Manchester attack: What the papers say

Press show disbelief, anger and
determination after terror attack at Ariana Grande concert

Reaction

The loudest message is one of unity and hope, with The Guardian‘s Owen Jones saying the city’s
response has amply demonstrated that twisted hatred “cannot begin
to match the love and solidarity of Manchester”.

While there are “vultures driven by hatred already
circling over this atrocity”, he says, “let’s emphasise all the
things that unite this diverse society, and reject those who urge
us to do otherwise”.

Mancunians will “rally together” now as they did in the face of
IRA terror 20 years ago, says the Manchester Evening News, adding: “Today, tomorrow,
the next day and beyond, we can show the terrorists who want to
destroy our way of life that they can never win.”

However, the social and political implications of yet
another home-grown terrorist perpetrating an attack on UK soil sit
uneasily with some commentators.

Andrew Roberts in the Daily Telegraph says police and security
services should be applauded for preventing so many plots from
turning into attacks, but argues radicalisation is fundamentally a
cultural phenomenon and the public must demand an end to the
“relentless sectarianism and grievance-mongering which
characterises contemporary British Islamism” and insist on
integration rather than tolerating ethnic and religious separatism
under the guise multiculturalism.

He adds: “British culture and especially history should be
promoted as something of which British Muslims should be
proud.”

Piers Morgan says every sinew in his body “is pulsating with
blind rage,” partly directed at “members of the community from
where this killer came who knew him and did nothing to raise any
alarm bells”, he says in the Daily Mail.

“Candle-lit vigils” and calls for “love to conquer hate”
are laudable, but “none of this will stop more attacks”.

Instead, it is the responsibility of the Muslim community
to “dramatically step up the war on these twisted, deviant minds
abusing their religion”, he argues.

Not so, says Dr HA Hellyer, associate fellow in International
Security Studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London,
in CNN.

He argues demanding unconnected Muslims “do more” to stop
terror is a “paltry” response, an attempt to offload a
responsibility to resist terror which rightly belongs to all of
us.

“They’re not responsible for an outrage they had nothing
to do with, any more than all white people baptised in Protestant
churches had anything to do with Breivik’s murderous rampage in
Norway,” adds the academi.

Terrorism is a part of the word we live in, “but it is our
collective choice as to how we live in that world”.

Indeed, declaring our refusal to live in fear or to compromise
on our values of freedom and tolerance is not merely a wishy-washy
nicety, it is the only way to defeat terror, says Daniel
Finkelstein in The Times.

Terrorists will continue their bloody campaign of violence
as long as they believe it can succeed, he writes, drawing
comparisons to the IRA, who believed they could terrorise the
public and government into giving in to their demands.

“When it became clear that they were losing, they sought
peace,” Finkelstein adds. “The lesson taught by the IRA is that the
way to defeat terrorism is to resist it until it stops.”