Essay PreviewMore ↓
The more interesting contest is among the alternative theories to realism. It is a race for second prize, and the main competitors are feminism, globalism/neo-Marxism and pluralism.
The fundamental premise of feminism is that international politics is a "man's world" and a "gendered activity". Gender is a social construction based on ideas of "autonomy", "objectivity", "sovereignty" and "virtu" (Niccolo Machiavelli), of which only men and masculine states are allegedly capable. Writing after September 11, feminist novelist Arundhati Roy encapsulated this critique, saying, "Women of the world stand between two extremes, both represented by androcentrism, Rambo culture and patriarchy - Osama bin Laden and George Bush." Bin Laden reportedly has 42 wives and is a defender and instigator of Taliban-style hardline Islamic "structural violence" against women. Bush heads the most conservative American administration since Ronald Reagan, pursuing vested interests of the military-industrial complex and giant oil multinationals that extort women in the Third World (a line favored by Marxist feminism).
Realist dogmas and metaphors of "war of every man against every man" and "stag hunt" (Jean Jacques Rousseau) have been pursued vigorously by the US government since September 11, accompanied by a culture of "manliness" and glorification of soldiers and ultra-patriotic themes in the media. "Imperial brotherhoods" (Robert Dean) among mujahideen and the Bush cabinet are waging destructive wars to quench their fanaticism and male egotism. Some feminists see the World Trade Center itself as a symbol of male capitalist egotism which ran into another kind of Arabic male chauvinism on September 11.
Feminists also like to point out that the majority of women in the world, including Palestinians, mourned the deaths of innocents in the terror attacks, and called for a foreign policy of reconciliation instead of revenge.
How to Cite this Page
"International Relations Theory and the Terrorists Attacks of September 11." 123HelpMe.com. 27 Feb 2020
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- First shock, then terror, followed by sorrow and lastly rage were my emotions on September 11th, 2001 when a hijacked airliner crashed into the Twin Towers in New York City. Tunh. Tunh. Tunh. All circuits are busy; please try again at a later time. This message kept repeating as I tried to call my cousin in New York, who was working in the South Tower. At the time the American Airlines flight 11 just moments earlier crashed into the North Tower. I sat in my house in shock and terror. Then at 9:05 am, about twenty minutes after the first collision, United Airlines flight 175 crashed into the South Tower.... [tags: September 11 Terrorism Essays]
1078 words (3.1 pages)
- Terrorism has been affecting the world for many years, but most especially since September 11th. Countless amounts of time and money have been spent; many soldiers and American resources have gone out try to stop the problem, but what happens to the terrorists after they have been captured. A basic level of humane treatment needs to be given to all people even those suspected of or convicted of terroristic offences. Using torture to attempt to find more information is not the most helpful or effective method that could be applied.... [tags: Treat Terrorists Like Enemy Combatants]
2008 words (5.7 pages)
- There were numerous events and threats leading up to the terrorists attacks on the World Trade Center which left chaos amongst the streets of downtown New York City and would leave America and its families devastated and prone to change after this infamous date in our nation’s history. What happened on September 11th, 2001 was without a doubt both horrific and ill natured. Multiple terrorists hijacked several US airliners that would later be flown into the North and South towers, the Pentagon, and also an unintended area in Pennsylvania.... [tags: September 11 attacks, World Trade Center, Al-Qaeda]
1506 words (4.3 pages)
- After the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) that killed over 3000 people and left countless wounded, the United States of America and its allies declared War on Terror (Bradley & Goldsmith, 2005). From late 2001 to 2009, the battlefront for the war on terrorism was predominantly in Southeast and Southwest Asia (Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan). Recent trends however indicate that though the previous mentioned battlefields are active, radical Islamic terrorism is becoming increasingly present in the West and especially in European countries.... [tags: Terrorism, Al-Qaeda, September 11 attacks]
1057 words (3 pages)
- On 11th of September 2001 a total of 19 militants associated to a terrorist group named Al-Qaeda; carried out a suicide attack on World Trade Towers in New York by hijacking four airliners. Two planes out of four were used to attack the towers while third and fourth were used to hit Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania. With reference to its date of occurrence, this attack is referred generally as 9/11and it resulted in widespread destruction and death i.e. over 3000 people and above 400 police officers.... [tags: Al-Qaeda, September 11 attacks, War on Terrorism]
1084 words (3.1 pages)
- The U.S. military response to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 signifies the most extensive use of force by any state since the Persian Gulf War more than two decades ago. Following these operations, many commentators have suggested that there has been a notable transformation in international law regarding state responsibility for terrorist acts. This essay aims to argue that such change has been of marginal significance and it does not satisfactorily countenance states’ response to international terrorism.... [tags: Terrorism, United Nations, United Nations Charter]
714 words (2 pages)
- Financial Effects of September 11th September 11th, like few other dates in the history of our country, will be permanently engraved in all American’s memories. Even though the events of this tragic day are behind us, the economy is still feeling the burden of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The economy was already experiencing a fall off before the attack. Despite the struggling times, Wall Street analysts believed that with the six Federal Rate cuts, the United States economy could avoid recession.... [tags: September 11 Terrorism Essays]
1549 words (4.4 pages)
- On September 11,2001 19 Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four airlines and carried out suicide against targets in the U.S. all 19 coordinators died, crashing two planes into the twin towers of the world trade centers in the new York city, another plane crashed into the pentagon in Virginia and the fourth and final plane into a field in Pennsylvania. The Islamic attackers were terrorists from Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations. They were apart of Osama bin laden’s al-quida terrorist organization. Some of the terrorists lived in America for more than a year and taken flying lessons at American commercial flight schools.... [tags: al-qaeda, terrorists, airlines]
557 words (1.6 pages)
- Are We Now Becoming the Terrorists. Terrorism is a weapon of the weak. Shut out of the great conversations that shape our histories and unable to control the grand forces that shape our destinies, terrorists strike out in angry desperation to force those they have identified as their oppressors to pay attention to the plight of the alienated and to hear the terrorists' demands. The events of September 11 were just such a gesture. The horror we felt watching a jet flown deliberately into a tall building and watching people leap to their deaths to escape the flames and collapse of the ruined skyscrapers filled us with a strange awe and a feeling of helplessness.... [tags: September 11 Terrorism Essays]
924 words (2.6 pages)
- As we reflect upon the terrifying events of 11 September 2001, we are haunted by analogies from our past. But historical analogies require careful examination, for choosing among them influences the way we will think, speak, and act. Commentators have compared the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to Pearl Harbor, because both attacks came without warning. With Pearl Harbor as the primary analog, the attacks on New York and Washington were quickly termed "acts of war." That is understandable, but dangerously imprecise.... [tags: September 11 Terrorism Essays]
835 words (2.4 pages)
Feminist interventions since September 11 have labelled the event and its aftermath as an instance of patriarchal "technology of destruction and domination". They urge a dire need to transform the realist paradigm and to include one half of the world's population in deciding on foreign policy so that a more harmonious world and a "just peace" can be arrived at. However, feminism has no unified tenor. Despite using phrases like "sexual terrorism" (Dorothy Roberts) as a much bigger threat to human security than Islamic terrorism, feminists are a highly divided lot, with competing visions of "radical feminism", "white Western feminism", "ecological feminism", "post-modern feminism", et al. Feminist international relations deconstruct realist policies with gusto, but offer no alternative model for transforming practice of world affairs. Can a superpower be realistically expected to simply "forgive" and "heal" terrorists who killed nearly 3,000 people in one single day? Feminists seem to be putting forth a chimerical ideal.
Globalism/Neo-Marxism is a structural theory that rates economics, not security, as the driving force of international relations. Under-development of Third World states leads to "dependency" on rich industrialized states, which exploit the peripheral states through an integrated capitalist system. Saudi Arabia, which produced the majority of the hijackers on September 11, is a classic case of exploitation by gas-guzzling and oil-hungry America. Globalists believe that domestic bourgeois forces reinforce foreign domination. In the Saudi example, collusion between transnational American corporations and the Saudi royal family oppresses common people and forcibly imposes foreign values on Arabic society.
The ill-effects of US-led globalization 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 into terrorism. Another insight globalists give is that since foreign policy depends on economic and geo-economic resource strategies, the US government is using its war on terrorism as a pretext to open Iraq for oil exploration.
Division between the European Union and the US on war against Iraq can also be seen as a symptom of intra-capitalist struggle and "differential growth rates" of the northern states (Lenin). Europe and America are headed for a titanic "struggle among imperialists" to colonize the world, and this cleft is widening day by day, as was proved when the last German presidential poll was fought primarily on whether or not Berlin should support Washington in war. Alignment of "part-capitalist" states like Russia, China and India with the US in the post-September 11 phase is an indication of core and "semi-periphery" (Immanuel Wallerstein) joining hands not just against the common enemy of Islamic fundamentalism but to jointly "transfer surplus value" from least developed and weak states, and to prise open their markets to exports.
Globalists provide a very valuable recommendation that war on terrorism must include a war against poverty, not a war against the poor in Iraq and elsewhere. If the gap between North and South is not bridged soon, terrorism will flourish and gain deeper socioeconomic roots. However, in the post-September 11 world, it is inconceivable that the "transformation of global capitalist hegemony" will ever come about. It is also doubtful if proletariat and subordinated classes everywhere sympathize or approve of Osama bin Laden, who is himself a capitalist millionaire. Al-Qaeda and Islamic holy warriors bother least about capital accumulation and most about religion. If at all there is a global struggle in their minds, it is not one between have and have-not states but a "clash of civilizations" (Samuel Huntington) between Islamic and Judaeo-Christian worlds. Globalist medicines to counter the capitalist world system are also impractical. Self-reliance and autarchy are discarded options in today's world, be it for tackling terrorism or underdevelopment.
Pluralism is another structural theory of international relations which agrees with globalists that world politics is often governed by economics, not security. But pluralists perceive no exploitative super-structure. They believe free trade and barrier-free investment will eradicate all differences between have and have-not states. They support the neo-liberal macroeconomic consensus of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as the answer to the ills of poor countries, including terrorism. It is an optimistic pro-globalization stand a la Francis Fukuyama's position that secularism, liberal democracy and free markets will reduce all tensions in the world.
In game theoretical language, international relations are a positive sum-game, not a negative or zero sum-game. By extension, what the Osama bin Ladens of the world hate most are America's "free way of life" and its efforts to "modernize" the world. Pluralists consider non-state actors very important entities, having transnational impact. Al-Qaeda is a great example of the "cobweb image" of pluralist international relations, where multiple players crisscross national boundaries and act in concert to influence foreign policies. Global jihad knows no territorial border. Another aspect of non-state actor prominence after September 11 is pluralist faith in efficacy of international organizations to promote worldwide cooperation and regulate conflicts. There is a heightened need today for a comprehensive global convention against terrorism under the aegis of the United Nations. Robert Keohane's "hegemonic mover", the US, has to take the new initiative for a new "regime" against terrorism at the UN.
Pluralists also approach foreign policy decision-making through models like "groupthink" and bureaucratic politics. American governmental decisions after September 11 are redolent with institutional turf battles between the CIA and FBI, the US State Department and the Defense Department, for example. Instead of using a paint-brush and faulting president George W Bush as a "Rambo" or a "capitalist exploiter", some pluralists go down the ladder by choosing smaller units of analysis at the intra-governmental stage and give a more thorough and detailed description of the parts that make a whole and give rise to the final foreign policy "outcome".
Pluralism offers a perfect theoretical explanation of terrorist groups as "super-empowered non-state actors" who challenge state sovereignties and foreign policies. Nevertheless, the theory fails to explain why the US waged war on Afghanistan and is planning another in Iraq. "Internationalism" and John Ruggie's "multilateralism" are nowhere to be seen at present, as the US is showing increasing signs of "going it alone" in its war against terrorism. International organizations have been reduced to meaninglessness, as the US seems least interested in sharing even declaratory documents from Iraq meant actually for the UN. Talk of "integration" and world consensus based on free market ideas appears Utopian as America is igniting more and more conflict in newer theaters to safeguard its own national security.
The Fukuyama brand of pluralism is far too naive in a world on the verge of war and in deep economic recession. Another problem with pluralists is that they are almost exclusively all Americans and reflect an ethnocentric view of the global system and motivating factors in international affairs. The concept of a benevolent hegemon enforcing rules and regimes for the benefit of all appears incredulous in the case of a US that is not signatory to some of the most important international treaties and conventions. Pluralists do not have the tools to explain why the US is not continuing in the camp of Immanuel Kant's "peace union" of liberal states. Is "democratic peace" really not a cover behind which advanced neo-imperialist countries intervene in and exploit poorer states?
From our discussion of alternatives to realism, globalism/neo-Marxism comes nearest to a thorough explanation of the events preceding and succeeding September 11. Imbalances in economic development between North and South directly fuel the fires of anti-Americanism and terrorism. They create a reservoir of young people without jobs who are willing to vent their spleen on targets selected by religious fanatics. Pluralist triumphalism about exporting Western liberal polity and economy to end all inequalities does not stand ground on serious scrutiny. Globalization has discontents, and is not an unmitigated success story. Addressing the problems of those discontents will assuage most of the rage that translates into terrorist attacks. Feminism has its own distinct contribution on September 11 by voicing the cause of voiceless women in the periphery, but it cannot offer a rational step-by-step explanation of the terror attacks and the US response by merely deconstructing and criticizing the existing system of international relations.