September 11 Terrorist Attacks on the United States - Research Paper Example

?September 11 Terrorist Attacks on the United s Introduction: The September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in the United States is one of the worst terrorist attacks ever in the human history. It has resulted in thousands of deaths and billions of Dollars losses. These sever attacks have led the world to pay attention to the growing phenomenon of world terrorism, in an attempt to analyze its reasons and prevent its causes. However, the United States is not the only country, which has been impacted negatively by the September 11 attacks. Rather, they have left their undesirable harmful effects on a lot of countries around the world. In fact, it would not be an over exaggeration to say there is hardly any country that has not impacted by these attacks in one way or another. Pre September 11 Attacks: After the collapse of socialism and the remaining of capitalism as the only political and economic power in the world, several theories emerged in an attempt to predict the kind of conflict that may emerge in the future. The end of History and the clash of civilizations are among the various theories that tried to put a framework for international relationships in the future. Francis Fukuama was the first political analyst to coin the phrase "End of History," in his article that bore the same name and published in 1989. In that article, Fukuyama argued that there is a remarkable contemporary achievement concerning the legitimacy of liberal democracy, constituting a system of government. This system, which had emerged in the eighties throughout the world, replaced all other known ideologies like hereditary monarchy, fascism. Accordingly, Fukuyama proposed that liberal democracy may constitute the "end point of mankind's ideological evolution." Thus, he explicitly introduced liberal democracy to be the final and most ideal form of human government, which human minds can not think of any better form of government. This leads him to think that this current status and ideologies marks the "end of history." That's because this form of government is free from any defects, unlike previous ideologies, which were characterized by various defects and irrationalities that led to their eventual collapse. Consequently, Francis Fukuyama argued that 1989 represented the triumph of market capitalism and liberal democratic ideology. Since then, market power was set to become the modernization project of choice for all countries of the world. So, the future of the international system, according to Fukuyama and many other political analysts, was to be characterized by the gradual democratization of market-democratic institutions, policies, values and culture. Liberal institutionalism would replace international anarchy by the international rule of law. Thus, it is believed that "the ‘End of History’ paradigm was upon us; the triumph of Western-style modernity was set to create one universal world civilization" (Herd, Graeme P. & Martin, Weber). In our contemporary world, it is obvious that the world market has fully dominated the role of the state in most countries of the world. There have been many economic and political analysts who believe that states are loosing their traditional roles in the face of the growing international market. An example of these economists is Herman M. Schwartz. Drawing on an assessment of the historical evolution of the world economy, Schwartz shows how the 21st century world has come to resemble the late 19th century, in which markets typically overwhelmed state policies, more than the mid-20th century in which states were often able to control or contain markets (Strange). In that sense, globalization has been playing a major role in this transformation process from state-based markets into free ones. Schwartz shows that globalization is a much more complicated term and more multi-faceted phenomenon than its current protagonists generally argue. He also believes that globalization provides a clear account of the complex interdependence of modern states and modern markets (Strange). The September 11 Attacks: On September 11, 2001, nineteen terrorists went on board of four planes and executed a set of attacks on the two buildings of the World trade center and the Pentagon, while the fourth plane crashed in Pennsylvania. This incident exposed two important facts about the performance of the American administration and the FBI. Starting by the failure of the FBI, it is largely condemned for not being able to expect the occurrence of these attacks. Several revelations and whistle-blowing cases have been made to comment about the failure of the FBI in dealing with these attacks. An example of a whistle-blowing case that raises an important issue and touches a high-rank organization is the case of Coleen Rowley, the lawyer who wrote a memorandum to the FBI Director in 2002, raising questions about how the agency handled the investigation with Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged terrorist, during and after the September 11 attacks in 2001. Rowley's case is an example of a successful whistle-blowing because it elevates the ethical and social standards of the society over one's own benefits, even if the results of the case are not a complete success. As a whistle-blower, Coleen Rowley aimed at exposing some defects in the performance of the FBI in order to analyze some reasons why the United States was not ready to face tragedies such that of September 11. In that case, whistle-blowing was the only non-violent mean, through which truth is revealed about an important matter that not only concerns the FBI, but the whole nation. After the deadly attacks of the terrorists on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, wide investigations had been conducted in order to expose those who are partly responsible for not being able to stop or even predict such a violent act prior to its existence. Finding most of the US officials trying to convince the public that they had exerted every possible effort to protect their nations from terrorism, Rowley tried to reveal some hidden facts about the inability of FBI agents to predict this terrorist act despite the availability of some evidences about possible attacks using airplanes (Westervelt). Consequently, Rowley felt that it was unethical to remain silent about facts that she knew and that can expose the ill-performance of some FBI officials. As a result, in her 13-page memo to the FBI manager, she expressed her concerns about the inability of the FBI to warn the American administration of the terrorist acts despite the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui, who was accused of preparing airplanes attacks in August 2001. Thus, the whistle-blowing case here is completely ethical because it reveals hidden facts and enlightens the public about some important matters that are related to the security standards in the United States. The success of the whistle-blowing case here is embodied in the attempt to enlighten the public about the ill-performance of one of the highest organizations in the United States, which the FBI, for the purpose of improving its performance and prevent possible sudden tragedies in the future. Turing to expose the failure of the succeeding American administrations during the last three decades, it should be noted that the September 11 attacks were caused partly by the Americans themselves. The Americans were the ones who used to provide help and support to Bin Laden when he was fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Surprisingly, the United States, which is now the number one nation suffering from Bin Laden’s terrorism, played a big role in strengthening and supporting Bin Laden at his early days in Afghanistan. The aim of the United States, at that time, was to win the last stage of the cold war with the Soviet Union, the second world Super Power at that time. Thus, the Americans at that time had the same goals as bin Laden and the Afghani militants, referred to as the mujahedin. Their shared goal was to get the Soviet troops out from Afghanistan. Ironically, Bin Laden and his people get many forms of support and aids from the United States at that time, including, money, armament, and tanks. The tragedy then reaches its climax when Bin Laden, who was supported by the USA at one point of time, turns completely against it. The estimated high tech American weapons, including “stinger” anti-aircraft missiles, given to Bin Laden in the past, are reported to be used against the American forces themselves in the U.S. war against terrorism in Afghanistan last year. (http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/orgdet.cfm?orgid=74) Toward the end of the war in Afghanistan, bin Laden formed Al-Qa'ida to continue the work of the Jihad in 1988. This was a major shift in bin Laden’s strategy, as he turned his attention to carrying the war to other countries in the world, under the name of defending Islam. Al-Qa'ida turns its support to Muslim fighters in other countries, such as Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kosovo. In the course of its new shift in strategy and principles, Al- Qa'ida started to train members of terrorist organizations from such diverse countries as the Philippines, Egypt, Algeria, and Eritrea. As many as 10,000 Arabs received heavy training in Afghanistan. Of these, nearly half were Saudis, with others including more than 3000 Algerians, 2000 Egyptians, and hundreds of others from Yemen, Sudan, Pakistan, Syria and other Muslim states. Thus, the circle of Bin Ladin’s enemies started to get bigger and bigger to include Arab regimes, and, above all, the United States, which he sees as taking over the Muslim holy sites of Mecca and Medina, and supporting the Jews in their conquest of Palestine. In almost all bin Ladin’s public statements and declarations in videos, interviews, and newspapers, he reiterates his main strategic goal, which is the expulsion of the American military and civilian presence from Saudi Arabia and the whole Gulf region; and the support of any fundamentalist group or organization in any Arab or Islamic country, seeking the overthrowing of regimes, whom he sees “heretic”. Therefore, the United States became the biggest enemy for Al-Qa’ida and Bin Laden and the number one target for his terrorist attacks. The first relatively big suicide terrorist attack against the United States was the bombing of its two embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. Yet, it is still the recent September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center which is considered the ever biggest and most influential from the point of view of the scope of participants, the method of operation, and the number of victims (Yoram Schweitzer ). Post September 11 Attacks: Yet, among those affected by the September 11 attacks on the United States, the Arab and Moslem world have got the worst impacts. First of all, the image of Islam and Muslims has been distorted a lot by these attacks. Also, some countries have experienced severe downfalls in their economy as a result of the attacks. Yemen, as well as many Arab and Moslem countries are among those countries, which has been impacted negatively by the September 11 attacks. The attacks on the US in 2001 have affected the US relations with almost all countries of the world. Apart from the decisions to tighten the measures practiced to allow foreigners to visit the United States, it has changed its foreign relations with many individual countries. For example, “there has been increasing attention on Yemen as the possible next major focus in the U.S. campaign against terrorism” (Zunes). The September 11 attacks have many consequences on the political and economic arenas. These attacks have changed the relationship between the United States and the Arab and Islamic worlds. First of all, the United States started to pay attention to the Arab world in an attempt to change the political regimes that do not serve the American interest in the region. One of the American initiatives in the Arab world is the releasing of the US-Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), which aimed at fighting terrorism indirectly by implanting democracy in the region. Among the list of goals that are declared by the US for releasing the MEPI, terrorism comes as a key issue. According to Jeremy M. Sharp, Middle East Policy Analyst, the MEPI is "a program designed to promote political, economic, and educational development in the Middle East." As declared by Former Secretary of States, Colin L. Powel, the main goals of the US policy in the Middle East include "winning the war on terrorism, disarming Iraq, and bringing the Arab-Israeli conflict to an end." In that sense, the United States is actually aiming at overcoming the challenges that affect their national interest in the Middle Eastern region. In order to overcome these challenges, the US exerts efforts to make radical changes in the Middle Eastern region. From the American point of view, terrorism can not be achieved unless Middle Eastern countries lead a successful development process, to which democracy, free markets, and technology revolution are three key principles. Thus, in deciding to release the MEPI, the US wanted to win the war over terrorism and change the current prevailing spirit of anti-Americanism in the Middle East. That's why Powel described the MEPI, as "a bridge between the United States and the Middle East…..an initiative that spans the hope gap with energy, ideas, and funding." In that sense, financial aid is used by the United States to reach a wider goal of a strong ties and good relations with the Middle East. While the United States, through the MEPI, offers financial aids to many of its allies in the United States, it on the other hand calls for a deep change in the way Arab political leaders manage their countries. For example, the American administration repeatedly sends a strong message to Arab leaders that open political systems are a prerequisite for successful open economies in the Middle East. That is, political reform should precede or accompany economic reform (Powel). Also, according to the American administration, empowerment of women and girls is an important key element in the U.S.-Middle East Partnership Initiative. Although the American administration, through the MEPI, promotes positive values in the Middle East, its goal of strengthening the ties with the Middle Eastern people is still hard to achieve due to the current failure of the United States to lead a successful war on terrorism. The American administration believes that Moslem and Arab leaders should find a way in order for democracy and Islamic theology to coexist in the Middle Eastern and Arab countries, where Islam is the dominant religion. So, the American administration wanted to implement its theory about the best way to achieve a state of coexistence between Islamic devotion and democracy is to better the social and economic conditions of Arab citizens. To achieve this goal, the Americans have released the MEPI, which is designed by the Bush Administration to "unleash the private sector, empower civil society and foster democracy in the Near East and North Africa" (Moore and Schrank). So, the main aim of this initiative is not just to give financial aids to Arab regimes; rather, the Americans wanted to make sure that these financial aids are to be used in improving the conditions of their citizens by spreading concepts of democracy, freedom of expression, and tolerance. In that sense, the MEPI’s economic and social programs are designed to "foster modernization, reform, and development over the long term. Change may not occur overnight and will require patience and persistence from U.S. policymakers for many years to come" (Sharp). However, the main challenge for the American administration is whether to give this financial aid to the Middle East conditionally or unconditionally. According to Pete W. Moore and Andrew Schrank, in their article which is entitled “Commerce and Conflict: U.S. Effort to Counter Terrorism with Trade May Backfire,” both conditional and unconditional financial aids could have problems. If this aid is given conditionally, "they risk igniting a nationalist, anti American, and quite possible an Islamist backlash – particularly if the conditions are perceived to benefit the United States or Israel rather than Arab firms, investors, and citizens" (Moore and Schrank). On the other hand, if the aid is offered unconditionally, it would probably serve the elite, and ignoring the poor and needy people. Thus, the American administration has to deal with the issue of the financial aids sensitively in order not to lead to negative results that are opposite to what is intended by the American administration. Works Cited Fukuyama, Francis. "The End of History." 1992. Moore, Pete W. and Schrank, Andrew. “Commerce and Conflict: U.S. Effort to Counter Terrorism with Trade May Backfire.” Middle East Policy. Fall 2003. Vol. 10 Issue 3: 112-120. Powell, Colin L. “The U.S.-Middle East Partnership Initiative: Building Hope in the Years Ahead.” DISAM Journal of International Security Assistance. Management. Fall/Winter 2003. Vol. 25 Issue 1 & 2: 65 (continued). Schweitzer, Yoram. "Suicide Terrorism and the September 11 Attacks."02 Dec. 2011. Sharp, Jeremy M. 'The Middle East Partnership Initiative: An Overview." 08 Feb. 2005. 01 Dec. 2011. Strange, Susan. "The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy." Cambridge University Press. 1997 Ware, Michael. "The New Rules of Engagement." The Time Magazine. 04 Dec. 2005. 01 Dec. 2011. Westervelt, Rob. "Blowing the Whistle: Experts Examine Challenges that Whistleblowers Face." Center for Business and Government. Harvard Gazette Archives. 01 May 2003. 03 Dec. 2011. Zunes, Stephen. “Yemen, the United States, and Al-Qaida.” Foreign Policy in Focus. 19 Dec. 2001. 02 Dec. 2011. Read More