UNITED STATES AND WAR ON TERROR: COSTS OF THE PYRRHIC VICTORY

Stevan Nedeljković

Marko Dašić

Abstract

The withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan during August 2021 puts an end to the longest war that America has ever fought and the first phase of the Global War on Terrorism. In this regard, two important questions arise, which we will try to answer in this paper. First, what are the main external and internal consequences that the United States has faced due to engaging in the “War on Terror”? Second, did the U.S. achieve its goals in that war? The external effects we have identified are the crisis of global leadership, the weakening of relations with the allies, the growth of China in the lee, and the rise of populism. Among the internal ones, we included the strengthening of the presidential function, the increase of state power, more profound social polarization, an increase in budget expenditures, and a growing deficit, as well as human casualties. In the end, we contributed to the debate on the nature of the U.S. “victory”. We are providing the argumentation in the direction that the final output of War on Terror should be named Pyrrhic victory.

References

• A National Security Strategy for a Global Age [NSS], December 2000, https://history.defense.gov/Portals/70/Documents/nss/nss2000.pdf?ver=vuu1vGIkFVV1HusDPL21Aw%3d%3d, Last accessed November 5, 2021.
• Ackerman, Elliot. 2021.” Winning Ugly – What the War on Terror Cost America.” Foreign Affairs. 100 (5): 66-74.
• Bergmann, Eirikur. 2020. Neo-Nationalism: The Rise of Nativist Populism, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bradley, Curtis A., Trevor W. Morrison. 2013. “Presidential Power, Historical Practice, and Legal Constraint”. Columbia Law Review 113 (4): 1097-1161.
• Brands, Hal, John Lewis Geddis. 2021. “The New Cold War: America, China and the Echoes of History”. Foreign Affairs 100 (6): 10-20.
• Bremmer, Ian. 2015. Superpower: Three Choices for America’s Role in the World. New York: Portfolio.
• Bush, George W. 2001.” The Deliberate and Deadly Attacks…Were Acts of War.” American Rhetoric. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/gwbush911cabinetroomaddress.htm.
• Byman, Daniel. 2021. ”The Good Enough Doctrine Learning to Live With Terrorism.” Foreign Affairs. 100 (5): 32-43.
• Carlisle, Madeleine, 2021. “How 9/11 Radically Expanded Power of U.S. Government”. Time. September 11. https://time.com/6096903/september-11-legal-history/
• Coolay, Alexander and Daniel Nexon. 2020. Exit from hegemony: the unraveling of the American global order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Crawford, Neta C. and Catherine Lutz.” Human Cost of Post-9/11 Wars.” Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2021/Costs%20of%20War_Direct%20War%20Deaths_9.1.21.pdf.
• Crawford, Neta C.” The U.S. Budgetary Costs of the Post-9/11 Wars.” Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2021/Costs%20of%20War_U.S.%20Budgetary%20Costs%20of%20Post-9%2011%20Wars_9.1.21.pdf.
• Daalder, Ivo A. and James M. Lindsay. 2003. America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
• De Luce, Brian. 2021. “After 9/11, China grew into superpower as a distracted U.S. fixated in terrorism, expert say”. NBS News October, 17. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/after-9-11-china-grew-superpower-distracted-u-s-fixated-n1278671
• Demick, Barbara. 2009. “In China, Bush remains popular president”. Los Angeles Times. January, 15. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-jan-15-fg-uschina15-story.html
• DePlato, Justin. 2015. American Presidential Power and the War on Terror: Does the Constitution Matter? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Dudley, Susan E. 2021. “Milestones in the Evolution of the Administrative State”, Daedalus, 150 (3), 33-48.
• Gaddis, John Lewis. 2005. Surprise, Security, and the American Experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Garton, Ash Timothy. 2002. ”U.S. and the Hyperpower.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/04/usa.comment.
• Genovese, Michael A., David Gray Adler. 2017. The War Power in an Age of Terrorism: Debating Presidential Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gordon, Philip H. 2007. ”’Punish France, Ignore Germany, Forgive Russia’ No Longer Fits.” The Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/punish-france-ignore-germany-forgive-russia-no-longer-fits.
• Gordon, Philip H. 2007a. ”Can the War on Terror Be Won? How to Fight the Right War.” Foreign Affairs. 86 (6): 53-66.
• Hall, Johnny. 2021. “In search for enemies: Donald Trump’s populist’s foreign policy rhetoric”. Politics 41 (1): 48-63.
• Haynes, Jeffrey. 2020. “Right-Wing Populism and Religion in Europe and the USA”. Religions 11 (10): 1-18.
• Held, David and Kyle McNally. 2015. “9/11 Wars: A Reckoning” Social Europe. March 13. https://socialeurope.eu/911-wars-a-reckoning
• Held, David and Kyle McNally. 2016. “Path to authoritarianism: the collapse of the politics of accommodation”. Open democracy. September 13. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/path-to-authoritarianism-collapse-of-politics-of-accommod/
• Held, David. 2016. Global Politics After 9/11: Failed Wars, Political Fragmentation, and the Rise of Authoritarianism. London: Global Policy.
• Hiland, Alexander. 2020. Presidential Power, Rhetoric and the Terror Wars: The Sovereign Presidency. New York: Lexington Books.
• Ikenberry, John G. 2020. A World Safe for Democracy: Liberal Internationalism and the Crisis of Global Order. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States [J.R.], September 18, 2001, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf, Last accessed November 5 2021.
• Kagan, Robert. 2004.” America’s Crisis of Legitimacy.” Foreign Affairs 83 (2): 65-87.
• Keller, Bill, 2003.” Why Colin Powell Should Go.” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/22/opinion/why-colin-powell-should-go.html.
• Kennedy, Brandon. 2012. “The Hijacking of Foreign Policy Decision Making: Groupthink and Presidential Power in the Post-9/11 World”. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 21: 633-680.
• Krauthammer, Charles. 1990.” The Unipolar Moment.” Foreign Affairs 70 (1): 23-33.
• Lahoud, Nelly. 2021. ”Bin Laden’s Catastrophic Success: Al Qaeda Changed the World—but Not in the Way It Expected.” Foreign Affairs. 100 (5): 10-21.
• Lawson, Gary. 1994. “The Rise and Rise of the Administrative State”, Harvard Law Review 107 (6): 1233-1237.
• Layne, Christopher. 2004. „The War on Terrorism and the Balance of Power: The Paradoxes of American Hegemony”, In Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st century. eds. T.V. Paul, James J. Wirtz and Michael Fortmann, 107-121. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Le­wis, Jef­frey. 2011.” EU Po­licy on the Iraq War and its Af­ter­math: The Bre­ak­down and Re­vi­val of Con­sen­sus-ba­sed De­ci­sion-ma­king.” In: Making E.U. Foreign Policy: National Preferences, European, Norms, and Common Policies, ed. Thomas C. Daniel, 70-91. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Marshall, William P. 2008. “Eleven Reasons Why Presidential Power Inevitably Expands and Why It Matters”, Boston University Law Review 88: 505-522.
• Mearsheimer, John J. 2021. “The Inevitable Rivalry: America, China, and the Tragedy of Great-Power Politics”. Foreign Affairs 100 (6): 48-58.
• Miller-Idriss, Cynthia. 2021. “From 9/11 to 1/6: The War on Terror Supercharged the Far Right”. Foreign Affairs 100 (5): 54-64.
• Nedeljković, Stevan. 2020. „Strategija uravnotežavanja u međunarodnim odnosima, studija slučaja: francusko i nemačko uravnotežavanje Sjedinjenih Američkih Država posle Hladnog rata.“ Doktorska disertacija. Univerzitet u Beogradu: Fakultet političkih nauka.
• Newport, Frank. 2001. “Bush Job Approval Was at 51% Immediately Before Tuesday’s Attacks.” Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/4882/bush-job-approval-51-immediately-before-tuesdays-attacks.aspx. Last accessed November 5 2021.
• Nguyen, Thi Thuy Hang. 2017. “George W. Bush and Asia: In the Shadow of the September 11”. Asian Affairs 48 (2): 313-333.
• Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 2014.” Transformational and transactional presidents.” Leadership. 10 (1): 118-124.
• Oleszek, Mark J. and Walter J. Oleszek, “Congress and the President: “Yes We Can!” or “Can We?”” in Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations. ed. Thurber, James A., 251-284. New York: Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Owens, John E. 2006. “Presidential Power and Congressional Acquiescence in the “War” on Terrorism: A New Constitutional Equilibrium?. Policy & Politics 34 (2): 258-303.
• Owens, John E. 2009. “Rivals Only Sometimes: Presidentialism, Unilateralism, and Congressional Acquiescence in the U.S. “War on Terror””. in Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations. ed. Thurber, James A., 309-324. New York: Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Pestritto, Ronald. 2007. “The Birth of the Administrative State: Where It Came From and What It Means for Limited Government”, The Heritage Foundation. https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/the-birth-the-administrative-state-where-it-came-and-what-it-means-limited. Last accessed September 12, 2021.
• Pew Research Center Report. 1999.” Optimism Reigns, Technology Plays Key Role.” Pew Research Center. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/1999/10/24/optimism-reigns-technology-plays-key-role/.
• Pffifner, James P. 2009. “Partisan Polarisation, Politics, and the Presidency: Structural Sources of Conflict”. in Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations. ed. Thurber, James A., 37-59. New York: Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Qinggo, Jia. 2003. “The impact of 9-11 on Sino-US relations: a preliminary assessment”. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 3: 159-177.
• Rhodes, Ben. 2021. “Them and U.S.: How America Lets Its Enemies Hijack Its Foreign Policy”. Foreign Affairs 100 (5): 22-31.
• SIPRI. 2001.” Military expenditure and arms production.” Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2001/04.
• SIPRI. 2021.” World military spending rises to almost $2 trillion in 2020.” Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2021/world-military-spending-rises-almost-2-trillion-2020.
• Snyder, Jack. 2003.” Imperial Temptations.” The National Interest. 71: 29-40.
• Taleb, Nassim Nicholas. 2007. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. New York: Random House.
• The Washington Post/ABC. 2001.” Post-ABC Poll: Terrorist Attacks.” The Washington Post. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/vault/stories/data091401.htm.
• Thucydides (translated by Martin Hammond) 2009. The Peloponnesian War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Thurber, James A., ed. 2009. Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations. New York: Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs [WIIPA]. 2021.” Costs of War.” Brown University. Last accessed November 5 2021. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/BudgetaryCosts.
• Wayne, Stephen J. 2009. “From Washington to Obama: The Evolution of the Legislative Presidency”. in Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations. ed. Thurber, James A., 61-81. New York: Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
• Yahri-Milo, Keren. 2018. ”After Credibility: American Foreign Policy in the Trump Era.” Foreign Affairs. 97 (1): 68-77.