How do we get past 911? Should we forget 911?

My name is Marta da Silva. I am a junior and International Relations/History concentrator here at Brown. I decided to take this course because I believe it provides a necessary foundation to the multifaceted study of International Relations. I also hope to gain from this course an historical and theoretical background to the modern-day study of International Relations. Lastly, Christina Kim recommended this course to me last semester and her word is gold.

Upon receiving this assignment and processing this question, I reasoned that the dilemma in dealing with the tragic events of 911 is an issue of the perception and obligation of commemoration. People need to (yet often do not) separate living in the past and learning from the past. Instead of moving forward in aims of peace, memories of violence and the perception of the events on 911 perpetuate further violence; in a primitive sense, the reaction is comparable to schoolyard, or playground revenge. Violence becomes synonymous with action and justified as such, upholding a sense of duty to remember and fight for the victims of the terrorist attacks.

An article from the New York Times on September 11th illustrated the prevailing question of “whether the war in Iraq has made the United States safer or more vulnerable to terrorists.” I would even argue that another question prevails: whether the war in Iraq has made the United States more similar to the terrorists. There is a disturbing video online (http://www.current.tv/pods/controversy/PD04399) that demonstrates a torture technique called “water-boarding,” which is one of the methods used against terrorist suspects. The video at one point states that the aim is for torture to prevent terrorism. Which is worse? Does putting a government label on these methods of violence make them logical or acceptable? Does not this method of resolution simply perpetuate the problem? Likewise, are we better off constantly using 911 as our benchmark reference point, or should we move on?

Illustrated by the reading from Theories of International Relations, analyses such as that of Maja Zehfuss contend that the “White House has exploited the memory of ‘September 11’ to justify the curtailment of civil liberties at home, and an aggressive military response abroad,” (167). The politics of memory, as argued by postmodernists, has become a powerful tool in policy decision-making. People must be aware of policy actions and their affiliated interpretations; we must differentiate between honoring the victims and creating some semblance of peace in their memory. A time must come when we can remember and honor the tragedies of 911 without relying on that memory to justify current policies of vengeance and violence. We must commemorate the victims without becoming blinded by the remorse.

Posted by Marta da Silva on September 18, 2007 10:19 AM | Permalink

« From Priya Pingali: 9/11 Response | Main | Forgetting 9/11? »