Spencer Ackerman covered the War on Terror over the past 20 years for The Guardian and other outlets. In Reign of Terror, he argues the post 9/11 era accelerated America's descent into political chaos. The forces of xenophobia and white supremacy reared their head and were mainstreamed into the popular discourse. The aftermath of 9/11 fomented a blowback first felt though interventions abroad and eventually into a deeper reckoning on the home front (or "homeland" to cite the era's rhetorical changes). Reign of Terror is consistently grim but well argued.
In the post-9/11 era suspected terrorists were rounded up and sent to Guantanamo Bay, held as enemy combatants, and often denied basic human rights. Torture became standard policy and Ackmerman describes in graphic detail the methods pursued by the CIA and the military. While President Bush was careful (except for a few thinking out loud moments) not to implicate all Muslims as jihadists, the era fueled anti-Islamic attitudes of an increasingly xenophobic voting bloc already enraged over the Mexican border and changing demographics in America. Islamophobia would manifest itself in accusations President Obama was an imposter born in Kenya.
No one gets off free. Conservatives quickly figured out how the war could be used to further their political agendas. Liberals barely put up a defense to the new militarism. Out of fear from looking weak in the face of existential threats, most Democrats supported the Iraq War. The author also criticizes President Obama for missing valuable opportunities to reshape foreign policy and end the War on Terror, but the machinery set by the Bush administration was too entrenched for substantial change. Instead, Obama streamlined and widened the war by stepping up surveillance and the use of drones.
In 2016, candidate Trump condemned America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even prompting some gullible pundits to declare him the "peace candidate" opposite Hillary Clinton (generally considered a hawkish liberal). Trump reveled in violent rhetoric and implied the War on Terror needed to be waged with no constraints whatsoever. He spoke of "secret plans" to defeat Isis and labeled all Muslims as the enemy by calling for a ban on all from entering the country. Even more predictable and disturbing was the new populist talking point: liberals must be considered just as dangerous as Isis, or even worse.
I recall the unrest in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri in response to the police killing Michael Brown. It was an early example of a militarized police force being unleashed on protestors who were demanding racial justice. It was the first sign the War on Terror tactics would be waged on American citizens. During the 2020 protests after of George Floyd's murder, Trump and many Republicans wanted to use the military to jail and brutalize protestors. Homeland Security and ICE agents made their presence known and showed little restraint despite being filmed on I-Phones. Meanwhile, the War on Terror rolled on endlessly.
Reign of Terror is bleak, but well-argued and impassioned. The key to Ackerman's main argument goes back to Susan Sontag's reflection on 9/11 that was published in the New Yorker the week after. Instead of calling for retribution and offering banal statements about American perseverance during challenging times, she called out the country's foreign policy in the Middle East as the main cause of the attacks. Pundits on the left and right denounced Sontag. The Bush administration, with bi-partisan and popular support, chose to pursue vengeance and conflict on the Middle East. Any hint of soul searching or a reconsideration of America's relationship with the world that Sontag advocated for were either ignored or silenced.
Ackerman offers no alternate paths or solutions, and while I try to avoid criticizing a book for what it's not, considering alternate paths or counterfactuals have their use. No one escapes unscathed. Dissenters to the War on Terror are portrayed as ineffectual. The acidic critique of Obama may be warranted at times, but the political realities the administration faced in 2009 made a total halt to all conflicts untenable. As Obama advisor Ben Rhodes pointed out to Ackerman, what if Obama had ended the War on Terror and it was followed by a cataclysmic terror attack - and then what?
Ackerman's also in the complicated place of being critical towards the National Security State and the populist forces Trump unleashed, who see themselves in opposition to the nefarious "deep state." The subtext was they wished to take over the deep state and install their own loyalists - and according to a recent article they have a plan in place. The distinction should be spelled out more clearly: one is a dangerous, violent, antidemocratic political movement - the other needs institutional reform and more accountability.
Ultimately, Reign of Terror provides a coherent and passionate perspective on how the War on Terror damaged the world. The level of destruction wrought by American military power wrought on Asia and Africa left a trail of death and suffering in the millions. The militarization of the police and armed insurgency movements pose serious existential threats to democracy's survival. I would recommend Reign of Terror as a must read for some critical insight on the past 20 years.
