Print
Email
Share
Cite
[Note: A transcript of this meeting is unavailable. The discussion is summarized below.]
This general meeting focused on the events leading to and the aftermath of the World Trade Center tragedy on September 11th. The speakers and participants at this meeting specifically addressed how the U.S. might have avoided the tragedy, and assessed the efficacy of its subsequent domestic and foreign response.
Prior to September 11th, the U.S. seemed to be in a "bubble" of contentedness and economic security. In light of fairly recent terrorist attacks (the embassy bombings in Africa, the Cole bombing and the first World Trade Center bombing), it seemed odd that Americans, as a whole, were not more concerned about future attacks.
Brian Jenkins discussed the difficulties of picking up the clues that appeared meaningless prior to September 11th--clues which seem, in retrospect, so obvious. He also addressed the problems of gathering intelligence in the U.S., which include the debate about recruiting "suspect" sources for intelligence sources; domestic restrictions on intelligence activities; budgetary restraints;lack of inter-agency cooperation, and others. Overall, according to Jenkins, the organizations and agencies who deal with these issues on the front lines are not organized to work together well.
Michael Doran stated that the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is an important dimension to the tragedy. He also noted that oftentimes, anti-American fervor in the region is fueled more by pre-existing problems within their own societies than by American actions.
Stephen Flynn brought to light the economically disastrous shutdown of U.S. borders after the W.T.C. tragedy. He also described the need for substantive change for the frontline agencies such as Customs, Immigration and the Coast Guard. Those agencies must be better linked with National Security offices if they are to prevent another attack. He also stated that because of the technological advances of the 21st century,the attacks of September 11th could be replicated. He also noted that people with anti-American sentiments may be inspired by the 9/11 attacks' success to carry out such acts again.
Fareed Zakaria voiced the need for the U.S. to form a different type of relationship with various countries around the world. He stressed that the what seemed to be a central paradigm of U.S. foreign policy -- "if you can't transform the world, then disengage"--should be abandoned. He also emphasized the importance of the U.S. traveling the middle road, and becoming better at negotiations with countries that can help with the war on terrorism, e.g. Germany and France.
Other issues raised included:
- The fact that Osama bin Laden used the openness of globalization to exploit one of its major features -- that small players can unsettle big players.
- America's relationship with Israel and its inclusion on bin Laden's list of grievances against the U.S.
- The perception that the U.S. is not concerned about Arab/Muslim suffering in the Middle East.
- Oil consumption and U.S. reliance on Middle Eastern oil.
- The possibility of the administration taking advantage of the current situationto withdraw from the ABM treaty with Russia, to infringe on civil liberties and to bring government into the personal lives of citizens and other residing in the U.S.
- The impact that military action will have in the U.S. and in Afghanistan and whether anything will change for the better.
- The need for better preparation, organization, and response to threats and/or attacks on the homeland; Americans should be cautious of being lulled into another false sense of security.
