The article advances the claim that the September 11 attacks functioned as a strategic 'head‑fake' that redirected U.S. policy and public attention toward counterterrorism and democratization campaigns in the Middle East, at the expense of preparing for rising state adversaries (notably Russia and China). It links early post‑Cold War triumphalism, political psychology, and policy choices under the Bush administration as causes of that misdirection.
— If accepted, this reframing alters how policymakers prioritize defense investments, alliance strategy, and retrospective accountability for two decades of interventions.
Daniel Edward Rosen
2026.09.15
72% relevant
The symposium and the article foreground an argument that the responses to 9/11 (the ‘‘Forever War’’ and domestic security apparatus) became the primary political story rather than the original attacks; that matches the existing idea that 9/11 functioned as an inflection that redirected politics and policy in ways that outlived the original threat.
Robert D. Kaplan
2026.09.07
100% relevant
Kaplan’s central claim and examples: treating 9/11 as a misdirection and citing actors (George W. Bush, Vladimir Putin, Jiang Zemin) and policy consequences (Global War on Terror vs. great‑power neglect).
← Back to all ideas