Political Science - Federal Political

Political Science - Federal

Political Science

In what ways did the events of 9/11 and the measures taken as a result of the tragedy affect the way in which America viewed itself in terms of its own might, its ability to secure its own citizens and detect new kinds of enemies?

Prior to the bloody and vicious attacks against the United States on that bright September morning in 2001 the American self-view of superiority, might and some may even say invincibility, were as solid and as unshakable as the World Trade Towers themselves. Americans saw their own might in the context of previous victories during the prior century and in the light that that was naturally cast by the sole super power in the world. Hence, the Americans viewed their own status as nearly incapable of being challenged let alone defeated. Symptomatic of this self-aggrandizing view was the almost complete ignorance and utter lack of understanding regarding the hate that was directed at the West and in particular directed at the United States. Indeed, the sleeping giant seemed wholly unaware of the growing anger and resentment toward the country. However, with the destruction of the Twin Towers and the resulting actions that were taken after the terrible events of that day, it has been incumbent on the American people to compulsorily revaluate themselves and to make serious changes in the way the nation viewed its own levels of strength that had clearly been at least partially complicit in facilitating the terrorist attacks against the U.S.

In order to understand how and why these events changed the views of the American people it is necessary to provide a clear structure of what factors led to the American view of its own dominance. This revelation will provide the background necessary for understanding how and why America had come to believe in its own might and shed some light on what might be the possible vulnerabilities that the terrorists exploited enabling them to carry out their plot. Once that framework is established it is useful to examine in which ways the attacks challenged the prevailing beliefs that America had developed and chipped away at the self-image of the country causing it to begin a metamorphosis. It is worthy of note that this metamorphosis is not complete but is well underway. To understand how both the self-image and the way in which the attacks changed that self-image and have had a lasting impact on the U.S., it is useful to examine some of the changes that have taken place post 9/11 and to discuss how those changes affected a more modest and humble self-view of the United States.

American Dominance

America's view of itself as virtually impervious to attack was not developed without merit or out of simple arrogance. "[P]opular stories of American culture produce a mythology that helps shape subsequent behavior...which continues in movies, television, comics, and video games, and the ideals of both democracy and the Judeo-Christian tradition."

Instead of being unworthily arrogant or of being guilty of megalomania, the nation had a long and prestigious track record of major accomplishments that allowed the United States to almost ignore its failures which were present in the nation's history. To be sure, the U.S. had suffered defeats in Korea and in Vietnam against substantially inferior military opponents which in the minds of some should have had a dampening effect on the nation's view of itself in terms security. However, the victories that had been achieved previous to Vietnam and Korea and the victories that came after those wars simply cast an eclipsing shadow over the losing efforts and prevented the Americans from keeping their might in the proper context.

America prior to 9/11 and indeed subsequent to 9/11 remains the world's only superpower. This status has been achieved through continuous effort to build up arms, develop important strategic alliances and through creating the most powerful economic engine in world history. These accomplishments have been possible in part because of what America means. "Americanism, as different people have pointed out, is an 'ism' or ideology in the same way that communism or fascism or liberalism are isms." (Lipset 31) Americanism, however, unlike many other of the dominant isms has served as an explosive force in terms of productivity but has had an unfortunate side effect of creating a sense of overconfidence among those who ascribe to its tenets. As a function of this point-of-view, Americans tended to see things in their own peculiar light which necessarily obstructed their ability to appreciate the events being planned against the country that would change the nation and the world forever on September 11, 2001.

Illustrative of Americanism is the view that many in the U.S. hold with respect to the country's contributions to world history. It is the belief in self-reliance and in American superiority that confirms to its citizens that the U.S. that saved the world from the tyranny of Hitler and Hirohito and without such contributions the rest of the world would certainly have fallen. Americans even refer to those that served in World War II as the "greatest generation" from whom they are the progeny which both acknowledges the important contributions of the individuals that fought but signifies that the greatness has been passed down on a genetic level to the posterity of those soldiers. These events and perceptions of Americans about their contributions on the world stage loomed large in the collective mind of the country prior to 9/11 giving it cause to overlook the failures in Korea and Vietnam and focus more on the nation's next great achievement which would undoubtedly come.

As the victor of the Cold War, the Americans derived an enhanced sense of importance. In fact, the view that Americans held of the mighty Soviet Union helped to further reinforce the image of grandeur that was assumed by the people once the communist empire had been toppled. Thus the fears and exaggerations about the Soviets actually helped the U.S. To construct a greater image of their own power once the Cold War had concluded. Like World War II, the Cold War further established the supremacy of the U.S. At least as far as the nation was concerned and in terms of how secure the country actually was.

With the attack of Saddam Hussein on Kuwait, the Americans had the chance to illustrate global hegemony once again. Memories of the war in Vietnam gave many in the world pause about the outcome of U.S. involvement but in many ways it was essential for the Americans to demonstrate to the world that the war in Vietnam was actually lost as a result of misinformed political gambits rather than as a function of U.S. weakness. Once the U.S. had crushed the Iraqi menace, the self-image of the Americans was unwilling to even entertain suggestions that the nation was anything other than unbeatable.

The combination of these factors created an American security situation that was essentially focused on threats that would come from the sea or more likely from the air. This fostered efforts in the U.S. To protect against encroaching submarines, missiles from rogue nations and other threats that were tied to aggressive states. It did not seem probable that a group of individuals that embraced a specific ideology would present a significant threat to the country and therefore a blind spot for the kind of terrorists that attacked on 9/11 grew more substantial with each passing year.

Attacking the Image

With the attack of the World Trade Towers by the 9/11 hijackers not only were buildings destroyed and lives lost but the very image and prestige of the U.S. was assaulted. "Jet planes pierced and exploded gigantic phallic towers that were icons of a culture (America), of modernism and of globalization, and they likewise pierced and exploded into that nation's military hub." (Stein) No longer could the U.S. proclaim its invulnerability or even its capability to deal with threats in any kind of absolute manner. The nation could not even immediately determine exactly what had happened having been caught so completely off guard that it was unclear who had been responsible for the attack. In many ways, the U.S. seemed to stagger and flail as it recoiled from the attack and showed its embarrassment at having failed to live up to its own self-image. The image of the United States had been struck in multiple ways with the destruction of the chosen targets. Specifically, the image of the U.S. As an economic giant had been battered as not just the buildings fell but so did the value of the U.S. stock market and other related financial indicators. An attack of this nature struck at the heart of Americanism and American dominance and threatened to throw not just the U.S. But the world into recession.

As the great protector of its people, the U.S. government had assumed that the systems it had devised to protect and shield the public from attack were almost impregnable. This should not have been the view that the nation held especially in light of the 1993 attack on the World Trade Towers, the attacks on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996 and the 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen. Each of the attacks had not only killed Americans but should have signaled to the country the woeful lack of ability the nation possessed with respect to identifying potential threats and protecting against them. But the U.S. had not taken the warnings that had been so violently given them by the '93 World Trade Tower bombings, Khobar and Cole incidents but had failed to understand that the enemy that it was fighting wanted to kill as many civilians as possible and would use any means possible. The United States simply could not see that to this new enemy, it was not enough to simply hurt the United States, the enemy sought to devastate the country in every way possible.

In the aftermath of the destruction, the United States came to realize that it had prepared for the wrong war. The Americans had anticipated another conventional war in which enemies with uniforms from specific nations would square off against U.S. military personnel in armed combat. Knowing that they could not compete against the United States in such an effort, the hijackers attacked America's most vulnerable and least protected target. Shockwaves from the planes smashing into the buildings shook the American giant and alerted it that its preparations for war had not only been misplaced but had been completely in vain.

Image Altering Changes

In the months and years that followed the attacks, the Americans went through a number of self-flagellating efforts ostensibly designed to get to the truth behind the intelligence failures and to help prevent such attacks from happening in the future. However, many in the world saw these efforts as ways to affix blame, to salvage an image and to attempt to explain away the events. The U.S. also took steps to implement new methods for monitoring actions, for coordinating intelligence and for working to protect the population more effectively. All of these efforts had a collective negative impact on the self-image of the injured country which was not necessarily harmful but was helpful in that it enabled the country to see past its own bravado.

In response to the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Bush administration proposed the creation of the Department of Homeland Security in order to better coordinate and implement counterterrorist strategy and policy in the United States."

With the creation of such a department the United States was forced to recognize that it had been inadequate with its preparations for security prior to September attacks. This was a difficult paradigm shift that was greeted by initial resistance from the Bush Administration and would have likely been resisted by almost any American administration regardless of party. It should be understood that the creation of such a department, especially one with a cabinet level position was in of itself a humiliation and would naturally result in hesitancy to adopt the measure. However, in the end, no amount of resistance could prevent the White House from complying with public will demanding such action that demonstrated such a grasping, desperate need to feel that the government was taking measures to better protect its citizenry.

Another of the considerable processes that began after the destruction on 9/11 was the formation of the 9/11 Commission. The formation of the commission itself was an admission by the country that mistakes had been made. Whether or not actual important recommendations would or did come out of the commission was of secondary importance and beyond the scope of this analysis. What is important is that the U.S. was forced to acknowledge its own weaknesses and admit to its own failures in a highly public manner. Infallibility and imperviousness that had previously been hallmarks of the U.S. self-image, had been dashed to pieces with the attacks and the formation of the 9/11 Commission simply punctuated the event.

The 9/11 Commission proceedings and the subsequent report issued by the commission was used by both conservatives and liberals in attempts to provide cover for the death and destruction caused by the hijackers. However, the underlying truth revealed that intelligence the which had been assumed to be of such impressive quality had been vastly misinterpreted and security efforts that were esteemed to be of such sterling excellence had failed at almost every point with the possible exception of the capture of Zaccarias Moussaoui (the alleged 20th hijacker) who was arrested prior to boarding the plane. However, the actual arrest had nothing to do with national security per se as Moussaoui was arrested "for visa violations." Both conservatives and liberals pointed to the successes that their groups had made attempting to take credit for events that were often mere chance or simply the work of an individual that was not being guided by any grand plan. But the reality of how the image of America had changed and how the country had been forced to reassess its own self-image was unmistakable.

From the 9/11 Commission the position of National Intelligence Director (NID) was created. The NID "would have greater authority over the national intelligence budget and programs, and over hiring and firing people to head the national intelligence agencies..."

Again, the implication was that America's pride in its own might and security had been misplaced. Another person would be needed to assure that the same incompetence or lack of organization would not permit another event like 9/11 to take place. The politics of such an appointment only increased the level at which the stumbling giant that was America was scrutinized and ridiculed for its failures.

As the world looked at the United States and questioned how the attack was possible, the United States was forced to look back and ask for help. No longer could the Americans assume that any intelligence worthy of acquisition would come from U.S. sources alone. America would have to learn to better cooperate with the world community not just in sharing information but in sharing decision making power. The sentiment and understanding that flooded the U.S. directly following the attacks were spent quickly in the American war in Afghanistan. The United States used massive and crushing power along with the joint forces of more than 40 countries to destroy the Taliban and scatter the forces of al-Qaeda.

However, the next venture of the United States illustrated how the world viewed the new U.S. standing and what the world would demand as the price for the failure on September 11. As the Americans discovered, fighting a war with Iraq without the international support that the nation had enjoyed against Afghanistan would prove significantly more difficult. Further, the manner in which the world reacted to the U.S. insistence on war with Iraq was indicative of the new view of itself that America would have to become accustomed to. No longer would the world be willing to turn a blind eye to the actions of America or provide unthinking allegiance to the actions of the U.S. The tables had turned and the Americans would have to reevaluate the manner in which they conducted foreign-affairs.