Source:Public
Now marks the tenth anniversary of the attacks on the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon. For this reason, the media are paying great attention to this event. In these reports and documentaries there is a strong tendency to present this event as one of those historical moments that changed the future of societies.
Ten years have passed since the aforementioned events and, now, we can analyze their impact more calm down and establish its true historical significance. It is, from what we perceive, an overvalued fact; this usually happens when what happened becomes a symbol. And so it is for the United States, because that changed their way of seeing the world and diminished their sense of security. It was also an attack with great media value, since it was broadcast practically live on television, which helped magnify it. But for the rest of the societies, its value and historical importance was different.
The attacks of September 11, 2001 demonstrated the vulnerability of the United States. They inaugurated a series of attacks on other Western centers - Madrid, London - which increased the feeling of insecurity and that their perpetrators - Islamist terrorism centered around al-Qaeda - could represent a serious threat to the West. There was even talk of confrontation between the Western world and the Islamic world. This perception had two immediate consequences:
- At the domestic level, most governments applied legal measures to restrict rights and increased police surveillance and control mechanisms, all with the aim of preventing other possible attacks.
- At the level of international relations, the reaction of the United States stood out. He immediately embarked on a war against the Taliban regime that ruled Afghanistan and protected al-Qaeda members; the Taliban were removed from power (2001) but the conflict still continues. The clear punitive intent of this conflict, supported by the international community, was diluted with the outbreak of the war against Iraq (2003):a more diffuse conflict that could not be justified with the argument of the fight against terrorism and that no longer had the approval of the UN or much of the international community. In part, this second conflict delegitimized the first because it led to the belief that, in reality, the ultimate intention of the United States was not to punish those responsible for the attacks but to establish a strategy of domination over the Middle East.
The combination of both policies has reduced the threat of Islamist terrorism in the West, although it is still alive in areas such as Pakistan or the Maghreb. In any case, today it seems evident that international terrorism (read al-Qaeda) has not been capable of collapsing the Western world or endangering its political and economic foundations. The spectacular nature of his actions could have served to increase his prestige among certain social layers of Islamic societies or to temporarily frighten the populations of the West, but he never represented a serious threat to the established order.
Thus, we find ourselves with a very important event to explain international relations during the first decade of the 21st century, especially because it helps to explain the actions of the United States as a hegemonic power. But outside this area its importance diminishes.
If we had to choose some events that occurred in this first decade and whose impact may be more relevant to the global historical future, we could cite the following:
- The revolution in information and communication technologies, especially the spread of social networks.
- The economic crisis that began in 2008.
- The Arab revolutions that overthrew some dictatorial regimes in North Africa.
- The rise of new powers like China and India.