executed for the crime.... U.S. public opinion in the world media is expressing its anger against the Islamic world.... Although America and Israel are responsible for atrocities against Palestinians and other Muslims, no Islamic school of thought supports the killing of innocent people. The United States and the West should take these incidents as terrorism and not as a crusade."
"Great American Tragedy"
An op-ed by Irshad Ahmed Haqqani in the mass circulation, Urdu Jang stressed (9/13): "Not a single media commentary from the United States has hinted at a critical appreciation of the country's foreign policy. Only one statement is being repeated, that the terrorism against America will be responded to and the terrorists will be crushed. The incidents are doubtlessly a great tragedy in which thousands of innocent people were killed. However, America should not overlook the reactions being seen in a part of the Islamic world. America suspects Osama bin Laden and some Palestinian groups, but American experts recognize that the two circles do not have the organization and resources that are required for such a big operation."
"Historic Incidents Of Terrorism In America"
An editorial in the second largest Urdu Nawa-e-Waqt maintained (9/13): "The possibility of Jewish Zionist mindset planning the acts of terror can't be ruled out. This mindset did everything to stop Bush from becoming the President of the United States.... Only Jews are aware of U.S. internal security and communication infrastructure and have the capability to ruin it.... After these acts of terrorism, Ehud Barak was quick to put the blame on Osama bin Laden.... Moreover America should open-mindedly review it internal and external policies including its anti-Islam, anti-Muslim attitude."
"Terrorism In America"
An editorial in the pro-Muslim League Urdu Pakistan judged (9/13): "It is a cause of satisfaction that America has not blamed any group or nation for the incidents without investigation. However, Zionists and Indian extremist Hindus are propagating against Palestinians and Osama bin Laden. America should be aware of these elements designs, who have already caused considerable damage to its image. Now these elements want to pitch America against the Muslim world."
"A Speech Lasting Merely A Minute"
An op-ed by Beg Raj in the popular Urdu Din noted (9/13): "It is important to analyze what Pakistan's fate will be in case of a possible attack on Afghanistan. The Afghan influx, following the Soviet invasion, holds our society and economy in chains. U.S. funds and arms were used in that war. If there is an attack on Afghanistan this time, the U.S. and Russia will be allies, not opponents. Pakistan is already accused of giving refuge to Bin Laden. [In case of a U.S. strike] we will be forced to side with the Allies. Pakistan will be in deep trouble whichever side it chooses to support.... President Bush has already sounded the bugle for war in his one-minute speech."
"America Declares War"
An op-ed by Hafiz Shafiqur Rehman in popular Urdu Din remarked (9/13): "In the beginning, CNN and BBC kept saying in unison that 'no one knows who is responsible.' However, as soon as it regained its senses, the Jewish-funded media turned its cannons in Bin Laden's direction."
BANGLADESH: "Menacing Attack In America"
Anti-West, Bangla-language Inqilab's editorial insisted (9/13): "There is no doubt that this is a heinous and cowardly act on the United States. All must realize that terrorism only begets terrorism and does not help bring about a peaceful solution to any problem.... We condemn this attack and express our sympathy to the families of the victims. We also hope that real culprits will be hunted down and their identity will made public."
"We Condemn This Horrific Disregard For Human Lives"
The independent, English-language Daily Star editorially commented (9/13): "There is no reason to view this entirely as an attack on the United States; it is, in fact, an onslaught on the civilized value-system.... We urge out own government at this point to get a move on to see how we can be of any assistance to an invigorated, all-out international campaign against terrorism.... While we understand the...outrage of the U.S. government and people...we urge them to hold their reactions within the limits of fighting terrorism, without prejudice to any particular religious faith or denomination.
"We Condemn This Barbaric And Heinous Terrorist Attack"
Conservative, Bangla-language Ittefaq stressed (9/13): "We condemn those terrorist killers....It should be mentioned that care must made so that no innocent person, community or country is harassed as a result of this heinous act. The United States and the leaders of the world community must show prudence and farsightedness.... The American leadership must ensure who are the real perpetrators of this attack not only for their own security, but also for the security and peace of the world."
NIGERIA: "World Solidarity Against Terrorism"
The respected, Lagos-based, independent Guardian's editorial underscored (9/13): "Tuesday's terrorist attack in the United States of America must be condemned by the whole world.... Those like the terrorists behind the American tragedy who act in defiance of the UN do grave danger to the oneness of humanity. The entire world is united in sympathy and solidarity with America in this hour of grief and horror."
"A Global Misfortune"
The Lagos-based, independent Comet urged (9/13): America deserves the sympathy of the whole world and cooperation of everybody to track down those behind these suicide bombers.... Support for America at this time is support for liberty and freedom, for our collective cherished values as a human community. America's response as they have done historically will not only make America safe but the world itself will breathe a sigh of relief."
"A Slap Against Providence"
The Ibadan-based, independent Nigerian Tribune declared (9/13): "We condemn, in the strongest of terms, these unmitigated terrorist acts. The attacks...must not be allowed to pass without a full measure of reprisals. The world cannot afford to countenance the reign of psychopaths wearing the toga of freedom fighters."
CANADA: "Innocent Populations Have Nothing To Do With Extremist Terrorists"
Michele Ouimet judged in the lead editorial in Montreal's liberal La Presse (9/13): "The Americans want the head of Bin Laden, and one can't blame them. But how will they do it? Will they bomb Kabul?... Already diplomats and humanitarian groups are packing their bags.... Of course Americans' anger is legitimate and a lot of innocent people were killed.... But American sanctions also kill. More slowly, more subtly, unspectacularly...and they especially hit the innocent civilians. We wrote yesterday about the impact of economic sanctions on Iraq. They succeeded in agitating new hatred against America but also killed -- at least 3,000 children a month, according to UNICEF. Innocent populations have nothing to do with extremist terrorist groups ..and they shouldn't have to pay the price of the retaliation."
"Canada's Duty Will Call"
Former ambassador and deputy editor Graham N. Green wrote in the nationalist Ottawa Citizen (9/12): "...[T]he United States needs to know that its allies will stand with it, including militarily, if its retaliatory actions provoke a wider conflict. There are some things in life worth fighting for. Defeating those responsible for attacking the essence of our democracy is one of them."
"At Times Like This, We Thank God That We're Canadians"
Columnist Susan Riley wrote in the nationalist Ottawa Citizen (9/12): "As for Canada: Our best protection may be distancing ourselves a little more explicitly from U.S. foreign policy.... Faced with the random brutality unleashed on ordinary Americans yesterday, it is hard not to think: Thank God, I live in Canada. But we, like the Americans, would be terribly vulnerable to terrorism. We are safe because of our relative harmlessness, more than our virtue."
"The End Of Island America"
Under the subhead,"Sixty years after Pearl Harbor, the United States may finally find that it cannot always beat the world's horrors back to other shores", John Gray wrote in the leading Globe and Mail: "For [President] Bush and his people, the terrible realization will be that after a few lightning strikes and commando raids on suspected enemies in obscure desert strongholds..., the problem will not be solved, for terrorism is a serpent with no head."
"Who Is To Blame?"
Under the sub-head, "When you consider who had the motive and the means, one name heads the list," Iraw specialist Laurie Mylroie assessed in the leading Globe and Mail (9/12): "Almost certainly, a state was behind yesterday's well-organized attacks. Most probably, it was again Iraq. Saddam Hussein is not one to leave his work unfinished, and nothing has changed his mind that the United States remains his greatest enemy."
"Still The World's Longest Undefended Border?"
Regular columnist Jeffrey Simpson wrote in the leading Globe and Mail (9/12): "About two hundred million people cross the U.S.-Canada border each year. Most of them do so without a hitch.... All that may change.... The U.S., having suffered what U.S. commentators immediately described as another Pearl Harbor, is going to be in no mood for shilly-shallying allies. The United States has been attacked and it will demand support for whatever steps it decides to take from allies such as Canada. And the U.S. has every reason to expect that support, since yesterday's attacks, although directed against the U.S., were also attacks against democratic regimes whose openness leave them vulnerable to terrorism."
"America To Its Allies: You're Either With Us Or You're Against Us"
James Fergusson, deputy director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba, wrote in the leading Globe and Mail (9/12): "Yesterday's terrible events...will make a new U.S. strategy known as 'Homeland Defence' central to U.S. national security--with direct implications for Canada.... [T]he United States will likely adopt an international security posture of 'with us or against us.' Failure to make such a commitment will reinforce Washington's unilateralist tendency. For Canadians and the government of Canada, the terrorist attacks south of the border should be seen as a wake-up call. Our neighbor is vulnerable, and so are we."
"Wait For Red Mist Of Anger To Clear"
Commentator Alexander Rose filed from Washington in the conservative National Post (9/12): "The nation's blood is up, but the risk is not that Washington will strike hard, but too fast.... Domestically, the entire national security infrastructure is going to have to be redesigned to account for this terrifying new era. Internationally, the bombing must coalesce civilized nations into a cohesive front adamantly opposed to terrorism of every sort. .... Finally, on the conceptual level, the West must grasp that it, as a whole, is in mortal danger from fanaticism of various colours, and that terrorism is not aimed exclusively at the United States."
"West's Moral Failure At Root Of Tragedy"
Under the subhead "Our holiday from history's undertow has come to an end", columnist Mark Steyn wrote in the conservative National Post (9/12): "...[T]he United States belongs to NATO, a defence alliance of prosperous Western nations in which only one guy picks up the tab. The U.S. taxpayer's willingness to pay for the defence of Canada and Europe has contributed to the softening up of America's so-called 'allies,' freeing them to disband their armed forces, flirt with dictators and gangster states, and essentially convert themselves to semi-non-aligned.... "Those nations who persist in finessing and nuancing evil should understand now that what is at stake is whether the world's future will belong to liberal democracy and the rule of law, or to darker forces. And after yesterday America is entitled to ask its allies not for finely crafted UN resolutions but a more basic question: Whose side are you on?"
"Democracy Will Prevail Over Barbarous Hate"
The liberal Toronto Star editorialized (9/12): "It is hard to fathom the monstrous hatred that would drive such crimes against humanity. Today, Canadians can only add their prayers to those of President George W. Bush for the victims and their loved ones. And for the heroic women and men who perished tryhing to save them.... Symbols of national pride can be rebuilt. Lost precious lives cannot.... But American leaders, to their credit [say] 'we're not going to change our way of life because of these people.'... [R]enewed pressure must be brought, in the aftermath of this infamy, on those who harbour terrorists. Canada should be an active player.... It is easy to strike fear in an open society.... It is harder to destroy a free people's iron resolve. Americans will prevail over this monstrous hate. Friends will stand with them."
ARGENTINA: "The U.S. Got A Blank Check From Its European Allies"
Oscar Raul Cardoso, leading Clarin's international analyst, held (9/13): "We have no choice but to face reality in all its magnitude: beyond the massive tragedy caused by last Tuesday's multiple terrorist assault, the attack against the U.S. has an undeniable aspect of humiliation of its power vis-a-vis the rest of the world. Only by understanding this aspect can one understand some political and military developments boosted by Washington in the international scenario.... Yesterday [the U.S.] asked and obtained from NATO...the first 'war' blank check granted by NATO to one of its members in over fifty years of history.... After having been Europe's protecting umbrella against a Soviet military threat for over four decades, the United States has started to collect that bill: the other NATO members committed themselves to aligning their own war capabilities according to Washington's demands.... Even so, most experts expect that this new form of 'war' will continue with some unilateral military action from Washington, because the USG faces now a double and unexpected test: it must prove to the world that it continues being the world superpower and it must find some graphic way of saying the same to its own society."
"The Rhetoric Prior To An Exceptional Retaliation"
Telma Luzzani, leading Clarin's international columnist, wrote (9/13): "The 'act of war' referred by Bush has no concrete enemy. There is the offense and its consequences. But there is no tangible attacker. With this spirit, with the superpower's hurt pride and a society that will soon demand results from him, inexpert Bush will have to solve an unusual fact. Behind his phrase... an answer is getting ready to put an end to the huge astonishment left by a surprising attack performed without fire weapons, with the United States' own airplanes and against its architectural symbols of power. Besides, Bush faces disagreement in his own ranks.... The 'act of war' focuses on an acceptable rhetoric for a people who finds it hard to understand what happened and feels compelled to see another image of itself."
"On The Border Between Two Worlds"
Mariano Grondona commented in daily-of-record La Nacion (9/13): "There is something on which all international observers agree: last Tuesday's criminal assault...has inaugurated a new world... with a new actor: terrorist organizations.... If, with the passing of months, last Tuesday's tragedy has no consequence, the attack will remain as a huge but isolated event.... If Bush delayed his move--like asking for an exhaustive investigation before acting--their enemies would interpret his cautiousness as weakness.... In conventional war, the soldier knows that he 'could' die. In saint war, the combatant 'wants' to die. There is an abyss of difference."
"Same As In The Cold War, The World Is Divided Into two"
Business-financial Ambito Financiero's international columnist Marcelo Falak argued (9/13) "The collective trauma suffered in these hours by the U.S. people and leaders will tend to reinforce the voices of two traditional sectors in the U.S. foreign policy--isolationists and hard-liners.... The future world will again be divided into two: on the one hand, 'civilized' countries; on the other hand, dictatorships and threatening regimes. Among the 'civilized' countries... cooperation will prevail.... In that international community there will also be emerging countries. Argentina has heavily suffered international terrorism and knows the risk of not making up for its security shortfalls with an active international cooperation... Therefore, the role of an allied country will be crucial not to lose room in a world that appears as a more hostile one also from the economic viewpoint."
An editorial in liberal, English-language Buenos Aires Herald stressed (9/13): "The response to Tuesday's atrocities must begin today because the effectiveness of the terrorist strike means that it will happen again and the next time could be worse. Whatever the response, it cannot lead to another terrorist victory. Allowing terrorism to dictate its perverted agenda would destroy 280 million lives in the United States, not 10,000. But so would giving '1984' Big Brother methods delayed application in the United States. With the nature of this enemy, negotiation is not only undesirable but simply not possible. Yet the spiral of retaliatory strikes makes a Middle East or even world war entirely possible - Israel will not stand idle while Saddam Hussein's chilling words ('the cowboys hd what was coming to them') mean that a nuclear attack from a rogue state cannot be ruled out.... The only answer is for the U.S. to admit itself the victim as much as the spearhead of globalization and to end isolationism, finally seeking a real, impartial and honest solution to the Middle East's problems. Tuesday's tragedy may have been caused by the U.S. role as the world's policeman but its shadows cannot be banished until it succeeds in that role."
BRAZIL: "Invisible War"
Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo Chief Editor Otavio Frias Filho commented (9/13): "The series of terrorist attacks in the United States will have consequences that seem not difficult to predict. A so far weak president is expected to become strong as a result of internal nationalist cohesion. His hesitant international partners will have to support his retaliation campaign.... Interventions on behalf of 'civilization,' as in the Gulf and Balkans wars, will have greater international support and may become routine. The American paranoia may be emphasized and the U.S. will perhaps experience another burst of xenophobia especially against non-whites.... Brazil's foreign policy is expected to abandon plans of autonomy forced by the dynamics of the Invisible War's, which replaces the Cold War."
"'War' Opposes The U.S. To Unknown Enemy"
Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo Paris correspondent Giles Lapouge questioned (9/13): "Wasn't Osama bin Laden cynically trained by the CIA? Wasn't he chosen by the United States as an essential element in the fight against the Soviets? Wasn't it the United States that produced this devil? It took lots of time for the United States to realize what everyone knew from the very beginning: that Taleban is the U.S's worst enemy, as well as the major enemy of the West in general, of the human rights, of democracy, of the respect for women and children, in sum of all civilization."
"The U.S. Is Not The Only Victim Of Aggression"
Brazilian Ambassador in Washington Rubens Barbosa stated in center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo (9/13): "The U.S. is undoubtedly the main victim of this absurd aggression. But it is not the only one. Equally victimized were all the nations that believe and defend the fundamental principles of democracy, freedom and justice.... Behind the attacks is the suddenly emerged awareness that the world's greatest power is not free from the violence that devastates so many regions in the world."
"Horror, Show and Fundamentalism"
Liberal Folha de S. Paulo columnist Marcelo Coelho judged (9/13): "A brutal, simultaneous, unexpected, cowardly attack will serve for that the immense U.S. military power to be used without the supposed good manners of a civilized nation. The problem is that so far the bombings and terror actions carried out by the U.S. had remote adversaries, and distant justifications. How many thousand children died in the bombings against Iraq? How many civilian targets were hit due to 'technical failure' in Serbia? How can one condemn terrorism after having used napalm in Vietnam? Not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Of course I prefer Bush to bin Laden, as well as the Republicans to Taliban. But we should not think whether it is better to bomb Manhattan or destroy Kabul.... Bush's speech is somewhat fundamentalist in my opinion, and this freedom beacon has already killed too many people.... The Palestinian celebration of the attacks was abominable, but it is not a reason for bombing them. I deplore the American victims, not that the Pentagon was hit."
Brazilian retired Ambassador Antonio Amaral De Sampaio commented in center-right O Estado de S. Paulo (9/13): "It is not conceivable that the USG may change its policy, especially in the Middle East, according to fanatics' demands. If it does so, it will no longer be a superpower. It neither seems feasible to fight the terrorist threat with internal measures to restrict fundamental liberties and human rights. Such measures would transform a great democratic nation into a police state.... The punishment promised by Bush cannot nor should be removed. The target of retaliation must be carefully chosen.... The mistake in Sudan must not be repeated."
An editorial in conservative O Globo asserted (9/13): "If terror can be everywhere...the instruments to fight it should also be everywhere. First, the international intelligence community should have a degree of interconnection much more superior to Interpol's database. On another level, it's necessary to strengthen the competence of an international court for crimes of terror.... The attack on U.S. calls for a prompt, efficient and energetic answer from the world. It must also be the starting point for a permanent, collective readiness for this type of war for which the world doesn't seem to be prepared as it should be."
"More Security Does Not Mean Less Freedom"
Editorial in business-oriented Valor Economico (9/13): "The Americans and those who are sympathetic to them cannot forget that the U.S. major contribution to mankind has been the remarkable democratic experience and the guarantee of individual rights.... Exceptional measures may be used in favor of justice, but can also serve to carry out atrocities. Nothing is more dangerous for democracy... The U.S. is a model for the world for what it did in the past to preserve the state of law and guarantee fundamental human and civil rights achievements. Those who admire the U.S. society hope that it finds a way to conciliate the need of providing more security to its citizens without forgetting the principles of its Constitution."
MEXICO: "Criminals "
Felipe Calderon wrote in independent Reforma (9/13): "What has happened not only to the industrious American people, but to mankind as a whole hurts deeply.... It is a sterile and stupid act of vengeance. I believe that anti-American feeling has gone just too far. The events are an extreme demonstration that should not be allowed to happen again.... Unfortunately, Mexico will be affected by this actions of terror, particularly because much of what had been advanced in the migration issue could vanish, as anti-migration feeling is likely to increase."
"Out Of Paralysis"
Independent Reforma carried a column written by top editors stating (9/13): "There are a number of possible scenarios regarding the U.S. response to the terrorist attacks.... In any event, the delay in the U.S. government's response is showing some cracks in U.S. intelligence and security services, as well as in President Bush's leadership."
"An Attempt Against Open Society
"Jorge Chabat stated in nationalist El Universal (9/13): "If the purpose of the terrorist attacks is to kill thousands of innocent people--who will benefit from these developments? If their purpose was to show the U.S. as vulnerable, the objective has been reached. But what is next?... To believe that the U.S. would change its Middle East policy or elsewhere as a result of the attacks makes no sense at all. As a matter of fact, what is likely to happen is that the U.S. toughens its policy regarding groups that seek to promote change in the world.... Let us hope that from the ashes of New York's twin towers an international society determined to fight the terrorist threat more efficiently, without undermining the foundations of a democratic society, will emerge."
"The U.S., Our Ally"
Gabriel Szekely judged in nationalist El Universal (9/12): "No reasonable human being can do anything else but condemn the actions of terror against thousands of defenseless civilians.... However... the U.S. government...would do well...to respond with a cool head--avoiding any action that could affect innocent lives.... Its actions should be well thought out and clearly explained."
"Reflection In The Face Of Horror"
An editorial in nationalist Excelsior held (9/12): "Nobody can justify such a cold blooded and satanic action that has brought grief to thousands of homes in the U.S. The U.S. receives the solidarity of the whole world.... The massacre reminds us that stubbornness is the worst manner to solve differences among men.... The U.S. society should not ponder whether the unleashed terror might be the consequence of other irrational actions that have been implemented in the name of peace and democracy.... The international community is closing ranks with the U.S. Nothing would be less fruitful than an unfair persecution or an 'a priori' revenge that would only cause greater uncertainty to the precarious balance in the world."
"Third World War Or Second Holy War"
Jorge Carlos Diaz Cuervo said in business-oriented El Financiero (9/12): "Who failed in the successful terrorist attacks? Is it true that the U.S. is the most powerful, secure and freest nation in the world. How many enemies and how much hatred has the U.S. added up through the years? What are the U.S. enemies willing to do?... The security measures will be greatly increased from now on in the U.S. The world will be divided between those who are aligned to the U.S. and the U.S. enemies. At first glance Islamic fundamentalist nations seem to be responsible for the attempts. We cannot simply discard a U.S.-led military escalation against these nations-that could unleash a Third World War or a Second Holy War."
"Reflection In The Face Of Horror"
An editorial in nationalist Excelsior argued (9/12): "Nobody can justify such a cold blooded and satanic action that has brought grief to thousands of homes in the United States.... The international community is closing ranks with the U.S. Nothing would be less fruitful than an unfair persecution or an 'a priori' revenge that would only cause greater uncertainty to the precarious balance in the world."
"Mexico Vis-a-Vis Terrorism In The U.S."
An editorial in left-of-center La Jornada states (9/13): "The U.S. government has every reason and justification to concentrate on repairing damages and helping the victims, but these actions should not place its trading partners in a critical situation--as has happened in Mexico, Latin America and even in Europe.... It is foreseeable that these terrorist attempts will increase U.S. pressures on its neighbors, Canada and Mexico. They could become strategic checkpoints, and our nation actually becomes a barrier for northbound migration.... It would not be an exaggeration to say that the Mexican government might be asked to get involved in a military alliance in North America.... In the face of this possibility, it is important to remember that regardless of the reasons for the criminal attacks in New York and in Washington, it is a matter of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, and that the Mexican people have nothing to do with them."
"Impotence Of A Potentate"
Monterrey's leading El Norte ran commentary by academic Victor Kerber, a former Mexican diplomat (9/13): "What is about to come is a redefinition of the U.S. in the world, a new focus that could take the form of a retreat from the world scene, as happened following the 1929 crash and the Great Depression, when the U.S. assumed a policy of isolation.... This means that national security will return to its traditional concepts and will narrow and reduce its commitment to that of strictly defending U.S. interests.... There will also be a witch-hunt.... And if you think that being a Mexican makes you safe, let me tell you that in some U.S. intelligence circles, Mexico is not only considered a dangerous source of drug trafficking but also of terrorism, with special concentration on the Mexican states of Chiapas, Oaxaca and Guerrero, which may harbor terrorist cells capable of bombing banks, ambushing and sabotaging anything that has a U.S. profile."
CHILE: "Against Barbarity"
Government-owned but editorially independent La Nacion (9/12): "Today...there is a unity among the international community against terrorism. All political differences have been put aside when it comes to confronting barbarity. This is evident from the multiple reactions in all continents immediately following the attacks.... The greatest victory for terrorists would be to cause confusion and loss of control, which cannot be allowed to happen... Chileans right now feel emotionally very close to the American people. Their tragedy puts us in mourning. Their pain is ours. We stand by them in this moment in which that country will have to resort to all its moral reserves."
"Reflections Of The Day After"
An editorial in afternoon La Segunda noted (9/12): "What will be crucial is to establish a network to investigate, indict, and punish those responsible at the global level. In a scenario in which only a handful of men suffice to hijack an airplane and launch it against a building with thousands of people, lies a future in which the military and espionage could have greater power.... Checkpoints in the airports failed. The anti-aircraft defense failed. All warning systems failed. If four passenger airplanes can be hijacked in just one day in the United States and thrown in kamikaze style against the most important symbols of power on the planet--financial and military--then everything is possible. Perhaps that is the terrible reflection that prevails the day after."
COLOMBIA: "The War Has Changed Its Name"
The lead editorial in top national El Tiempo judged (9/13): "President Bush has sent two contradictory messages in his moving addresses. In some, he urged calm and [focused on] rescuing the wounded. In others, he spoke of revenge and 'hunting' those responsible of the attacks. Now, he has said that more than just acts of terror, the attacks were acts of war against liberty and democracy. Such feelings are understandable but ambiguous, and the U.S. could be tempted to [retreat into isolationism] predicated on the idea that foreign conflicts are not worth risking U.S. tranquility, or assuming alone the arrogant role of pursuing vengeance and justice.... Both options are equally dangerous. Following Tuesday's events, the world will change. We hope the world changes, we have to help the world change, but towards seeking international accord resulting from mediation, intelligence, pressure, and--in the worst case--the collective use of force.... From this point forward, the United States ought to exercise decisive leadership in the war that has been declared against the Free World...regardless of how violent or demented the retaliations of groups that know no boundaries in their fanatical efforts to confront civilized society with terror."
"The End of the Post-Cold War"
An op-ed by Colombian-Uruguayan political analyst Juan Gabriel Tokatlian in top national El Tiempo stated (9/13): "[This week's terrorist attacks] mark the end of an era in world politics and heralds the beginning of a new epoch...which, for lack of a better term, will be defined by greater competition and conflict. Rivalry among nations also will include non-governmental players, and both legal and illegal transnational forces. Within this context, the use of violence and force will increase rivalries and conflict ... The risk of such a potential scenario could grow [with the advent of a] global economic recession...escalating confrontation between Palestinians and Israelis, the tense China-U.S. relationship, and geopolitical changes in Asia--a combination of disturbing factors that could lead to major problems. Finally, the U.S. tragedy will show how important U.S. leadership is. Despite the sorrow and horror caused by these events, a peaceful and prudent [attitude] is necessary to prevent reacting with [excessive force]... The challenge will be garnering sufficient international support to act strongly and legitimately against terrorism."
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: "The Reaction To A Righteous Wrath"
Establishment tabloid Ultima Hora held (9/13): "This bloody act of terror, if answered with the same rage, could begin a chain reaction of deaths and retaliations, which could worsen the state of preoccupation experienced by the inhabitants of many parts in the world. On the other hand, it is not possible to remain iddle before actions of this nature and it is expected that the reaction will be exemplary. To demand 'an eye for an eye' is not the right thing in the current situation.... A simple judicial action against the responsible ones, although necessary, is not enough either. Evil, then should be attacked by its roots and uproot that cancer which has taken so many lives and has brought so much suffering to the families in the world."
Left-of-center tabloid El Nacional (9/13): "There is no doubt that, once again, the U.S. people will overcome the terrible moments which burden them and that they have the support of the international solidarity for their recovery efforts. God will grant wisdom to US leaders, so that their answer to this unfortunate moment calls for a sense of justice and that innocent blood may not be spill anymore. Dominicans are also suffering the horrible act of terror against that big nation, which houses with generosity over a million fellow Dominicans. El Nacional expresses its solidarity to the US community in the DR and transmits our condolences to the families of the victims of this Dante's tragedy."
ECUADOR: "The World Is Insane, Insane"
Pablo Ortiz opined in leading centrist El Comercio (9/12): "Is this rational? Can religious fanatics get revenge in this way? Don't they care that they are killing innocent people whose only crime was to live in one of the most famous cities? Animals never attack from behind; they do it up front when fighting for their survival.... We can only say that what happened is a sign that fundamentalist organizations do not believe in democracy because they are attempting to impose, by any means, their absurd ideas. This shows that life is not important to them, that feelings do not matter, and that revenge is the only goal in their lives (or deaths)."
"The Intolerable Fanaticism"
An opinion column by Leon Roldos (former Vice President) in leading centrist El Comercio judged (9/12): "The expressions of joy of some Palestinians, shown on television, do not necessarily link the Palestinian people with the attack. It was the innate reaction of a people who live with violence every day in confrontation with Israel. The joy over somebody else's tragedy is absurd. More than half a century has passed without reaching a concerted settlement in the Middle East. The U.S. and other countries have demonstrated inefficiency in bringing Palestinians and Israelis to reach peace, which they both deserve."
An editorial in Guayaquil's centrist Expreso stated (9/12): "We join the world in repudiating this terrorist insanity. We express our hope that even in these serious circumstances a dignified and civilized way out is found, taking into consideration the uselessness of attacks and the need to live in peace to resolve the most serious conflicts that exist between countries."
PERU: "Democracy Is Stronger That Terrorism"
Conservative, influential leading El Comercio's editorial commented (9/12): "We have to express our energetic repulsion to violence and our full solidarity with the United States. International terrorism deceives itself if it believes that such an attack to the heart of the U.S. will weaken the world’s democratic system. On the contrary, it has only produced repudiation worldwide.... Although the attacks perpetrated against real symbols of the financial, military and political power of the world’s most powerful country entail an open defiance to the democratic system itself...the pitiful immolation of thousands of people reveals the level of criminal cruelty of the perpetrators.... It is obvious that...none of this could have been perpetrated without the participation of some countries and clandestine organizations that openly declared themselves enemies of the U.S.… We cannot fail to mention the serious failure of the U.S. intelligence and security systems in preventing such a catastrophe… In the face of the 21st century these types of attacks warn us that the fight to defeat every type of fanaticism will be very hard."
“Condemnation And Solidarity”
Center-left daily La Republica's editorial held (9/12): “There are not enough harsh words to condemn the attacks perpetrated in the United States by terrorist insanity.... There is no doubt that this is the largest terrorist attack in history… We are facing of a new type of threat that compels us to fully revise all preventive security systems of the world and to pay more attention to the global effect of conflicts since many relate the aggravation of the situation in the Middle East to this attack. …We express our solidarity with the people and the government of the United States and reaffirm that terrorism will not make democracy yield."