Twenty-five years later, the war on terror is re-evaluated
As the world marks a quarter-century since the attacks of September 11, global media outlets are scrutinizing the long-term strategic impact of the subsequent military campaigns.
Twenty-five years after the coordinated attacks on New York and Washington, the international press is engaged in a complex retrospective on the legacy of the war on terror. While some American publications acknowledge strategic successes in preventing further large-scale attacks on US soil, other outlets question whether the long-term military engagements served the original objectives or merely deepened geopolitical instability.
According to France 24, the debate is not purely historical but remains a focal point for current political discourse. The assessment varies significantly by region, with European critics highlighting the consequences of conflating distinct geopolitical issues, while US commentators often emphasize the defensive principles that have held since 2001.
Divergent views on strategic outcomes
American media outlets have largely framed the post-9/11 response as a necessary and effective deterrent. The Washington Post noted that the administration got the most important thing right, despite acknowledging significant errors in the handling of Iraq and Afghanistan. The Wall Street Journal echoed this sentiment, arguing that the principle of taking the fight to terrorists abroad and holding host nations accountable were critical in protecting the United States from similar threats over the past two and a half decades.
In contrast, European perspectives often focus on the strategic missteps of the early years. The Times highlighted the Bush administration’s rapid conflation of the 9/11 perpetrators, who were Saudi citizens, with Iraq, describing it as an entirely unrelated country. This distinction is central to the European critique that the subsequent invasions were driven by political rather than purely security-based logic.
The trap of endless conflict
A more critical view emerged from French intelligence circles. Le Monde interviewed a former French intelligence official who suggested that the true success of al Qaeda lay in the long-term entanglement of the United States in protracted conflicts. According to the official, the trap was not the immediate attack, but the subsequent wars into which America plunged, diverting resources and attention from other global priorities while failing to achieve decisive, stable outcomes.
Political fallout in France
Amidst these geopolitical reflections, France is dealing with a domestic political scandal involving the National Rally party. A police officer with close ties to the party was recorded making racist remarks while on duty. Party representatives, as quoted in Le Figaro, have attempted to distance themselves from the incident, labeling it an isolated case that does not reflect the party's values. However, critics argue that the comments reflect a broader ideological stance within certain segments of the party, sparking renewed debate about the intersection of law enforcement and far-right politics.
