What the Arab papers say

By J.D | LONDON

THE death of Osama bin Laden provoked scenes of jubilation in America. Coming in the middle of the spring, the reaction in the Middle East was mixed. We look at responses to his death in the Arab press.

In al-Sharq al-Awsat, a pan-Arab newspaper, Hussein al-Shabakshy comments on the response of the general public and media to Mr bin Laden's death and the consequences for the uprisings in the Arab world:

The reaction of the Arab public has been varied. Some refuse to believe he was just killed because—according to them—he was "already dead": how else could his prolonged silence be explained? And then of course, various conspiracy theories are now being threaded together which cast doubt on the whole story and on the pictures (despite their being leaked by the Pakistani authorities and not the Americans). But others just don't care because, for them, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are old news—remnants of a more troubled and past age. Today, what matters is Muhammad Bouazizi and the movement for freedom. Osama is gone, Bouazizi lives on. Which one will win? Bouazizi of course! Turn the page and cast aside the book of al-Qaeda and its stalwarts. Bin Laden's death is being treated in the Arab press as if a head of state just passed away; this is worrying because the public's distraction will cost Deraa and Mesrata dearly.

In an independent Egyptian daily, al-Shorouq, Imad Eddin Hussein condemns Mr bin Laden and his approach to Islamic liberation as an utter failure:

God have mercy on Osama bin Laden… He did everything he thought he could to serve the Muslim cause. But in the end, if America and Israel had launched a multi-trillion dollar campaign to demonise Muslims, they couldn't have done a better job… Al-Qaeda ended up killing more Muslims than anyone else. They inflicted indescribable damage on the Muslim nation, while failing to inflict any real damage on the West…For us to confront the West, we need to be strong. But we will only become strong when we become free, well-educated citizens of democratic nations. If we could achieve that, Israel would not be able to push us around—the West would not be able to occupy our lands. Who knows—maybe they would start giving us the respect we deserve without us having to fire a single shot. But for us to simplistically reduce our relationship with the West either to complete subordination (à la Hosni Mubarak) or perpetual clash (as bin Laden would have had it)—that is the real tragedy.

Abdul Bari Atwan, in an unusually sympathetic description, remembers his 1996 meeting with Mr bin Laden while reflecting on the cost of the war in human terms in al-Quds al-Arabi, another pan-Arab daily:

I asked him what his one wish in life would be. He turned, tears glistening in his eyes, and said: "My one wish is to be able to die a martyr, to join my comrades from the anti-Soviet jihad who have already reached paradise." The assassination of Osama bin Laden and part of his entourage (including, possibly, his Yemeni wife, Amal al-Sada, and one of his sons) has proven a great victory for the Obama administration. Nevertheless, this victory has not been cheap: the "global war on terror" launched by America in Iraq and Afghanistan has dragged on for the past decade at a cost of $1billion and 1m dead and counting.

Nizar al-Sahali argues that the al-Qaeda leader's death will do nothing to end terrorism. In the Syrian state-backed al-Watan, he argues that to destroy the hatred al-Qaeda has so long represented, America must prove its sincerity through its actions, not its ideologies:

Al-Qaeda as an organisation hijacked the words Islam and Muslims, and put them into the same pot as terrorism. After the attacks on September 2001, Muslims were branded with the word "terrorism". The Bush administration adopted a philosophy of "if you're not with us, you're against us". Today, with all the "dancing and joy" in front of the White House over the death of bin Laden, the American administration didn't quite get the message: that the death of the hatred that bin Laden and his organisation represented for so long does not mean the end of "terrorism". That will be determined by actions, not theory, of the American administrations when it comes to the people of the Islamic world including the Palestinian issue.

In al-Hayat, a Saudi newspaper, Hazem Saghieh continues this theme. He argues that the Arab spring killed Mr bin Laden for the first time, and Barack Obama's special forces have killed him again. But, he continues, to rid the world of Mr bin Laden for a third and final time, Mr Obama must do right by Palestine:

America, emboldened by its latest victory, can dictate to Israel as it could not before. The problem with Palestine has been that one of its trees, Hamas, has continually been mistaken for the rest of the forest, namely, the country as a whole. This deliberate confusion has provided various madmen, including bin Laden, and dictators with a platform from which to spew their venom throughout our region. But if America applies itself with the same persistent determination to the Palestinian issue, it will be able to inflict a third death on bin Laden, for whom in the end the Palestinians suffering meant little, if anything.

Ali Al-Faqih links Mr bin Laden's death to the fall of dictators from Egypt to Côte d'Ivoire as part of what he calls "the season of evil's departure" in an independent online Yemeni newspaper, al-Masdar:

The death of Osama bin Laden—that leader of religious extremism—adds to the fall of the Tunisian and Egyptian regimes, and is an advent of the fall of those in Libya and Yemen… All these events give cause for optimism that this year could witness even more victories for the forces of good in the world.

For further translations, visit Meedan.net