Military Response To 9/11 Attacks and Gaza Conflict; A Comparative Study

Authors

  • Syed Raghab Ali Executive Director, Lahore Institute for Research and Analysis, The University of Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
  • Sapna Mumtaz Senior Research Fellow, Lahore Institute for Research and Analysis (LIRA), The University of Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56976/jsom.v4i1.221

Keywords:

American 9/11 Attack, Global War on Terror, Militant Extremist Organizations, Hamas, Israel, Escalation, Blowback, Anti-Western Sentiment

Abstract

The event of 9/11 led America to launch a global war on terror. Particularly, America started military intervention in Afghanistan intending to destroy militant extremist organizations and to upgrade the country’s security. Likewise, in the light of Hamas assaults, Israel has utilized a mix of military operations, targeted killings, and safety measures to safeguard its nationals and to stop assault escalation. The attacks on America by the Taliban and Israel by Hamas have questioned the security and hegemony of the West. Therefore, this paper tries to investigate the sequence and methods of Hamas's onslaught on Israel and its relationship with the American 9/11 attack, while comparing the counter-war strategies utilized by both nations. To compare and analyze the several aspects of the assaults, this research has adopted a comparative research methodology. The findings of the study suggest that, owing to adopting a force-centric approach, both states, Israel and the US, have failed to eliminate extremism and maintain regional peace. They have put forward a genocide scheme that has created a blowback situation in the West, and people are protesting at the global level against their policies. It has a ripple effect leading to an increase in anti-West sentiments, protests, violence, and militancy.

Downloads

Published

2024-01-24

How to Cite

Ali, S. R. ., & Mumtaz, S. . (2024). Military Response To 9/11 Attacks and Gaza Conflict; A Comparative Study. Journal of Social and Organizational Matters, 3(1), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.56976/jsom.v4i1.221

Issue

Section

Articles