11 September 2001: diverging narratives

The New York Times retrospectively covers 9/11 as the most traumatic attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor: nearly 3,000 dead, Twin Towers collapse, Pentagon hit, rescue heroism. The paper defends the 'war on terror' as necessary response — Afghanistan, strengthened intelligence, Patriot Act — while acknowledging in comparative reviews Iraq's errors and intervention human cost. The NYT remains the dominant narrative of American national trauma.

Le Monde places 9/11 in an Atlantic yet critical perspective: immediate solidarity with Washington, but questions on Iraq, liberties eroded and Muslim stigmatisation in Europe. The daily recalls Paris sympathy — 'We are all Americans' — then rising French criticism of US unilateralism. Retrospectives stress links to Middle East wars and security populism in Europe.

Al Jazeera covers 9/11 as a human tragedy that opened an era of perpetual wars for the Arab and Muslim world: invasions, drones, torture, Islamophobia. The outlet condemns the attacks while recalling Muslims also died in the towers and millions suffered reprisals — Guantanamo, profiling, Middle East conflicts. Comparative analyses with Hamas or Islamic State show how '9/11' remains a narrative tool used differently by region.

TASS retrospectively approaches 9/11 condemning terrorism firmly while criticising the US response: unlimited wars, interference, weakened international law. The agency recalls Moscow offered help to Washington in 2001, then relations degraded with NATO expansion and Middle East interventions. Comparative analyses stress failure of US operations in Afghanistan and rise of a multipolar order where 'war on terror' lost global legitimacy.

Xinhua presents 9/11 as a tragedy that deeply reshaped world geopolitics — with a distinct Chinese reading: terrorism condemned, sympathy for victims, rejection of military unilateralism. The agency recalls Beijing supported the UN counter-terror resolution while criticising preventive wars and interference. Retrospectives compare 9/11 to other security crises to show international stability requires cooperation, not hegemony.