The world after the Day After

Edward Gibbons is a good place to start from when we reflect on the fourth anniversary of 9/11 which was visually symbolised by the collapse of the Twin Towers. It will be a sombre reminder at a time when the American ‘empire’ copes with the enormity of the destruction and death caused by Hurricane Katrina, on the one hand, and the detritus of Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond, on the other.

The world has undergone a transformation since 9/11 which had a tectonic effect on perceptions about the very concept of security. The after-effects continue to be felt by both state and civil society the world over. At a conceptual level, what 9/11 did was to negate the tenet that the deployment of credible force was the purview of the state alone. The non-state actor jolted the global consciousness and demonstrated that macro-destruction and related human casualties could now be effected by elusive non-state entities. The fact that the needle of suspicion pointed to the Al-Qaida as a group and the Saudi exile, Osama bin Laden, introduced the element of religious radicalism and the dominant perception of a ‘jihadi’ war against the US-led West. What followed was predictable. The world at large empathised with the bewildered New Yorker and a UN Resolution was unanimously passed condemning the scourge of terrorism. In keeping with the distinctive strategic culture of the US and its own right-wing constituency now in power, the Pentagon used its formidable military capability to bomb the hub of the perpetrators of 9/11 in distant Afghanistan. Thus began the global war on terror and a swift regime change was brought about in Kabul.

However, during the course of 2002, a new front was opened by the US and Iraq was brought on to the radar — by deliberate choice. Much anxiety was generated about the Saddam regime supporting terrorism and seeking to acquire Weapons of Mass Destruction. The world was witness to the US secretary of state making an unprecedented, globally telecast, public powerpoint presentation to the UN Security Council about the need to deal robustly with Baghdad. Information was used to package and heighten the nascent threat that an unchecked Iraq would represent to global stability. And in March 2003, the US launched its war against Iraq — an operation that is still continuing with no neat solution in sight.

In hindsight, it has now been established that there was no serious threat of WMD from Iraq and that the regime, tyrannical as it was, had no record of supporting jihadi terrorism. It was, in fact, among the most secular of Arab states. However the die had been cast, and over the last year plus, the war on terror has become a self-fulfilling prophecy in that popular perception sees it as a war that pits one constituency of Islam against the ‘infidel’ West. Other groups have been emboldened by the 9/11 splinter effect and a non-linear pattern of terrorism now girdles an anxious globe.

In an oxymoronic manner a war that was supposed to contain terror has expanded the gene pool of converts to terror. Empirical data reveals that, globally, there have been twice as many terrorist attacks outside of Iraq in the last three years, as compared to the three that preceded 9/11.

Unpredictable terrorist violence that spares neither children nor women is the HIV of our troubled socio-political landscape. Dire warnings are issued from the ubiquitous global internet and a deep social corrosion has permeated the international body politic. The Other, different from a majoritarian identity either by skin pigment or choice of clothing or worship, is suspect and this is contradictory to the compulsions of globalisation and the diversity it engenders.

However, along with this social corrosion, there is the emergence of the contradictory trend of increasing socio-political resilience. States and society are gradually becoming inured to the very randomness of terrorist related violence. London’s 7/7 experience is a case in point. The stoic Londoner was determined not to let the elusive non-state entity permanently disrupt the rhythms of normalcy and this has been largely successful. But state responses are also becoming more repressive, terrifying and trigger- happy. The image of the famed London bobby, whose tolerance levels were deemed to be a model of state rectitude worthy of emulation, is now tainted.

Four years down the road, the experience of 9/11 and the responses it has generated offer many instructive lessons that merit deep introspection. A certain malignant virus has infected the entire physiology of state and civil society. A more calibrated and nuanced strategy that strengthens the constituency of liberalism and tolerance is called for and hopefully this will crystallise in a coherent manner in the years ahead. Till then we all have to fasten our seat-belts as we travel a roller coaster to the future.

The writer is officiating director, IDSA