The Years Since 9/11: A Lost Decade

The Years Since 9/11: A Lost Decade

In the aftermath of that terrible day, we had a chance to build our politics around social solidarity. Instead, George W. Bush led the charge to a politics of fear.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Ten years have passed, and there is still much to grieve about September 11, 2001. There are the lives that were lost that terrifying and tragic day: the 2,977 victims in the towers and the Pentagon and on the planes; and the 415 law enforcement officers and firefighters killed, public workers who were justly celebrated at the time as heroes—an impulse we would do well to remember today, as their counterparts are pilloried as pension gluttons and public service is casually denigrated as government bloat.

Lost, too, was the chance for a politics built around the kind of social solidarity embodied by those first responders and expressed by the society so moved by their sacrifice. Instead, thanks largely to the administration of George W. Bush, we got a politics of fear that helped launch a long “war on terror,” which in turn gave us a lost decade of American life.

If that sounds melodramatic, consider a few figures: 4,442 American soldiers dead in Iraq, 1,584 in Afghanistan. As of March, $1.25 trillion spent to destroy and then fail to rebuild and stabilize those countries, a cost that has crippled our capacity to respond to an economic crisis that has devastated the American working and middle classes and reverberated throughout the world. Weighing on our collective conscience, also, are hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, tens of thousands of dead Afghans, millions displaced—the overwhelming majority of whom had nothing to do with Al Qaeda’s heinous crimes on 9/11. To this, add a legacy of distrust, anger and grievance against the United States that will persist for years to come.

To salvage something from this lost decade, we should at least try to draw the right lessons from it.

First, although some measures to guard against acts of terrorism and to destroy Al Qaeda were of course necessary, our large-scale military efforts have been, at best, largely irrelevant to the goals of achieving justice and keeping us safe. Osama bin Laden, like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, head of Al Qaeda operations, was hiding not in some contested part of Pakistan directly ensnared in the Afghan War but in the heart of that country, in bin Laden’s case just thirty-five miles north of Islamabad, steps from Pakistan’s top military academy. The lesson here is that we do not have a military threat that requires us to defend the Karzai government in Afghanistan but a political challenge that lies in getting the Pakistani authorities to cooperate in curtailing the activities of violent Islamist groups. In this regard, the war in Afghanistan long ago became counterproductive.

Second, we have not so much won in the “war on terror” as Al Qaeda has lost because its extremist ideology has little if any appeal to Arab and Muslim societies, especially to the new generation in Egypt and Tunisia that has taken to the streets for democracy, jobs and justice.

Third, our greatest defense against terrorism has been our democratic institutions and our tradition of religious and ethnic tolerance. At times over the past decade, as with the passage of the Patriot Act, we have seen those institutions and ideals compromised.

President Obama was elected in part because he appealed to our better post-9/11 selves—the selves personified by the first responders. He promised to respect civil liberties not only because it would keep us safe—“There are no shortcuts to protecting America,” he said—but because it is right. That is something else to grieve: as David Shipler observes in this issue, President Obama may have come too soon in the historical cycle to fulfill his own promise.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x