Terrorist Attacks of 911 and

¶ … terrorist attacks of 911 and subsequent attacks can be understood through a careful consideration of the four levels of analysis of international relations. The individual level of analysis allows us to better understand George W. Bush's reactions, while the domestic level of analysis provides an explanation for the country's lack of preparedness for 9-11. At the interstate level, the interaction of the United States with Islamic states and Israel can be linked to the terrorist actions.

At a global level, gaps in wealth and technology can be seen to contribute to the terrorist attacks. Overall, the global level provides the most useful understanding of the attacks, although a simultaneous analysis of all four levels reveals a more complete understanding. The Four Levels of Analysis The four levels of analysis in international relations provide different explanations for events in the sphere of international relations.

These four levels of analysis (individual, domestic, interstate, and global) can operate simultaneously and independently to help us make sense of our world on a number of different levels (Goldstein). As such, these levels of analysis can provide a useful understanding of terrorism. A review of the issue of terrorism at the individual, domestic, interstate, and global levels can help observers better understand this complex issue. Individual At the individual level of analysis, the focus is on people.

As such, understanding of world events is done specifically with the impact upon the individual person. As such, understanding how people react individually provides information on events within international relations. One key assumption at this level of analysis is that the actions of individuals determine policy (Goldstein). In terms of the terrorist attacks of 911 and subsequent terrorist attacks, the individual level of analysis focuses on the reactions of individuals to these events.

Certainly, Rabbie (1991) argues that an understanding of individual personality is important in understanding how our responses to terrorism are shaped. At the individual level of analysis, an examination of both political leaders like George W. Bush can be useful. George W. Bush has been described as an individual who is outgoing, likable, and adventurous, with a tendency towards shallowness. These characteristics these have been said to "predispose him to impulsive decision-making based on an inadequate, superficial understanding of the issues at stake" (Jipson and Immelman).

Further, Bush "may not keep himself as thoroughly informed as he should (for example, by reading briefings or background reports), may force decisions to be made prematurely" (Jipson and Immelman). Certainly, many of Bush's critics have characterized Bush is international policies regarding terrorism as based upon a lack of preparedness and premature decision-making.

For example, the Bush administration's former counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke noted to an independent commission investigating the attacks of September 11th that the Bush's administration had not heeded his calls for high-level meeting, and give low parity of warnings about a terrorist threat from al-Qaeda (MSN Encarta). Domestic The domestic level of analysis looks at international relations through the lands of a specific, individual country. This analysis is interested in the characteristics of a specific country, and how these characteristics lead to specific actions.

At this level, it is essentially assumed that individual states are important actors on the international stage. Thus, understanding how an individual state determines policy provides an understanding of the workings of international events (Goldstein). The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and subsequent can be understood by looking at the United States at a domestic level of analysis.

At this level, it can be argued the failure of the United States to recognize growing Islamic fundamentalism and hatred of the West played a large part in the occurrence of the terrorist attacks. Specifically, the actions of the FBI, CIA, and the American government may have played a role in America's lack of preparedness for surge and terrorist actions (Posner). Interstate At the interstate level, international relationships are viewed through the interactions of states with each other.

In this level of analysis, policy can be understood through the often that reciprocal relationships between individual countries (Goldstein). At this level of analysis, the terrorist attacks can be understood within the context of the interactions of individual states. Specifically, the interaction of the United States with Islamic states and Israel can be seen as linked to terrorist acts.

Writes Posner, "how could America support the terror state of Israel, he asked, and then cry foul when the underpowered struck back?" Global The global level is a worldview approach to the analysis of international relations. The social, economic, and political structure of the world whole is seen as the strongest influence on international relations. This worldwide structure thereby influences the individual policies of international actors and individual countries. As such, an understanding the structure and function of this international system provides an understanding of the workings of international relationships.

The global level of analysis looks at the global gap in wealth among nations of the world, and technological change (Goldstein). The terrorist attacks of 9-11 and later can be understood within this global framework. Today, huge inequalities in wealth exist among the nations of the world (Goldstein). This global gap in wealth between nations like the United States and Islamic states can be seen to have fueled anti-American sentiment.

Interestingly, globalization and the world's increasingly mobile population may have also played a role in allowing terrorist access to the World Trade Center buildings (Posner). Overall, it is this global level of analysis that seems to best facilitate understanding of the crisis. The global view provides some answers to the reactions of shock and disbelief that segments of the world could hate America so much that they would commit the.