September 11th as a response to the USA external policy

· INTRODUCTION

************

September 11^th was a day that will stay within our minds for the rest of our lives. There was no bigger symbol of America than the destroyed Towers. When they collapsed they caused an earthquake in the World. The first words of Americans were rather simple « why ? ». « Why do they hate us ? » Then these words were taken up by everyone. They were addressed by President Bush, and other leaders around the World. They appeared in the media...

With constant repetition, these words have lost their original meaning. The need to know has been transformed into reason for retaliation. In fact the question « why do people hate us » ask who did it, and do not ask why. But it has all the same risen suspicions among some Americans who refused to go along with the official line, that is to see America as an innocent victim of an unfriendly country.

In this dissertation entitled « September 11^th , 2001 as a response to the USA' s External Policy », I focus on the USA's so called assigned divine mission to lead the World, and the ways they use to do it. But more than a statement, this sentence examines, in the same way other deeper explanations. This is not a report about 9-11^th , because this criminal event requires an examination of problems that existed before, that is to say problem of relation between America and the rest of the World. That is why I turned my attention to the background of the USA, because it revealed an important part of their feature, and above all, we can't understand the present if we do not know the past. This dissertation is not an hagiography of the USA's strength, on the contrary, it analizes the consequences of the discrepancy between this « hyperpower » and the poorest countries and the relation it sustains with the rest of the world. The point is that some of the worst effects of American power are the result of the best-intention actions. The effects of USA's Policy, past and present on the wider world are the anti-globalization movements, not only in poorest countries but also in Europe as well as in the USA.

If the question of why people hate America is not new, it has acquired a new dimension since the events of 9-11^th . It shed lights on « the burden of the past » (Part I) , particularly on the relation that the Muslims, and Eastern Europe sustain with the USA. « Why do people hate America ? » is a loaded question. It even divides the country. G.W.Bush claims, this hatred is due to jealousy, and other go further and point out the USA's External Policy. Despite the different points of view, people after the attacks were rallying round the flag. Above all these gatherings show that most Americans are simply not aware of the impact of their culture and their Government Policy on the rest of the world. But, more importantly, a vast majority do not believe that America has done, or can do anything wrong. But the fact is that the United States of America is a « hyperpower », a nation so powerful that it affects the lives of people everywhere.

The Americans know they are not a monolithic society. As we will see (Part II), the events of 9-11^th were a major trauma for the Americans. These events explained their will to retaliation. The population backed their President, who was willing to have his revenge. But gradually, the fuel to retaliation lessens. America and some countries reflect upon the only « superpower » of the world. Its history , the consequences of its lifestyle...But above all, most of the Americans as well as other peoples in the world, especially the European countries such as France and Germany want to make peace with war. Hatred, bombing... are no basis for building a secure world. In (Part III), I provide a summary of the consequence of 9-11^th as well as well as a pattern for a possible change, as for instance the coming into pictures of Europe as a new leader...

In this world of violence, only one thing seems to be clear for everybody, except for G.W.Bush : all the countries have the right to exist. There is work to be done within the USA's External Policy in order to change things.

· THE ORIGINS OF THE ATTACKS

************

· Chapter 1 : THE BURDEN OF THE PAST

A) The Manifest Destiny

As a newly built nation, the Americans believed they were the only one to have a « Manifest Destiny »^1(*), which was quite wrong. What singled out the USA from other nations was that they were the only one to have sought to shape the World in their own image.

The newly arrived European immigrants regarded America as a place where they could escape some aspects of their homeland societies, but above all the almost uninhabited land appeared as a place where they could start a new life. America was said to be a « Promised Land », or a « sacred space » selected for divine purposes according to a predetermined plan. When the Settlers gained their independence in 1776 they shaped the new continent with their own values through the Constitution. Among those values was the idea of Democracy. Since about that time they considered themselves as a beacon for the World (especially for Europe) or « a city on a hill that the eyes of all people are upon »^2(*). Those « Americans » were so proud of their country's way of life, that they intended to export it, and impose their standard to countries they considered « undemocratic » or « uncivilized ». But what they intended to do, shed light on the incoherence of their Foreign Policy. In fact, they stressed on their uniqueness, exceptionalism, and will to preserve their isolationism at the same time they claimed to export in the world. Universalism and isolationism are incompatible.

The USA's history of settlement and immigration is a major influence on the character of its Foreign Policy.

Later on, the meaning of the Manifest Destiny was distorted. It became an excuse, first, for continental expansion, and then for a world expansion. The goal of expansion had also changed. At the beginning it was defensive, then it took an aggressive coloration. Since about that time the USA were launched in an unbridled territorial growth. Among their first foe was Spain ; they fought for the control of the Mississippi (1795). The USA, also became at that time a self interested nation.

The end of the Civil War brought about a new expansionist scheme. The USA became increasingly involved in the Far East, for instance in China, that they considered as an important market for the USA's companies. They were also interested in the Pacific Island and more particularly in Hawaï. The United States regarded these islands as vital strategic positions in the Pacific, Mc Kinley even declared that the annexation of these Islands were part of their Manifest Destiny. In (1887) they acquired a naval base there : « Pearl Harbor ». As a strategic position, they could have a look on everything in the vicinity.

The most striking event in the USA's unbridled expansion was their will to conquer the Philippine Islands. For the first time there arose a movement of anti-imperialism or anti-colonialism. Nowadays, the goal of the movements still remains the same, that is to say stopping the USA's aggressions. At the time most of the Americans were cleary opposed to the acquisition and conquest of the Philippines. Most of the anti-imperialists reasoned primarily in terms of moral principles and tradition ; they invoked the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and stressed on the fact that governments derived their powers for the consent of the governed ; moreover, they did not think that American institutions, culture... could suit alien peoples. However, it seemed that the Americans above all feared possible retaliation at home. The opposition was such that Mc Kinley listened to the voice of the people. In those days, the voice of the people seemed to have some value. Now the present American leader G.W.Bush behaves like a dictator. This autocratic management could cost him dear for the next election. He is not at all pragmatic. His own father, was not re-elected because of his participation in the Gulf War.

Unfortunately for our time, O'Sullivan's phrase and above all the anti-imperial movement were superseded in the early 20^th century by F.D.Roosevelt's and Wilson's mainstream. They considered the USA had a duty to lead other peoples. They shunned out the Monroe Doctrine ^3(*), and settled themselves as policemen of the world. Gradually the USA became a huge octopus. But, what is more striking is that American supremacy in the Western hemisphere came to be regarded as self-evident and met little opposition. Now it is too late to stop what some call the « the Great Satan » . However, to cover its crime all over the world, the USA had kept a slight part of the heritage of the Founding Fathers, that is to say their civilizing duty. Thus they provided the poorest countries with some financial help. Before attacks, they even provide their enemies with food (Ex : Afghanistan/ Kuweit...).

Nowadays, two leitmotivs are very common. On the one hand, the Americans wonder why people hate them ; on the other hand, the rest of the World wonders how they can master the USA. A new world order is deeply wished.

If it is unquestionable that the USA's would-be appointed mission to lead the World has deeply shaped American Policy, we must not forget, the other striking element or at least the most important one, that is to say the myth of the conquest of the West, that have given birth to the « cow-boy » and the « western-genre », that is one of the icons of the USA in the World. This period, that is to say the conquest of the West, enables to understand the actual Foreign Policy of the USA. In fact, it had engraved in America inner being, and culture, that violence is the only way to resolve conflicts.

The western arrived in the same time with the Puritans.Very soon after they reached America, those Puritans who were so proud of being unique felt very isolated from the rest of the world and developped a kind of hysteria that was characterized by a deeper feeling of insecurity. The western externalised their fears. They found their resolution in the project of appropriating the land and taming the wilderness. Violence appeared as an enduring necessity to preserve « civilisation ». However, there is no myth without hero. The hero of the time was the cow-boy. A white- man, native of the country, seeking for a land to settle, but above all, it was the mastery of the gun that most characterized him. Besides doing the apology of violence the gun was the only key to open the way for the West and to secure the preservation of the white society. Violence appeared as a medium for the USA regeneration and improvement. The American film theorist Richard Slotkin^4(*) argues that violence was central in each phase of American process of appropriation.

Later on, the American reproduced this violence in their Foreign Policy that became more and more aggressive. But it was with President Ronald Reagan, that American aggression and unbriddled Policy reached its climax. Moreover, it was the era when America globalized the world view of the western as its political outlook on international affairs. President Bush, embodies altogether this era. It is not surprising at all, he has such a behaviour. Just like Reagan, Bush is a « cow-boy ». He comes from Texas, the greatest State of the USA, and the cradle of the cow-boy myth.

O' Sullivan was totally right when in 1845, he foretold a great future for its country, but reading « The great nation futurity » we have not the feeling, that O' Sullivan undermined aggression or violence to reach this great destiny. For him, it was God who led them to America, it was God that would have provided them with their present status of hyperpower. With age O' Sullivan thought grew obselete, and even farfetched. That is why a man like Franklin Delano Roosevelt who is considered as one of the architects of American Empire has decided to handle things and to use more likely means that is to say violence to reach that great destiny. He even stated that « no triumph of peace can equal the armed triumph of war ».

The Manifest Destiny was definitely turned into an excuse for aggression and had totally lost its original meaning. But worse is the manipulation of people. The USA through TV points out some peoples as rogue states. Thus, they can overthow their government and claim to act for the good of humanity. The Afghanistan and Iraq case are the latest striking example.

While the Americans wanted to be a « city on a hill that the eyes of all people are upon » they are now the hill of shame that all people despise, and yet, they go on believing they are a city respected and admired by the whole World. The most striking example is when Americans are asking wky people hate them, President Bush answered « they hate our freedoms, our freedom of religion our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other »^5(*)

Above all the President expressed a kind of nostalgia. Nostalgia of a former grandeur ; nostalgia due to the « loss of innocence », if the USA have ever been innocent. In his address to the people Bush answered in words that recall the aspirations of the first settlers : « America was targeted for attack because we are the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the World. And no one will keeep that light from shining »^6(*).

The leitmotiv question « why do people hate us ? » began to gain ground as the USA began with invasion and murder. The Americans seem to express a feeling of guilt as if they acknoledged that they are not totally innocent.

Violence seems to be deeply embedded in America's consciousness and is the fuel of their Policy. In the following chapter we are going to see how war has shaped not only the USA but also the World.

B) A country built on war

Throughout their history the United States of America have taken part in several wars. Each of them has contributed deeply to make the country what it is today. Most of these conflicts have shaped not only the USA, but also the World.

The first main conflict the USA had to face was an internal one that resulted in the Independence of the country. In those days, Great Britain was one of the main colonial Empires. The British ventured for the first time in America in 1497. All their attempts to settle in the country failed, until 1606 when the British Parliament created the London and Plymouth Virginia Companies, as well as the London Company to promote settlement. It was a great success. The colony was profitable. With time those settlers got used to living in the country. They became Americans. They were no longer British. Despite their success story, they have a deep feeling of alienation. While they wanted to build a new nation, a new world, they were constantly reminded that they were in the « nation's service ». Moreover, they have to pay several heavy taxes. In the decade after 1763, the colonies developped a furious self-assertiveness that would lead to full-scale War of Independence and separation from British rule. Under the Treaty of Paris (1783) the United States of America became a free and united nation.

This war was the first step in the USA building. Before, the USA were a British colony, then they became a nation that could make their own mind. The Declaration of Independence^7(*) (1776) has deeply shaped the Policy of the country. The Declaration stressed on the fact that, it was the right of the USA to fight the countries that prevent the accomplishment of their happiness or liberty.

Then came the first World War (1914-1918) and the second World War ( 1939-1945). Two important landmarks for the World. The USA did not take part either in the first War or in the second, but aggressions on their belongings and above all their « mission to create a new World order » were the fuel that explained their interventions. The two Wars stress on one of the main features of the USA, namely selfish-interest.

The USA did not want to take part in the first war, because they considered it was a European conflict that did not concern America . But at last they realized their economy depended partly on trade with the warring nations. So, to cover their selfish economic interests in taking part in the war and to justify their participation, Wilson, the President at the time provided the famous « Fourteen Points ». It was another way for the USA to take the upper hand on the world control. The essential Fourteen Points can be reduced to three esssential categories. The first was all nation's right to self-determination. This first category stressed on the fact national boundaries were to be redrawn after the war. It was an opportunity for the USA to acquire new territories and export its « American way of life ». The second category stressed on free trade. It was a second opportunity to increase their GNP and above all to colonize the World. With these elements the USA shaped the world at their image, preventing other nations from living as they would like. As Samuel Johnson said : « when all the power are in the hand of a single man, he will sometimes be abused »^8(*). It is totally what the USA have done until today. The remaining Point of the « Fourteen Points » is the proposal for a League of nations that would put self-determination and other principles into effect. In other words, this League is like an impartial judge. Although, all the other Points were cornerstones of America's traditional rhetoric, the League of nations was not. It was quite expected. This League was like a brake for their shadowy scheme.

If the first war did not provide any particular thing to the USA, the second one was quite different. First, Roosevelt in 1941 concocted the Atlantic Charter that gave birth to Breton Woods Institutions (the IMF / Worldbank / U.N came to life in 1945) then, with the victory the USA became the World « Superpower », that is to say the greatest economic and military power of the Planet. The USA have built a global order without realizing it.

Above all, the two wars had shed light on two men : Churchill and F.D.Roosevelt. They embodied the Great Alliance . Today, with 9-11^th the same pattern occur again. Bush and Blair stand by each other. Despite it is two different kinds of war, they expect victory like their forerunners. They are so proud of themselves and nostalgic of that period that some phrases of the first conflict of the 21^th century are drawn from the mouth of Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. For instance, Bush declared : « we will not fail » years before his counterpart declared « we shall not flag or fail » .

Nowadays, the World is not expecting the victory of the USA, or the victory of good against evil, but a new World order.

Last but one come the period from 1946 to the present. During the period known as the Cold War, American Policy makers became convinced that the Soviet Union was fanatically intent on establishing Communist Regime around the world. In 1947, President Truman announced the USA had to prevent Communist expansion anywhere in the world^9(*). It became the corner stone of American Foreign Policy.

More practically this period has speeded USA in their arm reinforcement, and to enforce the national Security Act of 1947. This Department centralized control all over branches of the Military in a new Department of Defense and created the national Security Council (NSC) and the Central Intelligency Agency (CIA). Somehow, this period has many common points with the post 9-11^th . After their failure to foretell, and even to cope with the attacks Bush has created the Homeland Security Department. It recalls in many ways the goal of the national Security Act, that is to say to centralized all the defensive way to be more effective. Then the USA's commitment to internationalism during the Cold War had irreversibly replaced the country's traditional isolationism, hence the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty (NATO) in 1950, and similar mutual Defense Pacts that eventually covered the Globe. After the attack G.W.Bush had gathered around him a worldwide community to cope with the terrorist issue. The USA, only remember that other countries exist only when they are in need. Their knowledge of the surrounding World is such, that early in his election campaign G.W.Bush was embarassed by his inability to name the leaders of several foreign nations.

And at last the Gulf War (1991) and the 9-11^th events (2001). These periods could have been entitled a « continuum ». In fact, in both wars, the Bushes, father and son were at the head of the country ; then the younger Bush surround himself almost practically with the team of his father^10(*) . At last, he seems that he is merely gathering the result of his father's intervention in the Gulf. The 2004 election will be the last stage. Can we expect a similar end ?

This part, once again emphasizes one of the main features of the USA, that is to say, their propensity for violence. The War for Independence (1776) ; the World Wars, the Korean War... Besides having shaped the USA and the World, this conflict were greeted in America as a triumph of armed response. It is the USA's lack of respect for human life that strikes fear and enemity into the hearts of the people the World over. In August 1945, President Truman ordered the dropping of Atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He justified the mass slaughter of civilians by saying the attack would save many other lives, because it would bring the war to a rapid close without any invasion of the Japanese home islands. The use of violence abroad in order to make the World safe and compliant to the American way has been the history of the last half of the 20^th century. All this promotes the strong conviction that America is a nation that has lost, if ever it had, the capacity to respond to any challenge, crisis, dispute, or difference of opinion by negociation , accomodation a serious dialogue. The USA even failed to establish a dialogue with Europe, culturally so close to them. However, they have succeeded in dividing Europe and scapegoated France as the only State responsible for this division because of their refusal to join them.

Violence is such within the USA, that it even destroyed its own people's everyday life. America is not only a nation in which random violence is an everyday occurrence, in which the possibility of being shot for merely nothing is a routine fear of any citizen. It is also a country in which disaffected teenager take their guns to school and shoot people. All these shadowy events are due to an 18^th century law, that allows people to bear arms. The past is present in everyday life of this country. The establishment failed to find any political resolution to the issue of violence at home. So, instead of resolving the problems of others, the Americans should try to resolve theirs.

If America has become a country that can not debate, engage or negociate with itself, can not wrestle with different meanings among people who are all Americans, then what hope is there that it can extend a listening ear or an open mind to the rest of the World ?

· Chapter 2 : WHY DO PEOPLE HATE AMERICA ?

America's rules of the World affects directly and indirectly the lives of every individual, community and nation.

In order to understand why people hate America, let us consider the USA's way of life, economic system, military interventions and at last its policy.

· A)The American way of life

George Ritzer^11(*), argues that American culture has acquired too much power in the process of replicating itself in the rest of the World. He even compares American culture to a virus. In fact there is hardly a place in the World where one can not get a hamburger^12(*). The hamburger is a particular source of hatred of America. It has spread standardisation throughout the world, and places USA's own values on a global pedestal. America even relates to the rest of the World in terms of double standards, hence the reason why America is hated.

American fast-food, music, films infect the culture of other nations, that focus their efforts on imitating the USA's films. This pattern of replication stifles native creativity. The « virus » of American culture and lifestyle replicates so readily because it is founded on a promise of abundance. And given the fact that so many people like their lifestyle, it is no surprise that Americans feel that their way is the best and the only way. People are so blinded by the American that they do not even realize they have lost their free will, they only adapt. Some nations are so bombarded with Americans films, that to survive their film industry starts to ape Hollywood, and their industry almost dies. Our world which is dominated by « free market » is also a world under tutelage of American culture. Some countries like France are determined to protect their culture. In fact, as Claude Ossard^13(*) said « it will be suicidal for France not to protect its cultural products ». But if France has enough power to protect its culture, some countries can not. In a way American-led globalisation seeks to replace other culture with theirs. Of course, there are always exceptions to general rules. The Iranian film industry has thrived largely because Hollywood products are not allowed into the country. In agriculture, José Bové^14(*) is opposed to the practice of feedings hormones to cattle to artificially speed up their growth. The Americans use this practice and flood France as well as other countries with their law price meat. So it cause the bankcruptcy of local agriculture, in fact local produces become marginalised at worst totally suppressed. In general, given the dominance of the USA, local cultures acquire the image of inferiority. In other words, the production of indigenous culture acquires the sense of backwardness. American-led globalisation decimates the cultures of the World, however they resolutely refuse to open their doors to anything foreign. Continued evasion can only result in more hatred abroad and more retaliation at home.

According to Steeve Fuller^15(*), it will be wrong to think American-led globalisation as a form of cultural imperialism. The idea of cultural imperialism implies a much more planned and directed impact on the native culture^16(*). It would mean that people are told or forced to give up their traditional customs and adopt Western ones. However it is not at all that happens, because the people themselves play an important role in the spreading of American culture. To make it clear, Fuller compares the « Mc Donaldisation » of the World to their military strength. In fact their military strength is used to deter foe countries to fight them, while they never forced no one to adopt their way of life. However, Fuller does not acknowledge the proliferation of burgers has had all the same devastating effect on the World. The natives adopt the practices of American culture.

· B) The USA's economic system

Hatred for America is also based on the fact that it prevents other societies from existing as full and free entities, from living as they would wish to do. The USA have simply made it too difficult for other people to exist.

In economic terms, it is quite true. The USA have structured the global economy to pertually enrich themselves and reduce non-Western societies to abject poverty. Free market is merely synonymous with free mobility of American capitals ; expansion of American exports ; free movement of goods and services from America to the rest of the world. Besides all these advantages the US control the international financial institutions such as the IMF ; the World Bank and the WTO. All these powers in the hand of a single country, the USA, contributes to marginalise the less-developped World. The ability of under-developing countries to have some goods has been systematically eroded. Absolute poverty has increased over the past decades, and the gulf between the rich and the poor is now very deep. In a way, we can say that the United State of America is literally taking bread out of the mouths of the people of developing and under-developing world. With all these assets, America does not need the world's institutions to run its foreign economic policies, therefore they did not need the rest of the world to live, and develop a kind of self-sufficiency. In fact, the US take little interest in institutions such as the UNDP^17(*), the UNHCR^18(*)... However, the USA maintain total control on the World Trade Organisation, because it is the major instrument of their imperialism, in fact it removes the obstacles off the way of their own multinational companies, and keep the other countries at arm's length. In a way the World's economy functions largely for the benefit of the USA and the USA-led group of eight countries^19(*). So, the misfortunes of the poorest, are a by-product of the self-interest of the richest. The USA, in fact accumulates the wealth of the world through some manipulations. For instance, the USA « control » the IMF ; this institution grants some countries loans in exchange the IMF asks them to allow Foreign Banks to own more equity in the local banking sector. Through such loan conditions American business ends up wholly or partly the key sectors of economy. The other striking example is Africa. This country was defrauded by the USA. In fact the AGOA^20(*) is supposed to provide African countries with duty and quota-free access for their products to the American market in exchange for certain concessions to the US and its firms. The American government grants access only to those goods that it decides may not negatively affect US producers. In fact, only products using fabric and yarns produced in America will have easy access to the USA market. The requirement for US raw material to be used in their products not only undermines the African countries own domestic raw material industries, but end up them being uncompetitive. American gains real benefits from AGOA, while Africa became poorer. The American so-called generosity is only a « façade » to hide their real features. They want people to think they are good. The principal beneficiary of America's Foreign Assistance Program has always been the USA.

The USA became really unpopular, even in the eyes of the more developed countries when they refused to take part in the Kyoto Protocol ^21(*). Everyone is concerned by Nature, the quality of the athmosphere, of the air, however not the USA. The USA announced that they would not implement the Kyoto protocol, because they conscider it is not the right tool to deal with the ozone layer problem. If the USA refused the Kyoto protocol, it is just because they are the main producer of carbon dioxide. They will not do anything that arms their economy. The USA clearly shows, that their needs are far greater than those of the rest of the world, but even the dangers to the Planet is subordinated to their own desires.

· C) The USA's military interventions

The USA a hyperpower with no equivalent. They consider the world as their belongings. nation States, geographical boundaries, political structures mean nothing for them. They behave as policemen of the Planet. From 1890 to 2001, the USA undertook 134 interventions in the world. The first focus of US intervention was on East Asia (Korea, Vietnam...) ; the second was on Eastern Europe ; the third phase was in Latin America and the fourth phase focused on the Middle East and on west Asia, starting with Palestine and Iran and moved on in the 1990's to Iraq, and at the beginning of the 21^st century to Afghanistan. All their military interventions had negative consequences. In Chile (1973), the USA allegedly toppled Salvador Allende, the democratically elected President, and installed the dictator Augusto Pinochet. Allende was assassinated, and the country was crushed by the dictator. The other striking example is Grenada (1983), where the USA intervened militarily to protect their interests. Innocent citizens of these countries were slaughtered, imprisoned and tortured. Even the former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali^22(*) criticized the USA's military policy. He said that the USA manipulate the world for the benefit of their own interest. He even declared that when it suits the US, they use the UN to seek legitimacy for their actions, to build coalitions and impose sanctions on « rogue states ».

· D) The USA and the worldwide policy

In this world, nothing seems to move without America's involvement. They are the only nation or power that can resolve the political issue in some countries ; without USA ratification, the Kyoto Treaty on carbon dioxide emissions is not worth the paper it is written on ; without an American nod, nothing moves at the WTO or the world Bank, and without America, the UN ceases to be a United Nations Organisation. Howerver, what is striking in American Policy is their incoherence. They are at once judge and jury. It is the display of such standards that has made America a global figure of hate. For instance, USA have imposed sanctions on countries that seek nuclear weapons, and yet they have the world's largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons, and are the only country in the world ever to have used the atomic weapons in war. Moreover, while they force other countries to abandon their nuclear plans, they continue to develop their own programme, developing and designing nukes and restarting nuclear tests ; then the United State of America declared that elections should be free and fair, yet they routinely intervene in the elections of other countries, the US have supposedly perverted elections and interfered with the democratic process of 23 countries to ensure a favourable outcome^23(*). The United State of America demand discipline, while they are undisciplined and undemocratic. Besides, their behaviour is deeply intolerable. At the end of the Gulf War, the USA targeted civilian infrastructures : water treatment, flood-control system... to keep their civilized image the USA removed the civilians casualties from television screens. They also criticize some countries about the management of their resources, while Americans continue to trash their own environment on increasing emissions of global warming gases such as carbon dioxyde.

Through all these examples we realize that the USA, are so self-contained, so self-confident, so proud that they do not really see their real feature, who they are really. It became obvious when Bush called Bin Laden « assassin ». But the people are not totally blind because they call Bush the « butcher ».

· Chapter 3 : THE TURNING POINT

· A) The attacks

September 11^th , 2001 is a day that will remain engraved in the people's minds. Terrorism has struck America before, but never with such heartbreaking destruction.

Four jets were transformed by hijackers into fuel missiles. Two pierced the world Trade Center towers, minutes apart, causing their collapse. Another pierced the Pentagon ; a fourth crashed near Pittsburg in Pennsylvania..

In an incriminating amateur videotape found at a house in Jahalabad, Bin Laden rejoices over the September 11^th attacks and describes in detail how he planned them :

« the brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation, and we asked each of them to go to America but they did not know anything about the operation. We did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes [...] we calculated in advance, the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the Tower. I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and the floors above it only. »

The World Trade Center. A quarter of a mile high, the 110-story world Trade Center towers were the tallest in the world. Designed as huge steel tubes, the Towers were supported by closely spaced, 14-inch steel columns on the exterior aided by steel columns in the central core. Their collapse almost certainly was caused more by the heat generated by thousands of gallons of burning fuel than by the impact of the jetliners.

North Tower :

8 :46 (a.m) :impact

The first plane crashed into the Towers's North face near the 96^th floor. The impact ignited more than 20.000 gallons of jet fuel and scraped away fireproofing insulation on the columns and floor trusses, exposing the steel to temparatures as high as 2.000 degrees Fahrenheit from the burning fuel.

The structural steel above and around the fire began to expand and soften like heated plastic in the intense heat.

10 :28 (a.m) : final moments

The floor pancake, progressively collapsing the Tower from within.

The North Tower stood for 102 minutes. It crumpled to the ground in eight seconds.

South Tower :

9 :03 (a.m) : impact

The second plane slammed into the Tower and blasted a hole through the adjacent side, wiping out many of the supporting columns and leaving the building aflame.

9 :59 (a.m) : final moments 

The Tower crumpled floor by floor.

The Pentagon. Less than an hour after the New-York attack began, terrorists turned a hijacked plane toward the Pentagon, the nation's military headquaters. A fortresslike structure built during World War II of concrete and limestone, the five-story building measures more than 900 feet on a side and houses more than 23.000 employees in five concentric rings of offices.

9 :40 (a.m), the boeing 757, crashes into the Pentagon's lower floors.

Within minutes, the upper-floors collapsed. Some 190 people are believed to be dead.

The White House has been the real target.

7 :30 (p.m) The national Security Agency had picked up at least two electronic intercepts indicating the terrorists had ties to Bin Laden.

· B) The roots of rage.

Grievances over the U.S.A's Policy in the Middle East combined with Islamist triumphalism make a toxic mixture.

The reasons are complex and rooted in history . The proximate source of this brand of hatred toward America is U.S Foreign Policy in the Middle East.

This hatred is also due to another element. That element is the idea that the U.S.A are not just the enemy of the Arabs or even the Muslims but also the enemy of God. It is an idea encouraged by Ayatullah Khomeini who proclaimed the U.S.A « the Great Satan » spread by Islamic extremists throughout the Arab world. Animosity toward the U.S.A in the Middle East can be plotted through concentric circles. In the white-hot core are violent ideologues like Bin Laden, and his acolytes. Then come Arab radicals, including both Islamic fundamentalists and secular nationalists who are desperate and angry enough to have danced in the streets upon hearing the news of September 11^th . But the distaste also extends to large numbers of temperate Arabs who were quietly pleased to see American arrogance taken down a notch.

Certainly the greatest source of Arab displeasure with the U.S.A is their support to Israel politically, economicaly, militarily. To a majority of Arabs, Israel is an oppressor of Arab rights. To Islamic fanatics, including Bin Laden, Israel is a State to be destroyed.

For Bin Laden the real Casus belli is the U.S troops' presence in his country dating to the military build up before the 1991 Gulf war precipitated by Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait. To Bin Laden, as well as many non-radical Muslims, the presence of infidel soldiers in the Homeland of the Prophet Muhammad is a sacrilege. His first goal is to compel U.S.A to withdraw its military forces from its native Saudi Arabia. For Bin Laden the Saudi regime is responsible for their presence.

Another grievance is the fact that the U.S.A have done little to stop Russia's savage war against separatist Muslim in Chechnya.

Many Arabs and Muslims feel they had ten centuries of great cultural achievement that ended with European colonialism. Now they feel impotent. They feel they are under siege from the modern world. The U.S.A symbolize this world. The West, they feel, look at them as backward and is only interested in their oil. Their sense of self-worth and identity is wounded.

Islam is perfect and its practioners have strayed from the fundamentalists of the faith. This notion gained increasing currency after 1979. Khomeini called Muslims to violence to conquer « the land of infidels ».The Egyptian writer Abd al-salam Faray wrote a pamphlet called « The neglected duty » in which he argued that holy war was necessary to defend Muslims' dignity. Bin Laden has come to fulfil the neglected duty. He fancies himself the Muslim commander who liberated Jerusalem from the crusaders. « Islam is the solution » is the slogan of the Islamic movement : it is the triumphalist religious convictions of Bin Laden that make him and his followers so dangerous. Most governments feel threatened by the rise of subnational forces like Al Qaeda^24(*), and must now devise a strategy to deal with this form of religious terrorism.

Beyond the U.S.A's presence in Afghanistan, it is their perception of the world and their self-centredness that is responsible for the events of the attacks of September 11^th . The Manifest Destiny came to encompass the American belief in the U.S.A. Special duty to lead other peoples, they also have the sense that they had a unique mission to set an example for the rest of the world, to export American freedom and democracy ; that sense of mission was applied in the early 20^th to the whole world by Woodrow Wilson. The Americans do not know how to be second, or even first among equals. They only know how to be the best.

The ill-effects of U.S-led globalization, and imbalances in economic development between North and South directly fuel the fires of anti-Americanism, deepens crises in the Muslim World and creates angry young suicide bombers and hijackers willing to lay down their lives to hit the Mecca of capitalism, the World Trade Center. Peaceful reordering and change of economic inequities between have and have not nations is not feasible. Hence, poverty and frustration in the Third world feeds in terrorism. War on terrorism must include a war against poverty

· C)The terrorist movements

Al-Qaeda. Bin Laden ventured into Afghanistan in the early 1980's to fight the Soviets. He helped fund and train a kind of Islamic Foreign Legion, and he learned the ways of guerilla war. Later, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Bin Laden offered his militias to the Saudi defense ; the King invited the U.S.A forces. Enraged at the presence of infidels in Islam Holiest land, Bin Laden turned his wrath on America. With his military experience, and personal fortune, Bin Laden forged an extraordinary network of terrorists, allying himself with groups from Algeria to the Philippines. That network became Al Qaeda.

He built camps inside Afghanistan where thousands have learned the craft of war, as well as Bin Laden own interpretation of Islamic law. One of the principal goals of Al-Qaeda was to drive the U.S.A armed forces out of Saudi arabia, and to overthrow nearly all Muslim governments which are viewed as corrupt to drive Western influence from these countries. On February 1998, he issued a Fatwah stating it is the duty of all Muslims to kill Americans.

Bin Laden married Mohammed Atef's daughter. This wedding was more than the union of two families. It heralded the fusion of two of the world's top terror organizations, Al-Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad. The merger has transformed Al-Qaeda, fostering new discipline among a loose association of terrorist organizations from more than 60 countries. Bin Laden schools his recruits in Mayhem. Its networks span more than 60 countries and are estimated to comprise some 3.000 militants. Here is how Bin Laden recruits and trains Muslims into terrorists :

«-Motivate : rhetoric from Bin Laden supporters at local mosques about world wide persecution of Muslims.

-Audition : network leader meets possible recruit in Pakistan.

-Train : once approved, recruits attend training camp in Afghanistan to learn basic military skills and strategy.

-Educate : gets advanced training at another camp, learns hoax to blend into foreign community.

-Graduate : return to Peshawar for instruction or destination and objectives.

-Sow the seeds : Bin Laden wrote a verse about the U.S.S Cole attacks, « the sight of flying body parts would fill your heart with joy ». The full 100 minutes of propaganda also feature footage of Bin Laden firing the AK-47 and a clip exhorting Muslims to further attacks. « America is much weaker than it seems ». At one point, Bin Laden is grooming his followers for suicide missions : « you will not die needlessly. Your lives are in the hands of God »

-Hit : a coordinator is called in, once a plan is well developped to pull various cells together and implement the attack. »^25(*)

With its attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Al Qaeda proved it can orchestrate spectacularly destructive attacks.

However, Al Qaeda's successes raise a key question : whether this new group gets help from rogue states, such as Iraq. But there is no evidences of Iraq's hand, Al Qaeda is fully capable of wreaking havoc on its own. The terrorist network has several sources of financing :

-Islamic charities : Al-Qaeda gets money from selected charities, mosques, and relief agencies.

-Donations : backers include businessmen, disaffected members of the Saudi Royal Family, and his own relative.

-Criminal activity : the organization earns cash by exorting protection money from wealthy merchants, and running other rackets.

-Front companies : Bin Laden own companies offer cover for operatives by providing them jobs and legitimate identities.

-Family fortune : he uses his fortune, to fund a network of some 3.000 fundamentalist operatives.

The Taliban. The story began in 1979 when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan to prop up a Communist regime. Through the prism of the Cold

War, the U.S.A saw a chance to confront its nuclear rival on the ground. So the U.S.A armed and financed the Mujahedin. The band of holy warriors the U.S.A backed came from the diverse Afghan tribes but also from cadre of Muslim volunteers including Ossama Bin Laden who saw resistance against the Soviets as a God ordered defense of Islam. And they won, sending the demoralize Soviet army home in 1989.

For the U.S.A the Afghan war was over. The American interest in the nation was finished, they have little interest in staying around. The Soviet withdrawal left Afghanistan ruined, with millions of refugees, lawless chaos. In their misery, many Afghans came to blame « the Great Satan betrayal ». They had fought on the front line of America's war ; the Americans had walked away, leaving them with a desolated country, did virtualy nothing to reconstruct Afghanistan. Significant foreign aid never materialized. Then came Omar, preaching at the Mosque in his native village near Kandahar. He put down his Koran to act. Omar says he discovered his destiny in a dream : God was calling him to save his country from the warlords. Now according to The Taliban lore, he gathered together 30 like-minded men. A movement was born determined to establish the laws of God on Earth and prepared to sacrifice everything in pursuit of that goal.The little group, calling itself the Taliban^26(*), literally students of Islam, more poetically seekers of knowledge, set out to bring vigilante justice to the city. Its vow was to bring peace, law and order and « pure » Islam to Afghanistan. Led by Omar the Taliban suscribes to a unique extremist model, based on harsh interpretation of Muslim law and a profound belief in never-ending Jihad. Young men displaced to refugee camps across the border in Pakistan had spent years in the conservative frontier Islamic schools where Pashtu^27(*) speakers memorized the Koran in the Arabic rhetoric of Jihad^28(*). They went home to rally behind the Mullah. The Pakistan connection gave the Taliban the muscle to turn its aspirations for law and order into a quest for national power.

Not every Afghan welcomed the Taliban. The toughened ethnic minorities and religious disenters loosely linked in the Northern Alliance fought them. Until 2002, the Taliban ruled 90 % of Afghan and is still engaged in fierce fighting to capture the rest. Stalled at the gate of Kabul, the Taliban found Bin Laden, who has spent some of his family fortune to finance the anti-Soviet Mujahedin. It was Bin Laden who brought anti-Americanism to the nationalistic Taliban ideology.

The events of September 11^th have forced the U.S.A to take a stand against the Taliban. Washington wants to eradicate that terrorist threat. The event of September 11^th have also uncoupled Pakistan from the Taliban as nothing previously could. In fact, Bush asked Pakistan President's help to hunt down Bin Laden. If they refused, Americans would consider it as betrayal. If he agreed, there would be trouble at home. Many Pakistanis believe Bin Laden is not a terrorist but a warrior of the Islamic faith. However, Omar refused to give up Bin Laden. If he delivered him to the West, he would betray the man who sustained him to power and added that « the Taliban will fight until there is no blood in Afghanistan left to be shed, that would not be just Afghan blood, but American too. »

On October 7^th , 2001, the U.S.A began bombing Taliban military sites. Many of the Talibans most radical leaders and supporters have been killed, taken prisoners, or fled the countryside

Al-Qaeda is different from the Taliban :

Al-Qaeda is international ; the Taliban were an Afghan phenomenon. However, the two were closely linked. The Taliban provided refuges for Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda ; and Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda offered ideological guidance and financial assistance to the Taliban.

· D) The media

After the 9-11^th attacks, the main question was « why Islamic extremists tried to kill Americans ». Everyone made up their own mind. However, among the different media, there were two tendencies : the right-wing media and the left-wing media. They suggested that the fact that America is « mighty and good » was the roots of terrorists hate. Other, suggested it is the success of American democracy and capitalism that is the real source of hatred. 

Richard Brookisher wrote :

« New-york City is also perceived as the hub of one of those subsystems, the roaring dynamo of wealth. Anyone in the world who look at his lot and is unhappy, looks at us, country and city, and sees an alternative. If he has an aspiring frame of mind, he may try to come here or imitate us. If he has an aggrieved frame of mind, he will hold us responsible. If he has the resources of a hostile nation, or its functional equivalent, he will try to kill us... the world's losers hate us because we are powerful, rich and good. When those who acted on that hatred have been repaid, seven times seven, we will rebuild the World Trade Towers, with one more story, just to rub it in»^29(*).

Thomas Friedman, another journalist wrote :

« There is resentment at America's stature as the world's richest nation, its sole superpower, its predominant culture. »^30(*)

Robert Kaplan, stated on air :

« It is the success of American democracy and capitalism that is the real source of hatred »^31(*)

Some right-wing media openly stated their distrust for the Muslims. Those media might be pointed as one of the causes of the attacks against Muslims in the USA.

Karine Rollins wrote :

« Islamic culture is intrinsically anti-West, innately full of hatred : « there is no evidence that Muslims living in America are necessary all great Patriots »^32(*)

The  Boston Herald  even stated that the Muslims were evil, above all it regards all Muslims as terrorists :

« Terrorism is not a deviation but actually the norm for Islamic culture »^32(*)

However, left-wing media such as the West-wing  is above this kind of simplistic analysis. This television series that represents American liberal values and democratic culture won several enemies.

First, the « West-wing » made a difference between Muslims and terrorism. The extremists has nothing to do with millions of Muslim men and women faith. The Muslims are quite « normal » people, the only difference with other peoples, is that, they come out of a culture that reinforces their hostility, distrust and hatred of the West and of America in particular.

Then, this television series declared American was not totally innocent in what happened on 9-11^th . It stressed on America intervention in the Middle East as the cause of the extremist wrath.

At last, this media, even took side in a way for the « terrorist movements ». A number of left-wing writers compared the Taliban with the Nazis and the people of Afghanistan are the jews in the concentration camps. The « West-wing » declared the analogy absurd, because the Taliban were not racists. Racial equality was a basic tenet of their outlook. Moreover, they were not bent on world domination.

Noam Chomsky^33(*) sided the « West-wing » point of view. He regarded the excuses about Middle East jealousy as convenient for the USA :

« The perpretrators acted out of hatred for the values cherished in the West as freedom, tolerance, prosperity, religious pluralism and universal suffrage »^34(*)

Chomsky went further when he said, the real terrorist was the USA, he even declared the world regards them as a leading terrorist state. To illustrate his sayings, he took for example the USA's condemnation by the World Court (1980) for «unlawful use of force » or « international terrorism ».

.

· THE POST SEPTEMBER 11th , 2001

************

· Chapter 1 : THE U.S.A'S REACTION

· A)Unanswered questions 

September 11^th , 2001 has changed many aspects of our lives forever.

It will be remembered as one of the most horific and unbelievable days ever experienced in the U.S.A. The events of this day certainly affect every American and likely affect every person in the world in some way.

q A.1) How the U.S.A missed the clues of the attacks ?

The White House suspected that a terrorist attack was coming, but four key mistakes kept the USA from knowing what to do.

After the september 11^th attacks, everyone inside the Bush Administration as well as outside it, knew there had been massive failures of Intelligence in the period before the attacks.

What went wrong ?

In the past month, a series of disclosures have cast doubt on the most basic abilities of the national-Securities establishment , and the nation have been forced to ask whether September 11^th could have been prevented.

In August, the President was briefed by the C.I.A on the possibility that Al-Qaeda, the terrorist network headed by Ossama Bin Laden might use hijack airlines to win concession from the U.S.A. That briefing was in response to a

request by Bush for information of the kind of threat posed by Al-Qaeda to American interests at home . The C.I.A came to the conclusion that «Al-Qaeda was determined to attack US ».After the strike came, the Administration made a decision not to discuss the August briefing. That was not the only embarassing paper kept under wraps. Earlier this month, a July 2001 memo by an F.B.I agent in Arizona who noted a pattern of Arab men signing up at flighing schools. The agent recommended an investigation to determine whether Al-Qaeda operatives were training at the schools. He was ignored.One of the men the F.B.I agent had under watch, a Muslim, did indeed have Al-Qaeda links. At high level of Government, the awful possibility is dawning that things could have been different. «If we had access to the Phenix memo, could we have broken the plot ? » answer : « there is at least a distinct possibility that we may at the very least have delayed it ».

Fighting terrorism hadn't been a top priority in the early months of the Administration , cutting taxes, building a missile shield and other agenda items had crowded it out. Bush's national Security Aides had been warned during the transition that there was an Al-Qaeda presence in the U.S.A, but in the first month of the Administration a sense of emergency was lacking.

On Monday, August 6, Bush received a document , which according to Rice was an « analytic report » on Al-Qaeda. Moreover, throughout the Summer, top officials had become convinced with a growing sense of foreboding, that a major operation by Al-Qaeda was in the works.

According to Rice, there was just a sentense or two on hijacking and the passage did not address the possibility that a hijacked plane would ever be flown into building. That was the first of the four crucial mistakes made last Summer. There might have been more discussion of the risks of hijackings in the President's briefing if its writers had known about the Phenix memo.

Agent williams wrote the memo on July 5. He posited that Bin Laden's followers might be trying to infiltrate the Civil Aviation system as pilots, he recommended a national program to track suspicious flight-school students. The memo was sent to the counterterrorism division of the F.B.I. The memo was ignored. That was the second key mistake.^35(*)

In a press conference^36(*), Rice conceided that in 2001 the F.B.I was involved in a number of investigations of potential Al-Qaeda personal operating in the U.S.A. Investigators had some reasons for beeing preoccupied with attacks and threats outside the USA. Our best estimation was something in South East Asia. By July, the level of noise about terrorism from Intelligence sources around the World was deafening. By the beginning of August, the President had made his request for a briefing on domestic threats. One of them was about to be uncovered. And therein lay the fourth mistake.

On August 16, Missaoui arrest, agent visited the airman flight school in Norman (Okla.) where he studied ; two of the September hijackers had visited Norman. The F.B.I did inform the C.I.A. The counterterrorism group in the White House was not inform.

The F.B.I has a long pattern of not sharing information with others.

In Washington, information must move through strovepipes.

Bush's simple passionate argument that he would not have sat idly if he had known what was going on September 11^th . Republican pointed out that members of Central Agency get the same information the President received and yet had not made a fuss about the August 6^th briefing.

Despite official statements, September 11^{th ,} could have been foreseen, critical warnings in the years before have been ignored :

 In 1993, terrorists set off a bomb in W.T.C's basement. Suspects in the plot have been linked to Al-Qaeda.

In June 1994, a Pentagon commissioned report concluded that religious terrorists could hijack commercial airliners and crash them into the Pentagon or the White House.

In December 1994 Algerian terrorists hijacked an Air France jetliner, intended to crash it into the Eiffel Tower.

In January 1994, police in the Philippines stumble upon a bomb factory run by Islamist terrorists. The arrested suspect reveal plans to crash a plane into the C.I.A building.

According to Eleanor Hill, Staff Director of the Joint Congressional Panel, the Intelligence community obtained information that a group of unindentified Arabs planned to fly an explosive plane from a foreign country into the World Trade Center.

In September 1998, the Intelligence community obtained information that Bin Laden's next operation would involve flying an aircraft loaded with explosives into a U.S airport.

In September 1999, a Library of Congress report concluded that suicide bombers could crash-land an air craft... into the Pentagon , the C.I.A or the White House.

In the course of 2000, C.I.A analyst established a link between Almihdhar and the man believed to be the principal organizer of the terrorist attack on U.S destroyer COLE, which was hit by a suicide bomber in October of that year. No alert was put out for Almihdhar or his associate, Alhazmi, until August 23, 2001. Only two weeks before the September attacks, an F.B.I agent in N.Y City sent a memo to Washington pleading for authorization to deploy resources to find Alhazmi and Almihdhar, warning that otherwise  people will die.^37(*)

The most important question is not what Bush knew before September 11^th , it is what the Administration and Congress have and have not done to fix a broken system.

During the period between March and September 2001, the Intelligence Agency detected numerous indicators of a terrorist attack, some of which pointed specifically to the USA as a possible target. This information was shared with the F.B.I, I.N.S...

In the context of such reports, it is impossible to believe the Bush Administration's claims that F.B.I headquarters made an innocent mistake.

Hill's report directly contradicted the claims of top White House Aides like national Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who hold a White House conference last May, « I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the W.T.C. »

According to Hill, the Intelligence Community was aware of the potential for this type of terrorist attack.

The Bush Administration refused to allow any testimony about what President Bush knew and when he knew it. This was clearly an attempt to protect him from political embarassement, either because, as a figurehead in his own Administration, he was told relatively little, or because he had critical information and failed to take defensive action.

Hill demonstrates that the Congressional Panel has willfully closed its eyes to the barrage of evidence suggesting that the U.S Intelligence Services played an important role in permiting, or even facilitating, the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3.000 people. It is particularly significant that the Congressional investigators have said nothing about the U.S Government surveillance of the supposed ringleader of the suicide hijackings , Mohammed Atta. The American media had largely silence the fact that Atta was a terrorist suspected before he was given an American visa and allowed to enter the U.S.A.

It is important to note that there was an active collaboration of American Intelligence Agencies with Al-Qaeda, going back some 20 years to the C.I.A's covert war in Afghanistan. William Casey, Reagan's C.I.A director pursued a policy of recruiting Islamic fundamentalists from all over the World. Bin Laden came as a C.I.A asset in Afghanistan, building roads and camps for the U.S back guerillas fighting the Soviet army.

Bush is now faced with the most difficult challenge any President could have : to lead a nation in a time of crisis unparalled since the second World War. Bush need to transform himself from a wartime leader with a steely will to win. He had no choice but to catch the criminal of the World :

« We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail » he promised the nation^38(*).

· A.2) Patriotism and victims

Everything will be different from now on. A loss of innocence , but also, the gains of things more valuable : a sense of national unity, and even wisdom. From heroic acts of rescue to extensive volunteer efforts, people are displaying a civic and patriotic sprit that many social analysts had thought was lost. For instance, In the wake of this week's events, several students declared they would study to become an F.B.I, or N.S.A agent.

Old Glory was coming to life. Orders for American flags have soared tenfold. Some of these flags will end up on front porches around the country. On September 11^th , Americans seem to have been searching for reason to believe in the virtue of public life. As for the Founding Fathers, they had returned to the popular consciousness in recent years. It was as if Americans, were looking to discover First Principals. As President Bush said : « we are fighting for the very survival of our civlization ». Americans are turning to the Constitution the Founders wrote and to the Bible they read. Polls show that attendance at religious services rose after September 11^th . It is an evidence that public life has changed in America since the Towers fell.

The U.S.A are a unique country that stands for something special. Of all the nations in the World, the U.S.A were built on nobody's image. The idea represented by the flag can never be taken from the U.S.A. The terrorists attacked the heart of the nation. They murdered more civilians in one day than ever in hour history. But they failed utterly in their goal of destroying the spirit of this country. As the French journalist Alexis de Tocqueville noticed when he visited the young republic 170 years ago, American patriotism is more rational, more based on interests, and less emotional than older varieties of patriotism. Tocqueville observed that though « less ardent » and less visible than that of other nations, theirs was a more durable faith. The substance of that faith is freedom. Nowaday a selfless commitment might mean going about our normal routines, including air travel. Caution is always in order, but fear is an unpatriotic emotion.

The country is angry. Although scapegoated, Muslims, Sikhs, and Arabs are patriotic, integrated and growing as American as the the « real » American.

The Sikhs looked Muslims, but are not. But to some, the turban and beard that most Sikhs wear look like Bin Laden's. If you are a Muslim or an Arab, or look like one, you must fear the insults, blows and bullets of your countrymen.

The council on American-Islamic relations counts more than 600 « incidents » since September 11^th victimizing people thought to be Arab or Muslim. Thousands were intimidated into not going to work, their mosques, their schools. Muslims are being accused of something that the community has not done.

For most American Muslims, the backlash reveals what they coinsider to be tragic misconception by many Americans about the nature of Islam itself.

There is no support in the Koran or mainstream Islamic tradition for unprovoked violence against innocent civilians. And most of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims do not support the Holy war Bin Laden is said to be waging against the U.S.A. Because the koran was revealed in the context of an all-out war, several passages deal with the conduct of armed struggle : Muslims are ordered by God to « slay enemies wherever you find them » (4 :89).

Extremists like Bin Laden like to quote such verses , taking passages out of their historical context to provide religious cover for those who would murder innocent people. In 1998, he ignited anti-American passions by issuing a fatwa, in which he declared «  the individual duty of every Muslim  to kill the Americans and their allies in any country is possible ». Bin Laden's radical and violent ideology is diametrically opposed to the teaching of the Koran and traditional Islamic doctrine. The « fatwa » is prohibited by Islamic law. In fact, Bin Laden does not include in his koranic injunctions the exhortations to peace,which in almost every case follow these more ferocious passages : « Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, God does not allow you to harm them » (4 :90).

In the koran the only permissible war is one of self-defense. Muslims may not begin hostilities (2 :90).

So why the suicide bombing, the hijacking and the massacre of innocent civilians ? Far from being endorsed by the koran, this killing violates some of its most sacred precepts.

It would be wrong to see Bin Laden as an authentic representative of Islam.

American-Muslims fear that to some Americans , such distictions mean little. Islamic leaders cautioned their fellows to lie low. This act of terrorism affect all Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

· B) The Americans want revenge now

Fighting back. From the start, the Administration warned that the war on terrorism would have no obvious endgame, but liquidating Bin Laden and his top Al-Qaeda henchmen. Rumsfeld may have been inviting Bin Laden to make a run for it. Bush also declared that it may take three years or ten but they are going to get Bin Laden. Fighting back tears, Bush vows that America will lead the World to victory  over terrorism , and also declares national emergency and gives military authority to call 50.000 reservists to active duty.

Intelligence officials believe Bin Laden has operatives in more than 50 countries. The biggest concentration is in about 30 camps scattered through out Afghanistan. For the moment, the Administration's strategy is to move deliberately :

Put together an international coalition and present evidence of Bin Laden's complicity to the U.N Security Council. The aim is to obtain a resolution demanding that Bin Laden be turned over, and to autorize force against him if he is not.

The President's Deputy Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, spoke of a « broad and sustained campaign of ending  state regimes that sponsor terrorism^39(*)» : One of the most effective option in the long run is working to build consensus among the nations of the World to stamp out terror networks where they have spread, country by country, mainly by applying constant diplomatic pressure on host nations. The new Bush mantra to the World : «You are either with us or against us ^40(*) ».

Pakistani President acceded to a slew of Americans demands for cooperation in return for a lifting of U.S sanction imposed after Pakistan's 1998 nuclear tests, Islamabad would share intelligence on Bin Laden and the Taliban and provide assistance to American forces, including passage through the country. Islamabad Foreign Minister said Pakistan would comply with all UN Security Council resolutions to combat terrorism. Pakistan warned its tribal chieftains that it would punish any one who gave sanctuary to Bin Laden. Pakistan officials and American ground troops tightened their surveillance of refugees flowing out Pakistan. The Taliban, it is expected will refuse any demand to turn over Bin Laden to the Americans.

The Administration then has a number of available military options.

Hunters stalked their prey from the sky with instruments of death. The U.S military campaign has removed Bin Laden's sanctuary and degraded his infrasctructure of terror. Pentagon sources say that the U.S.A have killed as many as eight high ranking Al-Qaeda officials, but most of the 11.000 terrorists believed to have spent time in Al-Qaeda camps are still on the loose.

In November 2001, armed with fresh intelligences reports on the whereabout of key Taliban and Al-Qaeda figures, the Pentagon began attacking buildings in Kabul and Kanohov in which they were believed to be hiding. Rumsfeld declared he had seen « authoritative reports » that the U.S.A had killed Atef and Al-Qaeda military chief. His elimination may cripple Al-Qaeda's terror making machine. The American targeting of Atef also serve to deliver a pointed message to to his boss.

Bands of local Afghan fighters whether driven by the desire to rid their country of Bin Laden or win $ 25 millions bounty the U.S.A had placed on his head, joined U.S special operations forces in the pursuit. Their orders were to shoot to kill. All weeks American troops manned checkpoints on the road running through former Taliban country seeking clues to Bin Laden's coordinates.

Special ops commandos plied Taliban lieutnants on the leadership penumbra with cash in exchange for secrets about Al-Qaeda leader's movements. While the informants could not deliver the exact address, they knew the neighbourhoods in which to look. Moreover the U.S.A and six of the World's richest nations agree to produce coordinate plan to freeze the assets of all terrorist organizations.

In the days that followed the attacks, a poll showed that 71% of Americans favored an attack on terrorist bases, even if that meant a high likelihood of civilian casualties. Howerver there is a political dilemma with global implication :

- Delivering the attack many Americans hunger for and failing to get many of the culprit might only demonstrate anew the U.S.A's impotence against terrorism.

- Killing many innocent Muslims in the process would also enrage the Arab World, possibly even toppling friendly Arab regimes and creating just the sort of clash of civilization that Bin Laden wants.

- The White House wants to try terrorists in secret. President Bush pointed Al-Qaeda members as criminals. Bush wonders whether to bring their enemies to justice or bring justice to them. Last week Bush signed a military order allowing foreign nationals suspected of terrorism to be judged by special military tribunals. The proceedings may take place in the USA or abroad. The defendant may not have access to the lawyer of their choice. There may have not have provision for appeal. Execution are allowed...^41(*)

No one in the Allies War Council believes Bin Laden's demise will mean the end of Al-Qaeda, much less global terrorism, or that the Taliban's desintegration will douse the flames of hatred in Afghanistan.

In fact, no matter what happens to the Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda still has many tentacles and people of the terrorist network will continue to plan and execute strikes against the West, vivifying Bin Laden's dreams of far-flung struggle.

The terrorist attacks permanently altered America's self identity. They must now embrace the global community they themselves built. It is a farewell to Isolationism

· C) What has changed 

· C.1)The death of the founding myth.

On September 10^th , the USA were the most powerful nation on Earth. Never one could have thought that one would have dared to attack the USA, and certainly not on their Homeland. Bin Laden and his international terrorist network did it. September 11^th , put an end to the belief that USA were unassailable but above all we realized that even the powerful army could be unefficient. It is all the same very important to stress on the fact that the attacks were « viscious », the Americans were surprised, and when they realized what was going on, it was too late.

More than the collapse of the WTC, September 11th, is the collapse of the USA's image in the World. As expected Bush declared he will hunt down terrorists in a long , unrelenting war. However, what is surprising is the shift of the USA's method. Bush will not run the retaliation alone. He has gathered a global coalition around him. This behaviour is really a U-turn in USA's Policy. In fact they have always been reluctant to cooperate with the international community. Pride is over, now time is to retaliation. Bush and his people has no time any longer for ideology.

q C.2) Global security

The old pendulum swings between isolationism and engagement seem over now, for ever. President Bush is emblematic of the change . Until September 11^th , his Administration had been wary of global alliances. He finds himself leading the biggest one since the Cold War.

The globalization will endure. But to thrive, it must gain a new dimension : a new global sytem is needed in which all countries have to share information and adopt similar standards of random inspections. A Worldwide agreement to install controls, checks, while permiting the free flow of trade. This could be done through a new organization, but better still would be to use an existing one like the World Trade Organization . Government will commit themselves to these new security procedures as part of joining the W.T.O. What followed, war, anthrax in the mail, made overwhelming the sense that the World is now forever changed.

How safe are the U.S.A now ?

Bin laden has changed American public life, in many cases for the better.

The most important question isn't what Bush knew before September 11^th , it is what the Administration and Congress have done to fix a broken system.

Now the greatest challenge in fighting terrorism is not to prevent terrorists from repeating their latest attack but to anticipate where and how they will strike next.

The victims who perished on 9-11^th did not die in vain. Politics, at least for now, has been transformed : less synical, more mature, less judgemental, more trusting, more patriotic , more international in outlook, less ideological, more realistic. American want to fix a broken system before another strike comes. Bush is working to bolster U.S.A's defenses. A new political era begins in America on September 11^th :

Along with intensified law enforcement, Bush's plan would roll Secret Service and the Cost Guard looking along with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and dozens of others into a single new Department of Homeland Security. Bush named Tom Ridge (the former Pensylvania Governor) to direct a new cabinet level office of Homeland Security. His task is not only to anticipate and prevent terrorist attacks but also to cope with them when they happen. That is to say, preparing the country for future terrorist threats. This office would have an in house intelligence analysis group.

Since September 11^th , the number of F.B.I personnel working in couter-terrorism has grown from 1,000 to 4,000. Besides, since September 11^th , no criticism of the C.I.A has been more damming than the fact that the Agency's legion of highly trained spooks were less successful at infiltrating Al-Qaeda. They had to learn to spy again. In fact, the U.S.A spend more than 90% of its $38 billion to annual intelligence budget on spying gadgetry rather than on gathering human intelligence. Many C.I.A officials lost interest in doing dirty human espionage which meant recruiting dangerous characters who can act as spies and infiltrate terror networks such as Al-Qaeda's.

Washington is more careful now. The American people never abandonned their belief that the Federal goverment has certain basic duties beyond defending the borders. Since about 9-11^th , the attitude was changing. George W. Bush himself had proposed a vast expansion of Federal power over :

- Airports security.

Bush conceded that the airlines themselves could no longer handle the job without strict Goverment oversight. Thanks to the new airport- security bill passed in Congress last November, airline security has been taken out of the hands of the FAA and given to the newly created Federal Transportated Security Administration (TSA). In the past six months, billion have gone toward reinforcing cockpit doors, tightening the airline baggage-screening process and hiring 28.000 new Federal employees at airports to replace the private security firm that let Al-Qaeda through on September11^th . There is improvements in passagers profiling. They have started to scan passager lists for other suspicious characteristics.

- Borders.

The first line of defense against terrorism are the country's borders and shores. The Bounder-Security Act, Bush signed aims to modernize the country's system of tracking those who want to enter the country. The Administration plans to hire 800 more customs agents to police the borders. The Administration's $38 billion Homeland-Security budget proposes a $380 million system to track the entry and exit of noncitizens and gives $282 million to the Coast- guard for protecting ports and costal areas.

- Bioterrorism

Budget for Federal research on terror of all kinds, are skyrocketing. Last year's Anthrax attacks sent Public-health officials to strengthen the U.S's bioterrorism defenses. The country's nearly 7.000 local Health Departments train hospitals and doctors in how to spot and treat the symptoms of bioterrorism. The Homeland-Security budget is aimed at keeping casualties down. Almost all of the $ 9.5billion allocated to combat bioterrorism, for instance, goes toward training and equiping local public-health authorities to treat victims in the event of an attack.

There is a genuine debate inside the Government about whether Bin Laden is still alive. The White House believes he has survived the war. Why is he so hard to pin down ?

The last time the World heard from Bin Laden, there was reason to believe his end was near. American war planes pounded the caves of Eastern Afghanistan, and special troops positioned themselves for the big grab. Six months after hailing Bin Laden's imminent capture or death, Pentagon officials now admit that the Al-Qaeda leader « has gone missing » . Missing could mean dead, but only a small minority in the Pentagon, C.I.A and F.B.I believe that Bin Laden's silence suggest he was dead. The White House believes he is still alive :

-« I think we have lost him » says a USA counterterrorism official.

Bringing Bin Laden to justice has been a nonegotiable U.S war aim since September 17^th , when President Bush declared that he wanted the Al-Qaeda leader dead or alive. But with the trial growing cold, White House have lately offered a new definition of victory. It is a failure of the Pentagon and C.I.A to plink their top target. Massachussets senator John Kerry is among those who argue that the Administration's fear of casualties and reliance on Afghan proxies allowed Bin Laden to slip away.

For all his elusiveness, Bin Laden probably has not strayed far from the region. The C.I.A believed Bin Laden fled Afghanistan and is holed up in tribal areas of Northwest Pakistan, a region that is impossible to monitor. The best chance of eliminating him may lie in cultivating agents who can infiltrate his inner circle and bump him off.

Defeating terrorists as ruthlessly commited as Bin Laden will require not just military firepower but also patience, guile and a good deal of luck.

The U.S.A had made it clear to the interim Afghan government that if Bin Laden is apprehende, he must be turned over to American authorities. But how he will be brought to justice is a question the White House has still not decided.

In Peshawar (Pakistan's frontier town) they chanted « we love Bin Laden » and burned American flags and effigies of George W. Bush.

But a World away, the new unilateralist finds himself organizing an international coalition. According to him no single country can eradicate terrorism on his own. French President, Jacques Chirac and British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who visited Bush at the White House, said their armed forces would participate in retaliation so long as it is « appropriate and effective ».

· Chapter 2 : ALONE OR NOT ?

A) The people's reaction

Against war : September 11^th , showed that the U.S.A are hated by many people around the World. When we look at the World now, it seems that there is only America on one side and the anti-Americans on the other. Anti-Americanism is the view that the USA are basically a global bad guy, an imperial bullying nation only interested in making money at any price. Some Europeans' response to September 11^th is conditioned to overriding anxiety that the USA will use international terrorism as a standing excuse to intervene in the affairs of other nations. At first glance, it seems that Europe's « hate affair » with America is alive and well. They above all hate Bush's leitmotiv : « with us or against us ». Despite the displays of unity, a wave of anti-Americanism is sweeping Europe and the World, and the focus is on G.W.Bush. Activists have quickly mobilized behind several causes : antiwar against the already afflicted people of Afghanistan, and protecting US Arabs and Muslims against hate crimes. The objective of the antiwar movement has to be justice and not vengeful retaliation

In Berlin, 17.000 protesters gathered on Karl Marx boulevard. They shared a visceral aversion to George Bush, whose visit to Germany they were protesting. «Bush we don't want your war ! ». Some called him « war monger ». Some placards accused him of slaughtering the innocents of Afghanistan. Moreover, according to them the U.S.A respect neither treaties nor traditions. They don't care about their Allies unless they need some special forces for Tora Bora. 69% of the population were against sending German troops to Afghanistan. In Britain, America's closest ally, the poll found that 48% percent of people have a negative attitude toward the U.S.A President. In France the President's approval raiting was about 57%. While the Greeks allow U.S fighter jets to use their airspace as part of antiwar campaign, more than 86% oppose the bombing. According to them the U.S.A deserved the September attacks because of Washington's « unjust » handling of the World affairs, 57% of the person surveyed confess « having negative feelings about the U.S.A ». Part of the animosity is historical. The strike against Afghanistan have filled the anti-American contingent with fresh ardour. According to them, this war is not about freedom versus terrorism, it is imperialism versus the people. The Greek share this point of view shouting «American assassins ». After the attack of the WTC, Saddam Hussein, America's public enemy number one, as we could expect did not condemn the attacks and the death of thousands of people. On the contrary he publicly applauded the attacks. He declared : « America is tasting what it forced others to taste^42(*) ». He also said that « America arrogance had been humiliated ». For Hussein, the attack was a divine answer to USA's External Policy : « when God strikes, no one can stand in the way of his power^43(*) ».

B) The Allies

q B.1) Division between the European countries

Bush asked every nation to join the U.S.A . He received potential coalition partners. Some 100 countries had pledged some kind of military, financial, political, or intelligent support to the U.S.A for a campaign against Bin Laden, his Al-Qaeda network, and the countries that shelter or support terrorist cells. Among Bush's supporters are, Chirac and Blair, Germany's minister Joshka Fisher and Russian Foreign Minister, Igor Ivanov... All of them pledge their support in the battle against terrorism. But none have been more determined than Blair in making sure that Britain as well as the continent will stand « shoulder to shoulder » with the Americans.

Washington is assembling a global alliance for a possible attack. Can it hold together ?

At any rate, Afghanistan remains a good war for Tony Blair. Beyond war, he sees an opportunity for Europe to tackle poverty, global warning, inter-faith understanding, peace between Israelis and Palestinians and many other ambitious reforms. It is also a chance to shine on the World stage and remind voters at Home who have been questioning about his decisiveness and capacity to lead.

America has another European friend : Russia.

Before September 11^th , Russia and the U.S.A seemed on a coalition course. Now, the two nations share a common priority : the war on terrorism. They are now focussing on shared interests. As Putin said : « the Cold War is over, the World is at a new stage of development. ». Putin demonstrates a clear willingness to chart a new course on Foreign and domestic Policy. Beyond opening up Russian airspace to America forces, Putin lobbied the former Soviet Republics of central Asia to cooperate fully with war effort in Afghanistan, including allowing the use of military bases. Putin's motives for casting his lot with America are economic, and geopolitic. The cooperation with the Western Alliance brings acceptance in other international groups. With time Russia might become a full N.A.T.O member. Moreover to develop Russia's economy, Putin believes he must integrate the Western World. He wants to do business, not to take handabouts. Now that Putin has put himself at center stage with Bush and other Western leaders, he is again giving Russians the responsibility and sense of national importance that they crave for. For Russia, the door to Europe lies through Washington.

But there are also benefits for the U.S.A's rapprochement with Russia :

Russia produces 10% of the World's oil and its reserves could help reduce U.S.A dependance on the Middle East, moreover, Bush wants Putin's blessing on his efforts to topple Saddam Hussein.

However a growing sense of uneasiness threatens to divide Washington and its European Allies. The international alliance against terrorism is entering a new dangerous phase, opening hidden cracks in a slow-moving glacier. A sense of creeping reservation is in the air. Europeans fear that the U.S.A may be losing sight of the fact that the military campaigns is only part of the war on terror. Above all there is a deep worry about the course the war could take. Few dispute the basic aim : to hunt down Al-Qaeda and eliminate its Taliban ally. But many fear the means the U.S.A have chosen will not achieve the desired end risking social, political and cultural havoc. The point is that, since the end of the Cold War, every serious division between Europe and the U.S.A have been over military action. Europe simply does not believe in war anymore, largely because of its own experience. After an incredibly bloody past, Europe has moved beyond war. Even now, Europeans remain reluctant to believe that military power can be useful in solving problems. Even though many of them believe that Saddam Hussein is a dangerous aggressor, their solution is « anything but war».

Much of the difference in attitude is at root a difference in capacities. Europe spends only $140 billion on defense, compared with America's $347 billion.

However European governments remain America's strongest allies. Blair plays the role of a bridge builder between America and Europe and aims to turn the skeptics in Europe and the Middle East too, from focusing on the defeat of Al-Qaeda to an entirely different threat not directly linked to September 11^th :

Saddam's programs to build chemical, biological and especialy nuclear weapons. Bagdad is already in violation of the last 23 U.N Security Council resolutions.

But the toxic atmosphere of anti-Americanism prevailing in Europe might destroy the Atlantic Alliance. In mid January 2003, Bush had hardly an ally in sight as he moved toward war against Iraq. Even his staunchest comrade in arms, Tony Blair, looked wobbly to some. Antiwar Germany and deeply skeptical France, capturing a spreading popular unease, cast longer and longer shadows accross Europe. Bush looked lonely. The first casualty of war was the very idea of Europe.

A few weeks ago, war in Iraq looks imminent. Today, the mood has oddly shifted, as though key players were having second thought. Nowhere has this been more noticed than in the alliance between Britain and the U.S.A. Bush has been a bit disappointed to notice that Britain's Prime Minister has not quite kept pace. Tony Blair is under increasing pressure in Britain where antiwar sentiment is on the rise. He spoke out for giving the U.N weapons inspectors more time in Iraq. Bush thinks another U.N resolution is not necessary. Blair wants U.N's approval before going to war in Iraq.

The second casualty of war is France, and Germany.

In Berlin, while celebrating the 40^th anniversary of their friendship treaty, they ceremoniously pronounced that they would work together to save the World from war. It was quite a good idea. People will have the choice to solve the conflict either with dialogue or war. But neither France nor Germany thought their alliance would have single them out from the rest of the coalition. They were no longer in demand to support USA. While the members of the coalition were invited to sign the letter in support of Washington, France and Germany were not guessed. According to the French President, the British plotted to usurp their leadership.

The SUN , the British popular newspaper, favorable to a military action against Iraq wrote on the front page « Chirac is a worm», « the shame of Europe » « a hypocrite », « the mackerel of Paris » (in the front page Chirac's head appeared at the end of a long earthworm from the center of cracked France). The newspaper blamed the French President for « threatening constantly to resort to his right of veto to prevent any military action intended to make apply the will of theUnited nation in Iraq ». This was a setback to the idea of Europe speaking with a single voice. As D.Rumsfeld, U.S.A Defense Secretary said : « it is a new Europe, away from Berlin and Paris toward the newly enlarged and younger Europe, where the voices of Central Europe and the Baltics will encreasingly join those of Spain, Italy and Britain to create a new balance of power ».

How do France and Germany want to position themselves in a world dominated by the U.S.A, as competitors or partners ?

Since the end of the Cold War, many European leaders have long aspired to end American dominance and constructing a Europe that is counterbalance to the U.S.A, not just economically but geopolitically. The single market and the Euro are widely seen as essential steps in this direction. In fact, the Euro worth will probably continue to encrease against the Dollar. Moreover, despite a recovery, the U.S.A are hardly the model of economic health they used to be.

The U.S.A's retreat from its leading role presents another opportunity for the European Union. Whatever sort of power it chooses to be, it is likely to be something faintly different from the U.S.A. It ought to be less predatory, more concerned with social cohesion and the safety of society. But the question becomes :

- « Is Europe ready to lead ? »

The answer, is obviously : « no ».

The first reason is that too many European countries have not yet grasped the basic secret of leadership. The second reason, is linked to the division among the European countries about war in Iraq.That dream of leadership now looks to be deferred, if not dead.

q B.2) The case for peace.

More threats, more military force, none of this can stop people willing to hurt the U.S.A.

The U.S.A are a society that daily teaches Americans to look out for number one and to see others primarily as instruments to help them achieve their goals and satisfactions. And that insensitivity is institutionalized in the global system whose symbolic headquaters have been the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. It never occurs to the U.S that when they manage and shape global trade policies they increase the disparity between the rich and the poor countries.

If the world wants to be effective in a long term struggle against terror, we need a strategy to marginalize the terrorists by making it harder for them to appeal to legitimate anger to the U.S.A. In fact, if the U.S.A want a world of peace and justice, they need to be more just, for instance, in redistributing the wealth of the Planet so that everyone has enough, and on using its economic resources to end world hunger.

For those who fear a conflict, Blair is the only global leader judged to have the trust and standing with President Bush to slow or even redirect Washington's march toward war. But will he ?

· A NEW WORLD ORDER

************

· chapter 1 : CONSEQUENCES OF 9-11th

· A)The new heroes

September 11^th produced firefighters, rescuers, and ordinary people who became overnight heroes. The firefighters and other emergency workers went into the burning buildings, knowing the danger. They paid a high price. They have become the nation's newest heroes ; if this is indeed the first war of the 21^st century, they are the first casualties. The survivors are greeted with applause in the streets of their city. Volunteers at ground zero within hours of the crash found people alive. 9-11^th attacks produced also one political hero : Mayor Rodolph Giuliani. He joined the rescuers in the shadow of the Towers. When they collapsed, he had to run for his life. He created leadership in chaos. Days after the tragedy, Giuliani kept a promise to walk the sister of one of the deceased fireman down the aisle for the marriage. He was even compared to Churchill.

· B) Earthquake in the global economy

When two flying bombs crush through the upper floors of a Twin Tower skyscraper in New-york's financial district, the business World changes for ever. All the sectors are hit by the crisis.

Airlines is the business worst affected by September 11^th. People have stopped flying in large numbers. Fear is the travel sector's biggest enemy. Despite the reinforcement of security in airports and elsewhere, people have not changed their behaviour. The image of destruction remain fresh in the minds long after the events. Immediately after the attack, airline analyst predicted a 50 per cent fall in domestic American traffic for 2001-2002 and about 25 per cent reduction in the Transatlantic market. If these forecasts initially seemed alarmist, it quickly became clear that the outcome could be even worse, with international air-transport profits being devasted by a collapse in demand. Six weeks after the attacks, the Association of European Airlines said that Transatlantic traffic had fallen by 36 per cent. Around the World, airline companies were going bankrupt. The severity of the aviation fall, also threatens aircraft and aero-engine manufacturers.

Quite obviously tourism is the second sector hit by the events. Tourism depends totally on airline-companies. 9-11^th events had a disproportionate impact on the regions that depend on tourism. The Caribbean Islands have to face massive short fall in revenues. Two-thirds of all bookings were scratched. Even the greatest countries, among them the USA and Great Britain suffer from lack of tourism. Florida's Disney World on some day in October 2001 was all but empty ; about £150 million of bookings from UK were concealed in the four weeks after September 11^th.

If airlines and tourism were deeply affected by 9-11^th , then insurance companies were not far behind. The blow delivered by the hijackers changed the rules of insurance cover, especially for the transport and poperty sectors. Not all the insurance-companies are expected to survive the financial drain of the New-york catastrophe, especially those who covered the companies located in the WTC. Initial estimate of the WTC insurance cost $50 billion.

Other sectors like TV, and departments stores were also hit. Ruppert Murdock's news corporation said he suffered a $100 million decline in advertising income. Concerning oil ; as the travel companies had fewer and fewer activities, the demand for oil fell by and the economic growth prospects have been lowered for 2002.

After the human casualties due to the collapse of the WTC, the other « victims » are the workers. The international air-transport estimates that the final job losses in the airline industry, will reach 200.000.

· C) New alliances and war

One of the most striking consequence of 9-11^th events is the new world order. In fact, as previously said (Part II) many countries pledged support to the USA, among the allies are countries which have sometimes seen themselves as American opponents. Among those former opponents are Russia and Japon. Now Russia is one of the faithful supporter of the USA, though it is a self-interested alliance. But this war has also torn Europe into parts : in a one hand the countries in favour of war, on the other hand, the opponents. This war has built alliances, but it has also destroyed others. The balance is rather negative.

Another consequence of 9-11^th , is Bush declaration of war against Iraq on March 20^th , 2003. The attack of 9-11^th , as well as the Pearl Harbour attack (1941) has given way to a larger war. The USA have launched Tomahawk cruise missiles as part as an apparent effort to kill Mr Hussein and his two sons or other senior members of the Iraqi leadership. Once again it shows the USA's inability to cope with problems with dialogue. As the USA's goal is to control the Iraqi oil, Saddam Hussein dead is better for them. Bush and his Administration are not pragmatic. With this actual war they have engaged their country, and in a slight measure, the World into an unending war. This war will encrease the mounting anger among Muslims toward the USA. The way the consequences of this war will manifest are difficult to foresee, because such consequences became visible only after many years. In all cases, nothing good can be foreseen. Dropping bombs can never make a country safe from attacks.

The 9-11^th attacks highlighted a large question, concerning the role of the USA in the world. Many American citizens as well as world citizens were in favour of USA return to isolationism. They thought the USA were foolish to think they could solve the world's conflicts and problems. They even think that the USA should use their military force only when their interests are directly at stake. Despite this wish to isolationism is altogether comprehensible, it is no longer possible. The USA's economy is too entwined with the world's trading system and international financial market. Moreover, isolationist withdrawal would be exactly what the terrorists who planned the attacks were after. Responding this way would be admit defeat.

The better solution to have the World, the USA, safe is to make peace with war, as Europe has done, and above all to engage dialogue between the different cultures^44(*). Dialogue also undermean listen to the other, to call oneself into question, and respect. The USA's imperialism is not the main problem. The problem is the way they use their power. Most of the peoples only see the drawbacks of being in affair with the USA. They have to take example of the European Union. The community requires to believe in a common and shared future, where everyone counts, where each one has a role to play and where each one can keep its identity. In a word, the USA have to develop partnership with peoples and not subdued them. To avoid a clash of civilization, the USA must accept that all civilization have the same right to exist, the same freedom to express themselves, and the same liberty to order their society guided by their own moral vision. Moreover, peoples of the world have the right and the freedom to disagree with America.

· D) Europe as a new leader

As anti-Americanism is developing all around the World, it triggers the question about a possible substitute :

Europe ?

Europeans have long aspired to end America's dominance as the World's economic leader. The single market and the Euro are widely seen as essential steps in this direction. But, is Europe ready to lead ?

The European Union will grow from 15 nations to 25, and is likely to be titular of 485 millions of citizens and the Euro will probably continue strengthening against the dollar. If international investors lose confidence in the USA economy, fewer people will want to hold dollar assets. Europe seems to have many assets to lead . Moreover, it will be easy to get the World agreement, regarding the anti-American campaign.

However, despite this anti-Americanism movement in the World, the USA are still at the center of the World and will remain at his place. Nothing can move without the USA. As expected, if the Euro continue to encrease, and the dollar to fall what is going to happen ? Europe export to the USA will fall resulting a trade deficit for the European Union, while there will be a surge of import from the USA, and the European companies will see their US profit erode.

Similarly, the questions remains whether Europeans are ready to assume responsibilities for the success of the organization like the World Trade Organization. Once again the answer is no. Europe is not economically strong enough. The richest countries of the community have to support the poorest. The enlarge of Europe has been a big mistake. Europe is larger but not richer. Moreover, too many European leaders have not yet grasped, the basic secret of leadership. The defect of Europe is its military strike force. Europe spends only $140 billion, compared with America's $347 billion. The US spend almost $30.000 per soldier on R and D, while Europe spends $4.000. September 11^th , has not even urged a large increase in defense spending. Compared with the USA, Europe is second class-power. Europe need to develop a significant strike force, one that can fight with or without American troops. It would give it a stronger voice in the Alliance. Besides all that, war issue in Iraq has divided Europe.

Europe would have been a better leader, because it ought to be less wasteful of energy, less predatory toward environment, more concerned with social cohesion, and the safety net of society^45(*). America remains all the same the sole credible leader.

As the USA have distorted the United nations with their intervention in Iraq, no one can fully know, what international order Bush sought to create.

· Chapter 2 : CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME

· A) Social services and security

Since their status of « Policemen » of the World, the American Presidents were more turned toward their Foreign Policy than Homeland Policy. They are more aware of the World problems than theirs. Moreover, money devoted to the defense are more and more important to the detriment of the people's welfare. What is deeply wished is that the courage of the low-paid civil-servants such as the firemen after the collapse of the WTC will change the policy of the Administration.

The USA are a very wealthy country, however in 2002, 31 million Americans were living below the poverty line. The USA have failed to provide sufficient amounts of low-cost rented accomodation for law-income groups. The situation has resulted in homeless people throughout the country. Polls in June and July 2001 reported that, of the top fourteen problems facing the country, poor health care, hospitals and high costs ranked fifth ; poverty, hunger and homelessness were seventh ; and medicare and social security were twelfth. The social services debate is whether the US should adapt a nationally organized European type « Welfare State » which provides comprehensive social and medicare schemes for all funded out of general taxation.

Then, official statistics and personal experience surveys suggest that the USA have a high crime rate in comparison with other Western-countries. Firearms are used in three-quaters of these cases. In some urban areas, murder is the main cause of death. Today, there is a widespread lack of public confidence in the ability of the legislator to cope with crime and to protect individual citizens. People feel that they must safeguard themselves. Americans have irrational attitudes to crime and violence and create a self-perpetuating image that the USA are a violent and crime-ridden society. America's fundamental problem is the cult of violence itself and that one way to reduce this is to restrict access to guns.

What a contrast ! the USA have succeeded in overthrowing many governments, and are incapable to cope with the problem of violence in their own country. Moreover, they invest billions in the world, and are at a loss to provide a suitable Social Service to its people. Is the world more important for the USA than its people ?

Regarding G.W.Bush Policy, a return to the Democrat would be better for the country. They have much more consideration for their own people as well as for the world. It is a Democrat, Franklin Delano Roosevelt who have introduced in 1935 the national Insurance Programme known as Social Security. After Clinton's election as President of the USA, the first four and a half years of the new Administration saw more than 13 million jobs created ; he made the largest investment in health care for children since 1965. In 1993, President Clinton unveiled the Global Climate Change Action plan, a strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. He even proposed partnership between government and the auto-industry to develop a new generation of fuel-efficient vehicles. Despite all his efforts to better the life of his people, he did not forget the outside world. The USA have supported all the nations of Middle East who were working a lasting peace, hence the Washington Declaration which is an agreement between late Prime Minister Rabin of Israel and King Hussein of Jordan. The President pledged the government's fullest support in fighting terrorism.

Our world is entering a new dangerous epoch, Samuel P.Huntington even talks about clash of civilization between the West and the non-Western civilization. The battle against terrorism has already started. Since America is both the object and the source of global hatred its idea need to be adapted to our time or improved in any way. The greatest task of the USA and its allies is now to defeat terrorism without letting that happen again.

· CONCLUSION

************

Most Americans take it as self-evident truth that the American way of life is the best ever devised in the history of humanity. It comes as a shock to discover that the rest of the World thinks otherwise ; that America is an object of much fear and loathing.

The USA's Foreign Policy reveals much continuity. Exceptionalism and the messianic spirit, which characterize it are as old as the English North American colonies. Subsequently, American diplomacy became characterized by the repetition of the same deplorable mistakes : US colonialism and economic imperialism ; American domination of weaker economies. So, some countries saw their legitimate aspirations dwarfed by the USA's power and self-interest. Wars, rebellions were logical consequences. Symbolically, the collapse of the W.T.C heralded the fact that the USA have to rethink their Foreign Policy. The concept of Manifest Destiny that justified expansion are now old-fashioned.

We have crossed the threshold of the 21^st century to greater mutual danger, with a more awful toll of human pain and suffering than seemed possible. In the months and years ahead America faces a challenge as important as the military one. The USA will have to break their age old habits and rethink their role in the World. The USA will have to convince not just the leaders but the populations.

Hatred is no basis for a secure world. In all the violence that dominates the World only one thing seems clear. We all have a responsibility for the predicament and dangers facing the World. We all have a duty to think, act and work together ; there is work to be done within each society to eradicate hatred and build the possibility of peaceful cohabitation.

· BIBLIOGRAPHY

************

A) Ouvrages de référence

q Jenkins, Philip. The United States. New York : Palgrave 1997

q Ricard, Serge. The Manifest Destiny of the United States in the XIXe century. University Paris IV Sorbonne : Capes/Agregation d'anglais CNED, 1999

q BBC News Worldwide Ltd 2001. The day that shook the World. Great Britain : BBC NEWS, 2001

q Mauk, David and Oakland, John. American Civilization. New York : Third Edition, 2002.

q Colombani, Jean Marie. Tous Américains ? Paris : Fayard, 2002

q Sardar, Ziauddin and Wyn Davies, Merryl. Why do people hate America. Cambridge : Icon books, 2002

q Mc Fadden, Robert . A nation challenged. Jonathan Cape : New York 2002.

q Chomsky, Noam. Pouvoir et terreur. Serpent à plume 2003.

B) Articles de journeaux et magazines

1) The New York Review

q Dworkin, Ronald. The Threat to Patriotism. The New York Review. February 28, 2002.

q Fritzgerald, Francis. George W. Bush and the World. The New York Review. September 26, 2002

2) U.S News

q Walsh, Kenneth T. Now it's Bush's War. U.S News. September 24, 2001.

q Walsh, Kenneth T. I will not yield, I will not rest. U.S News. October 1, 2001

3) NEWSWEEK

q Hirsh, Michael and Barry, John. How to strike back. Newsweek. September 24, 2001

q Gutman, Roy. America's new friend. Newsweek. November 19, 2001

q Fuyama, Francis. Their target : the modern World. Newsweek. Special issue, 2002

q Mcguire,Styker and Meyer, Michael. Europe. Newsweek. February 10, 2003

q Theil, Stefan and Meyer, Michael. Europe barks, but does it bites ?

Newsweek. June 3, 2002

q Mcguire, Striker and Meyer, Michael. Is this the new World order ?

Newsweek. March 17, 2003

q Kuntzman, Gersh. Let's make love not war. Newsweek. March 17, 2003

q Zakaria, Fareed. Why America scares the world and what to do about it. Newsweek. March 24, 2003

The Daily Telegraph

q Delves, Philip. Anthrax. The Daily Telegraph. October 13, 2002

TIME

q Cloud, John. What is Al-Qaeda without its boss ? TIME. November 26, 2001

q Crumley, Bruce. Follow the money.TIME. November 19, 2001

q Mc Geary, Johana. The Taliban troubles. TIME. October 1, 2001

q Cloud, John. Can we stop the next attack ? TIME. March 11, 2001

q Ripley, Amanda. The hunt for Bin Laden. TIME. November 26, 2001

q Joffe, Josef. Ganging up on . TIME. June 3, 2002

Le Point

q Henry Levy, Bernard. Enquête au coeur d'Al-Qaeda, le vrai ennemi. Le Point. Vendredi 25 Avril 2003

C) sources Internet

q September 2001 timeline :   http://www.september11news.com/DailyTime.htm

q World Socialist web site :

http ://www.wsws.org

q America and the World as America :

http://zmag.org/crisescurEvts/interventions.htm

q US News :

www.USNEWS.com

q TIME :

www.Time.com

· ANNEX

************

Source : BBC News Worldwide Ltd 2001. « The day that shook the World ».

Great Britain. BBC NEWS, 2001.

* ¹ A phrase presumably coined in 1840's by the editor John L.O' Sullivan

* ² John Winthrop

* ³ Three basic principles :

non-colonialism ; non-intervention ; non-interference

* ⁴ professor of English at Wesleyan University, author of the book Regeneretion through violence.

* ⁵ President Bush first televised address on 9-11^th

* ⁶ Bush's annual speech to Congress on September 20, 2001

* ⁷ Thomas Jefferson

* ⁸ Rasselas

* ⁹ Truman Doctrine

speech to Congress in 1947.

* ¹⁰ Bush chose a former Defense Secretary, Dick Cheney as Vice-President and later appointed Colin Powell, former head of the Pentagon's joint chief of staff during the Gulf War, as his Secretary of State and Donald Rumsfeld, one of his father's Foreign Policy advisers, Secretary of Defense. His national Security adviser, Gondoleeza Rice.

* ¹¹ Professor of sociology and the author of The Mc Donaldization of society.

* ¹² The hamburger so Mc Donald is a metaphor for American way of life and corrosive influence in the world.

Like the hamburger, the idea of A merica has a number of ingredients : there is the most powerful government on Earth and the influence of its policy on countries and people beyond America ; there is the enormous power of US corporations that their invests outside ; the American view that put forward individualism.

* ¹³ Producer of the Oscar-nominated « Amelie Poulin »

* ¹⁴ co-author of The world is not for sale.

* ¹⁵ An A merican Academic who occupies the chair of sociology at the University of Warwick.

* ¹⁶ Ideological warfare.

* ¹⁷ United nations Development Program

* ¹⁸ United Nation High Commission for refugees

* ¹⁹ G8

* ²⁰ African Growth and Opportunity Act, signed into law by President George W . Bush in October 2001.

* ²¹ In Kyoto, Japan, on December 11, 1997 sets specific targets for the reduction of carbon dioxyde emissions. Carbon dioxyde, emited by motor vehicles and industries that burn fossil fuels, is blamed for climate change and global warming. The agreement requires industrialised countries to reduce emissions.

* ²² Unvanquished : a UN-US saga

* ²³ William Blum, in his book Rogue State 

*

²⁴ or « the base » is an international terrorist network. It seeks to purge Muslim countries of what it sees as the profane influence of the west and replace their governments with a fundamentalist Islamic regime.

*

²⁵ US News. October 1, 2001. The CEO of terror inc  (by David E.Kaplan)

*

²⁶ God's student - its goal is the establishment of a strict Islamic state in Afghanistan ; they are radical, or extremist Muslims. They take radical approach to interpreting Islam.

The Taliban allowed terrorists organizations to run training-camps in their territory ; since 1994 provided refuge for Bin laden and his Al Qaeda organization.

*

²⁷   The militia that dubbed itself the Taliban, Pashtu for Islamic student.

*

²⁸ Literally « to struggle » or « Holy war ». Some Muslims argued that U.S support for Israel constitutes a threat that justifies Jihad.

* ²⁹ Richard Brookisher, The new york Observer, September 13, 2001

* ³⁰ Thomas Friedman,  Chicago tribune , September 13, 2001

* ³¹ Ropbert Kaplan, NPR, Weekend edition Sunday, september 23, 2001

* Karina Rollins, The American Enterprise , December 2001

* ³² Don Feder, November 5, 2001

* ³³ Professor of linguistic at MIT and lifelong dissident.

* ³⁴ New-york Times, September 16, 2001

* ³⁵ All these revelations came from Eleanor Hill, staff director of the joint congressionnal panel.

* ³⁶ White House conference (May, 2002)

* ³⁷ These informations came from E.Hill

* ³⁸ On September 13, 2001, holding the shield of George Howerd, a hero cop, Bush vowed to crush terrorism before a United Congress.

*

³⁹ This is one of the decision make in the early days of the Bush war cabinet.

*

⁴⁰ On the afternoon of 9-11, Pakistan's military intelligence chief, Lt General Mahood Ahmed, visiting Washington, was summoned to the State Department and told what became Washington's maxim in marshaling on alliance for his war on terrorism.

* ⁴¹ On October 25, 2002 Congress passed the « USA Patriotic Act »

* ⁴² Al-Iraq

* ⁴³ Iraq television, September 12^th 2001

* ⁴⁴ Jacque Chirac, Paris Match, December 27, 2001

* ⁴⁵ Tony Blair, TIME, December 10, 2001  « The world community should tackle poverty, global warning, enter-faith understanding, peace between Israelis and Palestinians and many other ambitious reforms. I believe we should do it because I believe it is important »