Become a Member
Opinion

Actually, terrorists don’t need nice obituaries

Why can’t Western media call Nasrallah the monster that he was?

September 30, 2024 17:31
2175000359
Iranian women hold pictures of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in an Israeli air strike on Beirut's southern suburbs on September 27, during an anti-Israel protest in Palestine Square in Tehran on September 30, 2024. (Photo by ATTA KENARE / AFP) (Photo by ATTA KENARE/AFP via Getty Images)
3 min read

It is over 2,500 years since Chilon of Sparta uttered the immortal words: “de mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est” – which translates as "of the dead, nothing but good is to be said” – and it’s fair to say his words have stood the test of time. How often do we brush over the indiscretions of the deceased to save their memory?

When we mourn, we create a version of the dead that is somehow not quite who they were, but is airbrushed to fit the story we want to tell about them. If they were sometimes mean or didn’t settle their debts, we don’t hold them accountable at their funeral.

But, should this convention really apply to terrorist leaders? In many of the obituaries of Hassan Nasrallah, the deceased former leader of Hezbollah which were published in the British and American papers over the weekend, he received the same treatment.

In Saturday’s FT, it was noted that the ‘charismatic’ Nasrallah – who was eliminated on Friday by an Israeli strike on Hezbollah’s subterranean headquarters in Beirut – was described as ‘courteous, perceptive and funny’ by those who met him in recent years. For readers who are still unsure what to make of the man, the following paragraph rather charmingly reveals: ‘a life-long speech impediment, which left him unable to pronounce his Rs, was widely viewed as disarming.’ Cute. (And surely the perfect plotline for a follow up to 2010’s box office hit The King’s Speech. The Terrorist’s Tongue, anyone?)