On October 10, Pakistani teenager Malala Yousafzai—who received worldwide attention after being attacked by the Taliban for her advocacy for girls’ education—was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, along with Indian activist Kailash Satyarthi. Yousafzai’s work on educational equity is well-known. But less well-known is what she said to Barack Obama about how his wars were undermining the fight against terrorism.
Last year, Yousafzai’s White House meeting with Barack Obama received wide media coverage. But as I pointed out back then (FAIR Blog, 10/15/13), part of Yousafzai’s message didn’t make it into most media accounts: She told Obama that drone strikes in her country were fueling more terrorism.
After the meeting, she released a statement that included this:
I also expressed my concerns that drone attacks are fueling terrorism. Innocent victims are killed in these acts, and they lead to resentment among the Pakistani people. If we refocus efforts on education, it will make a big impact.
As Rania Khalek reported in Extra! (12/13), this part of her message wasn’t suited for US television:
In the week following the meeting, ABC, NBC and CBS aired 20 Malala Yousafzai–related stories, according to a search of the Nexis news media database. But not one of them mentioned her comments about US drone strikes.
After Yousafzai’s award, she was back in the headlines; the news about the Nobel Peace Prize made it onto every network newscast. But once again, her message to Obama was absent—a curious omission, given the context.
CBS This Morning was one of the few outlets that covered her drone comments the first time around, so it replayed an excerpt of an interview with Norah O’Donnell on October 10:
DONNELL: Is it true that when you spoke with President Obama, that you talked about your concern that drone attacks are fueling terrorism?
YOUSAFZAI: The first thing is that, it is true that when there’s a drone attack, those—the terrorists are killed, it’s true, but 500 and 5,000 more people rise against it, and more terrorism occurs, and more bomb blasts occur. So for that reason, I think the best way to fight against terrorism is do it through peaceful way, not through war, because I believe that a war can never be ended by a war.O’DONNELL: And you said that to President Obama?
YOUSAFZAI: Yes, of course.
CBS Evening News (10/10/14) aired an excerpt from the same interview that night , but it wasn’t this part.
Maybe it just takes some outlets longer to get around to talking about this. We noted last year that ABC reported Yousafzai’s critique of US policy 11 weeks after her visit (FAIR Blog, 1/2/14). And in a report last week about the Nobel Prize, the New York Times (10/10/14) mentioned in the first paragraph that she “confronted President Obama about American drone policy in a meeting last year.”
Can’t have a peace monger ruining the Malevolent Media’s “Great War”. Peace doesn’t sell papers, or get the working man killed so they can’t stand up and throw off the Corporate Lords and Masters.
In the real world, it would be for sure a foot in mouth for the current W.H.O., trying to explain to teenager who sees further than than all the Generals with their long range drone cameras, that “no really we have to kill the bad guys” because they terrify all the big “panty waist, Chicken Hawks”.
The comedian Kumail Nanjiana pointed out that Malala’s mention of drone strikes changed her from a proud, independent woman to a cute little girl. In the recent New York Times coverage they did mention drone strikes but not any of Malala’s opinions on them. Most of the criticism of the US policies was devoted to the conspiracy theory that she was a CIA agent. That theory in and of itself is probably a symptom of people tired of war, and I figure that’s why Malala preaches non-violence. She sees there’s a cause and effect where the hawks don’t.
This was also a failure to report on her support for socialism and opposition to capitalism, except on Democracy Now.
One peace prize winner to another, bombing is a great way to solve problems.
Obama, a Peace Nobel prize winner, is doing with his silent wars what GW Bush did with his declared wars, at the expense of innocents in other countries, and at the expense of our tax dollars all directed to benefit some big corporations.
what a waste of money and morals .
It is interesting that Malala seems not to have criticized drone warfare for its direct killing of civilians–she admits the drones kill terrorists, but then says this induces terrorism. This is a bit of a cop-out.
Whether Isis is fueled by drone attacks or not, I don’t know. She certainly knows the scene in Pakistan. I’ve bee thinking about the forms terrorism takes for the last three years. Your readers might enjoy this fictional take on a subject on everyone’s mind today.
Jihad in America travels on the wind.
While a nuclear terrorist attack is unlikely, in a bioterror epidemic, the genetically engineered plague is invisible. Our borders are vulnerable, and metal detectors are useless, even as ISIS, the Islamic State, raises its menacing black flag in Syria and Iraq.
What if the government is helpless, gridlocked in perpetual party conflict and rancor?
BEYOND TERRORISM: SURVIVAL is the fictional story of two unlikely strangers who found a way to survive the apocalypse, the most deadly terrorist attack in history.
Read a sample on my website: http://www.sanmiguelallendebooks.com/beyondterrorism.html
goood