March 17, 2020
We learned resilience after 9/11. But it’s the wrong kind for combatting a virus.
Ever since the attacks of 9/11 shocked the nation, Americans have been urged by political leaders to learn resilience in the face of terrorism. That’s been critical to improving our ability to withstand such attacks when they occur and to show terrorists that their strategy won’t have the effects they desire. Now, we face our nation’s scariest moment since then: a virus that’s killed thousands around the world and that’s infecting thousands of Americans — and spreading. But the same resilience that we learned to show in the face of terrorism — centered on continuing with everyday life — isn’t strategic, wise or tough in the face of this new threat. It’s dangerous, foolish and selfish. At a pivotal moment for slowing the spread of coronavirus on U.S. soil, Americans need to learn a new kind of resilience that’s the opposite of what they’ve spent 20 years cultivating — and fast.
It was soon after 9/11 that Americans were first exhorted not to let the devastating attacks of that day interfere with ordinary life. Within weeks, President George W. Bush was encouraging Americans “to go about their lives, to fly on airplanes, to travel, to go to work.” He was right: Once the federal government felt confident that no second wave of al-Qaeda attacks was imminent, it was critical to America’s economy, society and collective psychology not to let the tragedy bring a superpower to a standstill. Showing national resilience in the face of terrorist attacks actually counters the effectiveness of those attacks: Terrorism is inherently a strategy of provocation, and standing tough afterward actually thwarts terrorists’ very objectives. We’ve both worked on counterterrorism in the U.S. government — one in the year before and decade after 9/11 at the Justice Department and Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the other for much of the last decade at the Justice Department and National Security Council — and we both believe strongly in the value of building resilience in the face of terrorism.
Read the full article in The Washington Post.
More from CNAS
-
The U.S. Is Losing Ground to China in Southeast Asia
Commentary
Without routine engagement, Southeast Asian countries become uneasy about U.S. commitments and tend to look elsewhere—such as to China—to fulfill their needs....
By Derek Grossman
-
Podcast
Indo-Pacific Security / Middle East Security
The Global Power Shift No One Is Talking About – And Who’s Driving ItMost people see the world as the U.S. vs. China. But the real power shift is happening elsewhere. Richard Fontaine, CEO of the Center for a New American Security and a former ...
By Richard Fontaine
-
China May Grab a Lead in the Race for Military Fusion
Commentary
This article was originally published in The Wall Street Journal. America’s top diplomat for nuclear-weapons issues, Undersecretary of State Thomas DiNanno, revealed this mont...
By David Feith
-
Commentary
Indo-Pacific Security / Energy, Economics & Security
How to Win the Economic War with ChinaTrump's approach to China has run aground, giving Beijing unprecedented advantage in the economic conflict....
By Edward Fishman & Julian Gewirtz
