Editorial: Watershed year for the U.S.

Friday, Dec. 28, 2001 | 3:20 a.m.

New Year's Eve is just around the corner, and it is customary at this time to compile lists of the top events from the past year. Major national news stories from 2001 included the energy crisis, the lasting divisions over the narrow victory in the presidential election, and the Democrats taking control of the Senate. But in 2001, at least, there's no question what was the biggest national story of the year. Everything was eclipsed by the horror of Sept. 11. That Tuesday morning saw 19 terrorists unleash destruction against the United States that it had never witnessed before in just a period of a few hours. More than 3,000 people died in the suicide hijackings as the terrorists commandeered the jet airliners that toppled the World Trade Center and destroyed part of the Pentagon. It's a dicey proposition to assess the historical impact of an event so soon after it happens -- just slightly more than three months is but a blip in our nation's history. But Sept. 11, in many ways,! was a watershed event for our people and our government.

One of the unintended consequences of the terrorism was that it actually brought our nation together in a way that hasn't been seen in decades. Admittedly, Americans were united during the Gulf War a decade ago, but it wasn't the same. On Sept. 11 a faraway foreign country wasn't invaded, as was the case with Kuwait. This time innocent American civilians were killed on American soil -- and the televised images of the plane crashes and implosion of the World Trade Center were played repeatedly for a stunned nation. The impact on the nation's psyche is immeasurable, but it is certain that it created the resolve to bring to justice -- one way or another -- the men who orchestrated the cowardly attacks.

Meanwhile, Congress may not have officially declared war, but this is a war nonetheless. Yet it also is unlike any other that we have fought when it comes to who our enemy is. The Taliban regime ruled over Afghanistan, but the collection of Islamic extremists in charge hardly could be called a government in the usual sense. And the terrorist strikes weren't directly carried out by the Taliban, they instead were undertaken by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network, which was provided a safe haven in Afghanistan by the Taliban. So the United States wasn't launching a war against a foreign government with a head of state, it was initiating a war against terrorism, a frustrating campaign that can be illusory and take years -- maybe decades -- to wage.

It also should be noted that when 2001 was ushered in, there still were deep divisions in the nation over the bitterly contested presidential election, which saw George Bush win by the narrowest of margins. But that acrimony was put aside in the first weeks after Sept. 11 as the nation came together to respond to the terrorist attacks. Any questions about the president's ability to lead the nation were quickly put to rest as he has led what so far has been a winning military campaign, one that has resulted in the elimination of the Taliban and the destruction of the al-Qaida terrorist network in Afghanistan. While the president has found success so far, we shouldn't forget that bin Laden has yet to be found and there may be thousands of terrorists loose around the globe who attended bin Laden's terrorist training camps. For that matter, the emerging govern ment in Afghanistan could create headaches for the administration if the warlords come to the forefront again.

One major change that occurred after Sept. 11 was how people viewed government. No longer was government cast as the villain. Americans, even those critical of the federal government's scope, saw government in a new light. Government wasn't a faceless institution full of bureaucrats -- it was the firefighters and police officers who paid the ultimate price in an attempt to rescue people trapped in the World Trade Center. Government also was viewed as the solution to one of the weaknesses in airport security exposed by the terrorist attacks. Many Republicans in Congress wanted to maintain privatization of airport security, but public pressure forced them to relent, and President Bush signed into law legislation requiring the federalization of airport screeners. This will ensure better pay and better training, which will lead to a professional work force who se primary goal will be to foil terrorism. That wasn't the case under the old system, where cost-cutting, not security, pre! occupied the private companies in charge of airport safety.

As we look ahead to 2002, we have to acknowledge that Americans in recent years have developed an appreciably shorter attention span, so if bin Laden is captured or found dead, there will be some who will say that that's enough, and we should restrict our involvement in overseas matters. But the boiling tension between nuclear powers Pakistan and India is but one example of a hot spot that should get our complete attention. That is why the Bush administration is taking steps to try to defuse the situation before it spirals out of control. Sept. 11 demonstrated that we're not an island, that the United States will be a target for terrorist attacks, and we must be engaged with other nations. The year 2001 reminded us just how fragile the balance is between war and peace -- and 2002 shows no signs of being any different.

archive