In Europe, Disquiet Over Bin Laden and U.S
JakartaForum-NYTimes - PARIS — No European government has condemned or criticized the killing of Osama bin Laden by American commandos, but the questions raised about the changing details of his death sharpened considerably after the White House revealed that he did not fire a weapon, was not armed and did not use a woman as a protective shield.
¶Some are questioning whether “justice” in fact was done, as President Obama portrayed the killing, and whether the American troops made any effort to capture Bin Laden alive or whether they simply executed him. And some think that the scenes of celebrating Americans — whether at the White House or at ground zero — are inappropriate responses that are indecorous at the least and at worst could incite more terrorism.
¶The disquiet is mostly among those on the left and among the elite in the news media, but it is reminiscent of the atmosphere during the Bush administration and the war against Iraq, when the United States was criticized for unilateralism, arrogance, disrespect for international law, triumphalism and a resort to overwhelming military force.
¶“We’re back, not to square one, but perhaps square four in anti-Americanism,” said Nicole Bacharan, a scholar of the United States at the Institute of Political Studies, or Sciences Po, in Paris. “Whatever happens, we need to prove we are different or better, that we are so much more refined and delicate and have such a respect for the law,” she said, characterizing the European stance. “It’s very silly.”
¶The reaction is limited, Ms. Bacharan said, adding that she believed that most Europeans and French were “glad he’s gone.”
¶“I think it’s a small world of journalists and political elites who are not quite sure they should be happy,” she said.
¶But as a sign of the sensitivity — which also goes to the heart of European concerns about the war in Afghanistan and terrorism sponsored by Al Qaeda in Europe itself — the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, found herself on the defensive when she said on Monday that she was “glad that it was successful, the killing of Bin Laden.”
¶Her comments were heavily criticized among political and religious circles. A member of her own conservative Christian Democratic Union, Siegfried Kauder, said: “I wouldn’t have used those words. That is a vengeful way of thinking that one shouldn’t have; that’s medieval.” And her foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle of the Free Democrats, called on Wednesday for the West to temper its responses, to avoid undue celebration “that could again lead to incitement or the heroization of Al Qaeda.”
¶At the same time, in comments to the newspaper Die Welt, he said that the death of Bin Laden was “good news for the entire world,” and that “it is understandable to have a feeling of relief that this terrorist who had thousands of victims on his conscience cannot continue to spread his terror.” So long, apparently, as the relief is kept under control.
¶Nicolas Demorand, editor of the left-leaning French daily Libération, on Tuesday bemoaned the “toxic rhetoric” of the campaign against terrorism. From that rhetoric, he wrote, stems “this base, uncomfortable joy, unprecedented in a democracy, that blew yesterday over the streets of New York.”
¶Even the editor of the centrist weekly L’Express, Christophe Barbier, cautioned, “To victory one must not add provocation.” He added: “To desecrate the cadaver or the memory of Bin Laden is to revive him. To cry one’s joy in the streets of our cities is to ape the turbaned barbarians who danced the night of Sept. 11. It is to tell them the ghastly competition continues between them and us.”
¶But Le Monde praised Mr. Obama for his sober speech Sunday night, contrasting it with that of President George W. Bush in 2003, who dressed as a fighter pilot to land on an aircraft carrier and declare the end of combat operations in Iraq, with a banner carrying his “ridiculous ‘Mission Accomplished.’ “
¶The Dutch foreign minister, Uri Rosenthal, said in a statement: “It would have been better if Bin Laden had been captured alive and forced to answer for his deeds in a court of law. Nevertheless, this is a historic event.”
¶For Justin Vaïsse, a French political scientist who is director of research for the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution, the different reactions to the rejoicing “simply reflects the difference in experiences, which you could also see in 2001 and 2002.”
¶“Nine-eleven happened there, not here. Europeans don’t understand why people would rejoice at ground zero, while it seems relatively easy to understand that in the United States.”
¶Leah Pisar, who worked at the White House during the Clinton years and wrote a book in French about French-American relations during the Iraq war, “Orage sur l’Atlantique,” or “Storm Over the Atlantic,” said that underlying the disquiet was Europe’s concern about Qaeda retaliation.
¶“It’s partly the fear of upsetting the Muslim community at home,” she said, adding, “there is an angst everyone is sharing over where Al Qaeda will hit back.”
0 Comment:
Post a Comment