Will There Be Accountability?

On August 5th 2021, Hezbollah fired more than a dozen rockets at northern Israel for the first time, since the last Lebanon war in 2006 which killed 1200 Lebanese and 160 Israelis. In response to those rockets, Israel launched air strikes against multiple Hezbollah targets. The Iron Dome system intercepted most of these rockets, while few landed in open areas and there were no injuries declared by the Israeli officials. Hassan Nasrallah claimed that the launching of the rockets was a response to Israel air raids on Lebanese soil. He said in a televised speech, “we wanted to tell the enemy that any airstrike by the Israeli air force on Lebanon will inevitably draw a response, though in a suitable and proportionate way”. However, Hezbollah’s swift halting of escalation after launching dozens of rockets on the north of Israel and the short and limited response of Israel clearly showed that neither Israel nor Hezbollah wants war. Hezbollah is concerned with the declining situation in Lebanon, where inflation is out of control and there are shortages of electricity, fuel, food and medicine. This situation has led to discontent with the Government (and Hezbollah as well) that started back in 2020 amid the Beirut Port explosion, which encouraged thousands of angry protesters chanting anti-Hezbollah slogans, accusing the group for illegally bringing tons of ammonium nitrate into Beirut, and their reputation is still declining. Lebanon's influential Maronite Catholic Patriarch Bechara Boutros during his Sunday Mass urged the Lebanon army to “confront Hezbollah for the sake of Lebanon, and to take control of the entire lands of the south, to prevent the launching of missiles from Lebanon”, referring to the recent rockets fired into northern Israel by the group. In an effort to reassure Lebanese citizens about the recent clashes with Israel, Hezbollah leader Nasrallah said in a televised statement, “We don’t want to get into problem with anyone. We want to help our people”.

However, Hezbollah is part of a growing worldwide alliance under Iran’s ideological and military authority. Iran’s involvement in Lebanon’s affairs since 1976, within the Shi’a community, convinced the majority of Shia community Hezbollah, to coalesce into the Lebanese branch of the Iranian Islamic revolution known as Hezbollah. Hezbollah has also participated in the Syrian war to help Bashar Assad and Iran defeat the rebels there. Hezbollah isn't shy about the importance of the funding they receive from Iran. In June 2016, Nasrallah said “as long as there is money in Iran, we will have money”. About a week later (Friday July 1st, 2016) the deputy head of the IRGC (currently the head of the Quds force) Hossein Salami said “we have 100,000 rockets that are ready to fly from Lebanon towards Israel”, referring to a potential conflict.

That potential conflict between Iran and Israel is becoming more of a likely possibility with the continuing development of Iran’s uranium, with Benny Gantz warning on August 3rd that “Iran is 10 weeks away from gaining the bomb” and warning that “Israel is ready to attack Iran”. With the recent breakdown of the negotiations to return to the JCPOA, Irans has continued to accelerate its enrichment and now a military option seems to be the most likely way Israel will try to stop them from gaining nuclear weapons. Although Gantz has warned about the possibility of an Israeli strike, he has also worked to mobilize the international community, to restrain Iranian hostilities and unlike the previous government, took the initiative in involving the Security council and rebuilding the trust between Israel and various international organizations such as the E.U and U.N. The commander of the Quds force (the commandos of the IRGC) Hossein Salami issued a strong warning to countries threatening Iran saying during a visit to the country’s military base that Iran won’t hesitate to show a strict and decisive response.

The recent escalating tensions between Iran and Israel are not only related to Iran's nuclear enrichment efforts, but are also tied to the “shadow war” that is going on between Iran and Israel, where Iran has been targeting Israeli-linked shipping with limpet mines and drone attacks and Israel has been hitting Iranian soldiers and its proxies in Syria. However, the July 30th attack on the Israeli owned tanker Mercer Street which killed a British and Romanian citizen, was the first time these Irainian attacks on Israeli shipping resulted in fatalities. The foreign ministers of U.S, Britain, Romania and the E.U issued a joint statement condemning the attack and called it “ a deliberate and targeted attack,” adding that “all available evidence clearly points to Iran”. The US military’s Central Command has announced the results of its investigation into last month’s fatal attack and concluded that the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle was produced in Iran. The evidence has been shared with explosive experts in Britain and Israel. The investigation also recovered part of the drone ‘wing and after testing it was concluded that the drone was made in Iran. On Aug. 3 Israel’s envoy to the U.N Gilad Erdan, sent a letter to the Security Council, demanding its immediate action to the maritime incidents in the region and declared that Israel would retain its right to act against any future Iranian threats.

Two questions now remain that will determine whether Hezbollah and Israel will undergo another conflict in the near future. Will Israel attack Iran if they continue to get closer to a Nuclear weapon? If the answer to that question is yes, then the second question becomes more relevant. Will Hezbollah attack Israel if Iran tells it to? The answer is probably yes, but before Hezbollah agrees to this likely Iranian demand, it should remember the devastation the 2006 war brought to Lebanon, the current state of the Lebanese economy and put its fellow Lebanese, before the IRGC leadership.

The rapid fall of Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, on August 15th without a serious fight and the flight of the deposed president Ashraf Ghani, reportedly with several cars and a helicopter full of cash, heralded the inglorious end of America’s near two decade attempt to “nation-build” Afghanistan in its own image. The fact that the fall of the Afghan government, which had been supported by international coalition forces, fell even prior to the American departure of its military, intelligence, and diplomatic assets out of the country only added insult to injury. The fall was not surprising to many critics, but the speed of it all was. The situation in Kabul was so terrible that the United States had to beg the Taliban, a force once described by General Wesley Clark as “the most incompetent adversary the United States has fought since the Barbary pirates”, to spare its embassy and to ensure safe passage of the staff out of the country. The US even offered aid as an inducement for the Taliban to allow safe passage for its staff. The American exit from the country was also marked by airport bombingsthat killed 13 American service members and scores of Afghanis. The bungled withdrawal, has also led to American’s international allies being placed at risk and questioning the judgment of her leader. The British parliament held President Joe Biden in contempt by a unanimous vote. Many other European leaders expressed their shock at how poorly the withdrawal was conducted and noted that their faith in American leadership had been damaged by this affair.  

This exit from the country has larger consequences. As America withdraws, China, the main great power rival to the United States, is set to fill the power vacuum by attempting to get the Taliban led government within its sphere of influence. This is evident by China already announcing it is ready to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate governors of Afghanistan.  Russia, another major power, is also mulling recognition. This prospect of recognition by two major powers stands in contrast to the West's attitude toward the new regime which is one of non-recognition and the West attempt to lobby the international community to adopt a similar policy. China has eyed economic opportunity in extracting the rare earth resources in the country and China has noted that their strategic economic initiative to shift the trade routes of the world economy can run through Afghanistan. China also sees a détente with the Taliban as a means to cut off previous Taliban support for the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, which is an Islamist separatist group in China. Whether Afghanistan finally stabilizes under the Chinese sphere of influence or whether it once more erupts into internal discord and resists Chinese influence remains at this juncture an open question.

Twenty years after being removed from power by the US, as they formally proclaimed an Islamic Emirate in the country, the triumph of the Taliban seems complete. All this serves to suggest that the foreign presence in the country was not accomplishing any strategic goal America set, and the military occupation only managed to delay this Taliban takeover. This realization of at least the former point finally made policymakers arrange what was planned to be an honorable exit. President Trump had reached a withdrawal deal with the Taliban in 2020, which President Biden unilaterally scrapped. Instead, President Biden announced a longer timetable of withdrawal that moved the date of departure from May 1st to September 11th.  He also changed the nature of the withdrawal from being conditions based to unconditional and moved to disband a Trump created bureau that was dedicated providing support to overseas Americans in the event of a crisis.

Yet, here strategic blindness to the situation on the ground appeared commonplace. President Biden in a speech in July touted the superior numbers and equipment of the Afghan army over the Taliban, proclaiming that the fall of the national government was by no means a foregone conclusion and denied that there was intelligence assessments to the contrary (this turned out to be inaccurate). General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made similar remarks in July. Emblematic of the war at large, what was predicted to be an honorable exit quickly turned into a fiasco. Over-optimistic military assessments about the capacity of the Afghan army to resist the Taliban were rudely upset with many key cities in the country, Kabul included, surrendering without a serious fight. Despite insistences by Anthony Blinken, the Secretary of State, that what was unfolding in Kabul with the Taliban takeover and the frenzied rush to evacuate personnel was not anything like the American evacuation from Saigon and that America succeeded in its mission, such comparisons by the press were made.

The fact the United States finally withdrew from its most disastrous war since Vietnam was not the problem. The problem was strategic shortsightedness in entering Afghanistan and staying as long as America did, as well as carrying out a disastrous pull-out plan that led to a frenzied embassy rooftop evacuation and a chaotic rush to the Kabul airport by civilians.

From its inception, the American mission in Afghanistan was a moving goal post. Originally, the American invasion of Afghanistan was billed as an attempt to avenge the tragedy of 9/11 by waging an expansive “war on terror” to eradicate any terrorist and their state sponsors anywhere. In Afghanistan’s case, this war was to be waged on the members of the Islamist terrorist organization al-Qaeda, the organization responsible for the 2001 9/11 attack, and those like the Taliban who hosted these organizations in their countries.

If the object was to get the leaders of al-Qaeda like its principal leader Osama Bin Laden, then this could have been achieved through less interventionist means – but the US apparently had other plans. The Taliban offered to hand Bin Laden over prior to any military operation in Afghanistan, providing the United States gave them evidence he was behind 9/11. The ground invasion arguably could have been altogether avoided, as the Taliban reiterated their offer with the additional caveat that the Americans ceased their bombing campaign. Both offers were rejected by President Bush. The subsequent invasion of Afghanistan failed to capture Bin Laden, as he escaped to Pakistan after a close shave with American and the US allied Afghan troops in Tora Bora. His escape was made possible by the Pakistanis failing, perhaps intentionally, to secure their part of the border, infighting among America’s Afghan allies, and a lack of commitment of forces by American officials, who would miss other opportunities to cripple al-Qaeda by sending resources to Iraq, a country where al-Qaeda did not exist. Bin Laden was finally hunted down and killed in Pakistan in 2011, which should have signaled the end of the campaign given the declared goal of taking out the leadership of those responsible for the 9/11 attack, yet American forces remained in Afghanistan for ten more years.

Another goal post that was used to justify continued US presence in Afghanistan was that a phase of nation building was necessary to make the country self-governing. President Bush would gave a number of speeches where he would laud that under American tutelage, Afghanistan was to become more democratic, stable, a better place for women, and so on. Bush used gender advancements as a reason for the continuation of the war. Other politicians like Joe Biden would also encourage a long-term commitment of American blood and treasure being spent to make the country self-sufficient by eliminating corruption, warlordism, illiteracy, poverty, and the drug trade within the country.

There were expectations by the Americans that the Afghan army would be self-reliant and take over security matters by 2008. When this did not come to fruition, the date was moved by the Obama administration to 2014, however, even after this date there were questions regarding the seriousness of the Afghan army as a fighting force. The rapid collapse of the country during the US withdrawal proved those critics of the independence of the Afghan army right. Overall, about $1 trillion was spent in the name of securing Afghanistan by the US.

Yet, at every turn this nation building fell short. The United States failed to stop and even abetted the endemic corruption plaguing the national government as the CIA doled out money to any warlord, government official, and religious leader to buy loyalty, votes, and information. As much as 40 percent of American aid was used in this way. Nor did the majority of the aid stay in the war-torn country as 80-90 percent of American investment in Afghanistan found its way back to the US through a complex system of defense and aid contractors who in turn used the money for corrupt purposes and delivered substandard services to the Afghan army. During the course of the war on terror, US military officials even knowingly funded the Taliban insurgents it was fighting to let their convoys pass. Corruption was systemic in the Afghan army, where practices like using “ghost soldiers”, inflating the military troop strength with fictitious personnel to pocket more cash, was readily used. American officials readily manipulated statistics for public consumption that suggested the war was being won while privately admitting this was an unwinnable venture. Similarly, the attempt to rid Afghanistan of its opium production by the Americans failed spectacularly as the amount of opium production by the country rose from 180 metric tons in 2001 to 6,400 tons in 2019. To the extent any nation building was being done, it was being done by mass corruption and was only making the national Afghan government a client state that was wholly dependent on American aid to survive.

In the end, Afghanistan shows the folly of American overreach. The initial war aims might have been achieved peacefully from the beginning; and once the country was under military occupation - a listlessness of aims set in. From hunting down those responsible for 9/11 the goal now was to engage in a nebulous process called nation building to make the country able to govern itself (in a more liberal style). This process was broad, as it included attempting to restructure Afghan society to make the very conservative society more like the West, as well as focusing on getting the Afghan army to secure the country. Rampant corruption plagued this process and made the national government more dependent on international assistance to keep the Taliban at bay. The rapid collapse of the national government to the Taliban in all but one province while the United States was still removing its forces denied an honorable exit to the United States.

The takeaway lesson for the United States from this nearly 20-year debacle should be that the country and its leaders must think in geostrategic terms and about the ways in which its actions benefit or harm its long term aims. American foreign policy should be driven by well-defined aims. The intervention in Afghanistan, as this article shows, was not. Staying in Afghanistan and spending a vast amount of time, resources, and manpower on a corrupt and inept national government was detrimental while China grows economically, politically, and militarily.

Such time, resources, and manpower could have been devoted toward more meaningful and productive projects of containing China or addressing other issues that America faces. The United States should seek to befriend and support governments which have public legitimacy and a willingness to defend themselves by themselves rather than prop up a regime that has none of these qualities. In a sentence, the United States should play the game of international relations based on realist principles rather than act out in a blind ideological fashion. If the United States does this, it should avoid another scenario like Afghanistan.

After insisting that he “wasn’t going anywhere”, Former Governor Andrew Cuomo officially resigned from his position. Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul took his place two weeks after his announcement. Cuomo leaves New York State in chaos, with Hurricane Henri touching down and the Delta variant of COVID-19 pushing the city towards further lockdowns and vaccine mandates. His Democratic party is in shambles, and any chance of a supposed presidential run is improbable. Even the chief of Time Out NY resigned over connections with him.

The last few months of Cuomo’s Governorship divided the state of New York between praise and scorn, and shook up Democratic leadership across the country. On the one hand, Cuomo was lauded for his wisdom and competence in stopping the sky-rocketing numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths in New York State. Comedian Randy Rainbow had unironically coined the term “Cuomo-sexual” to describe the amorous feeling people had towards Cuomo’s leadership. Cuomo even won an International Emmy for his daily briefings to the people of New York.

On the other hand, Cuomo is currently under multiple investigations pertaining to several charges, including sexual assault, lying about COVID-19 casualties, and priotitizing COVID tests for close family and friends. Multiple fellow Democrats called for his resignation, including President Joe Biden, members of the state’s congressional delegation — including Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand — and members of New York’s legislature. As reported by NBC News, a poll released by Siena College in July 2021 during the ordeal found New Yorkers divided over their governor with 9 percent said he should stay in office but not seek another term, 33 percent said he should run again, and 23 percent said he should resign immediately.

In this article we hope to explain the situation which led to his resignation, as well as the ripple effects this will have on other Democrats, the State of New York, the identity of his replacement, and what this means for the Democratic party as a whole.

His Scandals

Over the last ten years, Andrew Cuomo faced plenty of scandals, but three specific ones put his leadership into question. Though he was notorious for having a reputation for being hard to work with, his current allegations were enough to force his resignation.

Cuomo’s resignation comes one week after a damning report issued by the state Attorney General’s office found he had sexually harassed multiple women, including a state police trooper assigned to his protective detail and women outside of government.

“This is not a responsibility we take lightly,” Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “We will hire a law firm, deputize them as attorneys of our office, and oversee a rigorous and independent investigation.” James, also a Democrat, said Cuomo had broken state and federal laws with his conduct, which she asserted included unwanted touching and sexual remarks. As reported in the Boston Globe, one former top staffer, Lindsey Boylan, tweeted back in December that Cuomo sexually harassed her for years. Following up her accusation with a post on Medium, she described in detail inappropriate comments, including a suggestion to play strip poker. She also said he gave her an unwanted kiss on the lips. Cuomo has since denied her accusations.

In another accusation, Charlotte Bennett, a 25-year-old ex-staffer, who left her state job, said Cuomo, 63, asked her questions about her personal life, including her sexual history. In response, he issued a statement, apologizing for inappropriate and “misinterpreted” remarks. As of today, 11 women have come forward with claims of sexual assault. However no announcement has been made recently regarding a court date to address these accusations. It’s difficult at the moment to determine what will happen to Cuomo after his resignation.

As reported by the Albany Times, allegations came out that during the early stages of the pandemic Cuomo prioritized COVID-19 tests, which were limited at the time, for his family and other associates. While testing was going on in New Rochelle during the beginning of the pandemic, one of those involved reportedly said that the people with close ties to the governor, including his relatives, would have their samples moved to the front of the line at Wadsworth Center Laboratory in Albany and given top priority. According to one of the testers, they were referred to as "critical samples." According to the Hill, particular scrutiny focused on the positive test of his brother Chris in March 2020 amid other conflicts of interest.These reports are currently being investigated by his impeachment probe. There are expectations that amid the conflicts of interest, there could be a potential shakeup at CNN, with Chris Cuomo possibly leaving the network.

Attorney General Letitia James also reported an undercount in coronavirus-related deaths of state nursing home residents by the thousands to avoid ire from the Trump Administration. Health Department officials confirmed this by releasing new data that added more than 3,800 deaths to their tally, representing nursing home residents who had died in hospitals and had not previously been counted by the state as nursing home deaths. Two sources told the Associated Press that the U.S. Justice Department has been examining the governor’s coronavirus task force. Currently, they’re determining if the state intentionally manipulated data regarding deaths in nursing homes. The sources anonymously said that the Cuomo administration had not been cooperative with prosecutors, especially in the early stages of the probe. For months they had not produced documents and other data the Justice Department had requested. The inquiry began in the Justice Department’s civil division, and some parts of the investigation have already been disclosed to the public. On Aug. 26, 2020, federal prosecutors gave Cuomo’s administration 14 days to provide data on nursing home deaths. More data was sought in October of 2020. Cuomo used those lower numbers last year to erroneously claim that New York was seeing a much smaller percentage of nursing home residents dying of COVID-19 than other states.

In recent weeks, Hochul’s office reported that nearly 55,400 people have died of the coronavirus in New York based on death certificate data submitted to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s 43,400 more than Cuomo reported to the public as of his last day in office. As of now, should this go to trial, it’s expected that the State of New York will most likely try to settle out of court for undisclosed amounts, fearing further administrators will be investigated over the matter.

His Replacement

Kathy Hochul (pronounced like “local”), Cuomo’s Democratic running mate, is now officially the state's first female governor. Hailing from Buffalo, NY, she is also the first governor from outside New York City and its immediate suburbs since 1932 (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt). She even plans to run for Governor again in 2022. “I am confident that they’ll see that I fight like hell every single day,” she said in an interview. “It’s how I’m hardwired, and I’m looking forward to this challenge, and I won’t let New Yorkers down.”

While the lieutenant governor doesn’t really do much (except be second-in-line for governor), Hochul wasn’t just sitting around. Cuomo tasked Hochul with chairing the 10 regional economic development councils that were the centerpiece of the administration's economic development plan. He also appointed her to chair the Task Force on Heroin and Opioid Abuse and Addiction. In this capacity, she convened eight outreach sessions across New York State to hear from experts and community members in search of answers to the heroin crisis and worked to develop a comprehensive strategy for New York.

She also spearheaded Cuomo's "Enough is Enough" campaign to combat sexual assault on college campuses. Since its inception in 2015, she’s hosted and attended more than 25 events. In March 2016, Cuomo named her to the New York State Women's Suffrage 100th Anniversary Commemoration Commission.

__His Place in the Democratic Party __

As of now, Cuomo’s chance to be anywhere near the political ticket for either re-election or presidency is highly unlikely. However, and despite all allegations against him, he had announced his intention to seek a fourth term in 2022. In 2019, he stated that “I believe I’m doing good things. I believe I know how to do this, and it gives me a personal sense of satisfaction to believe that at the end of the day, with all the nastiness in the world and all the politics in the world and the critics and the naysayers and the negativity, I know what I got done, and we have a lot going on now, and I would like to do it for as long as the people of the state of New York think I am a positive.” His legacy was summarily tarnished with the sexual allegations, especially during the peak of the #MeToo movement, which he ironically supported.

Regarding the Democratic primary, it’s unlikely the Democrats would be willing to bring him in. This resignation also opens the door for New York Republicans to have a chance at leading the Empire State. No Republican would’ve beaten Cuomo with his support during the peak of the pandemic, but now it might just happen.

In another report by the Times Union, AG James has denied having any political motivations for the probe. In fact, Cuomo even authorized it. James has also not publicly said whether she might run for governor. While her office oversaw the probe, it was actually conducted by two outside lawyers, Joon Kim and Anne Clark, who spoke with 179 people — including Cuomo himself.

As Mark Davis wrote in a Newsweek Op-Ed, New York Republicans will pick from a field containing Rudy Giuliani's son Andrew and Rep. Lee Zeldin. With the extra predictions of a 2022 GOP wave to take over the Senate and Congress, New York may witness something unseen for nearly 30 years: a close governor race, the first since Pataki's three-point win in 1994 over Andrew Cuomo's own father.

Tuesday September 11th, 2001 was a Tuesday, which felt like any other ordinary work day, until it wasn't. The illusions of normalcy were shattered when flight 11 crashed into the North Tower in a shower of fire, smoke and debris. Within the hour, the South Tower was hit by another commercial jet, removing any doubt that the horrific spectacle unfolding on television in front of the world's eyes, was a tragic accident. As the towers burned with hundreds of people trapped above the impact zone, a third hijacked airliner hit the Pentagon. A few minutes after, the South Tower collapsed, followed a half hour later by the North Tower, sending nearby onlookers running for their lives to avoid the tsunami of concrete and dust being released.

For many around the world, the events of 9/11 were unquestionably shocking and led to the advent of a new era in transportation security measures and a heightened threat perception of radical Islamic terrorism. For those living in the NY/NJ area, the effect of the attacks felt far more personal and traumatizing. For months after that day, it was surreal and heartbreaking to see the gaping void at ground zero, where the Twin Towers were supposed to be.

I grew up in a small city in New Jersey called Passaic about 9 miles outside of Manhattan. I have few memories of seeing the towers in person, but I distinctly remember going into the city one August afternoon, and seeing the towers about a kilometre away, a memory that stands out surprisingly clearly, given my age and the time that has elapsed. On that fateful day of September 11th, I had just started first grade and was my first class of the day, when I remember hearing the fire alarm. Naturally, I thought it was another fire drill. After the alarm had shut off, we remained standing outside on the curb, which was strange, because we always returned to class at the end of every drill. We were then sent home without any explanation and, like every other 6 year old, we were elated at the free vacation day and completely unaware of the circumstances that caused it.

Unbeknownst to me, my father was getting a live view of the horrors unfolding. He worked in the financial district a few blocks away and every day took the ferry across the river to the World Financial Center. Halfway across the river, he heard something resembling a sonic boom and looked out to see the North Tower on fire. Shortly after, the ferry docked and he joined the crowd close to the base of the building watching the tragedy, in shock. All of the sudden, he heard people yellinng "Another one, Another one!", as he turned to see the South Tower erupt in flames. Almost immediately after, he was able to get on one of the last ferries leaving Manhattan before transport was halted, later arriving home to a very relieved and thankful family.

Unfortunately, not everyone was so fortunate. About 3,000 innocent people were killed in one of the darkest days in American history and arguably its most famous terror attack. However, despite the trauma wrought on that day, 9/11 wasn't only defined by its exhibition of the worst impulses and evil of humanity, but also featured incredible stories of inspiring nobility and courage demonstrated by the first responders and citizens towards one another.

In the days and months following 9/11, there was a deep national feeling of anguish and sorrow, but also a tremendous anger to those who had perpetrated the attacks or their perceived ideological allies, leading to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since both efforts are now widely seen as a colossal failure, is it fair to say that America hasn't achieved the revenge it sought, following the attacks?

America hasn't achieved a conclusive military victory against radical Islamic Jihad. In fact it is inherently impossible to have a millitary victory against an ideology. The nature of the jihadist threat is that, as long as it exists as an attractive idea to fundamentalist Muslims, it can be acted upon in the future.

Muslims who feel disenfranchised from Western culture and ideas are more likely to be vulnerable to the allures of jihadism. These kinds of ideologies thrive on divisive political and religious rhetoric and claims of mistreatment by the West. In the wake of 9/11, it is crucial the West doesn't alienate moderate Muslims and that there is continued condemnation by Muslims of radical jihadists, not only on human terms but through religious arguments as well. While the aftermath of 9/11 may not have produced the conclusive military victory that many Americans longed for, its victory will be found in the rejection of ideas that divide Americans and people by race, religion, or creed and in the Freedom Tower that stands as a reminder that while America was bent on 9/11, it was far from broken.