September 11 – 25 Years Later, BU Experts Discuss

Drones illuminate the sky over New York Harbor on September 9, 2026, as part of a commemorative public art installation honoring each life lost in the 9/11 attacks. Media by 2,977 Lights Over New York Harbor/Craig Barritt

25th Anniversary of 9/11

25 Years Later, the Events of 9/11 Continue to Shape the World

BU experts on how the response to terrorist act has impacted geopolitics, intelligence, and so much more

September 10, 2026

BU Today staff

Twenty-five years ago this week, on the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 Al-Qaeda terrorists boarded four American commercial planes bound for the West Coast and intentionally crashed them. Two of those jets—American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175—left from Boston’s Logan Airport.

The first plane struck the North Tower of New York’s iconic World Trade Center at 8:46 am; the second plane struck the building’s South Tower 17 minutes later. Both towers collapsed shortly thereafter. A third plane, American Airlines Flight 77, departed from Dulles International Airport in Virginia and crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 am. The final plane, United Airlines 93, departing from Newark, N.J., crashed into a field in Shanksville, Pa., at 10:03 am. In the space of approximately 90 minutes, nearly 3,000 people lost their lives, including 30 members of the BU community.

The United States soon found itself embarking on a Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) that would become the longest war in the nation’s history and cost American taxpayers more than $8 trillion.

What no one could have anticipated 25 years ago was how the events of that day would continue to play out a quarter-century later. In observance of the anniversary, BU Today reached out to a number of Boston University faculty who are experts in international security, international relations, immigration law, privacy law, US history, and political science to reflect on the enduring legacy of that fateful day.

“The past 25 years constitute a cautionary tale, from which future generations might learn.”

David Mayers, professor of history and political science, College of Arts & Sciences

The death and destruction caused by the 9/11 attacks pitched the United States into fits of fear and fury, from the initial “war on terror”—and concomitant invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq—to the 2026 assault on Iran. The past 25 years constitute a cautionary tale, from which future generations might learn lessons on the imperatives of prudence and self-restraint. In this case, the squandering of lives, resources, and prestige will not have been entirely in vain.

From the arrogance of “shock and awe,” to the vile euphemism of “collateral damage,” to Abu Ghraib, to renditions and secret sites of prisoner detention, to “enhanced interrogation” techniques, we have undercut our moral authority. The country that helped establish the United Nations, spearheaded the meting out of justice to Nazi criminals at Nuremberg, helped frame the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and provided Marshall Plan aid to Europe has forfeited much goodwill. No country, not even the powerful United States, can live in isolation from, or in contempt of, the good opinion of other peoples and their governments. Nations previously well disposed toward America have grown anxious about our promiscuous use of force in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran.

While post-9/11 administrations have ascribed high-mindedness to United States military ventures, people on the receiving end have often perceived something else: either Americans have been blind to the willfulness of their national pride and the dangers of their unselfconscious hegemonial purpose; or, if self-aware, Americans have been disinclined to acknowledge their neocolonial ambitions.

The post-9/11 wars have also unbalanced the internal equilibrium and laws and liberty of the United States. This was first manifested in the authorization of the Patriot Act, with its tolerance of widespread government surveillance and monitoring of ordinary citizens in the conduct of their daily lives. As we must correct lapses of collective judgment—the suspension of prohibitions on torture, the eroding of civil protections—we need also to reflect on the virtue of traditional US conceptions and not become something irretrievably horrid. Written in a context different from our own, these words by the Cold War diplomat George Kennan still apply: “The greatest danger that can befall us . . . is that we shall allow ourselves to become like those with whom we are coping.”

Photo by Richard Drew via AP

“9/11 helped transform biometric identification from a marginal technology into a global security imperative.”

Noora Lori, associate professor of international relations and director of the Middle East-North Africa Initiative, Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies

Much has been written about 9/11’s enduring impact on airport security, surveillance, wars, and displacement. Less attention has been paid to a quieter legacy: the transformation of identification systems that establish who we are, where we belong, and whether we can move—or stay where we are.

9/11 helped transform biometric identification from a marginal technology into a global security imperative. Prior to 2001, only one state issued biometric passports; today more than 140 do. Biometrics became central to security vetting, allowing governments to verify travelers against expanding databases and watchlists. Access to visa-free travel pressured states to adopt new standards or risk exclusion from an emerging global mobility regime. But an infrastructure built on secure mobility also raises the evidentiary burden of proving: I am who I say I am. That burden increasingly extends beyond international travelers to entire populations.

Identity verification necessarily sorts people into those who can satisfy its demands and those who cannot. Universal security measures have unequal effects on people whose records are missing or inaccessible, who live far from where they were born, or whose citizenship is contested or vulnerable to revocation.

Neither mapping populations nor reading bodies is a neutral technical exercise. Identification systems allow states to narrate their populations more narrowly by determining what counts as proof of membership. Population registration and identity regularization drives create critical junctures during which political elites can harden ambiguous membership into exclusion. Biometrics promised an objective solution: where documents could be forged, lost, or missing, the body itself could become the credential. But bodies are not universally machine-readable. Manual labor can make fingerprints difficult to capture; injury, violence, age, cataracts, or disability can make people difficult or impossible to read. Technologies designed to make populations more legible can thus render some people increasingly illegible, unverifiable, and suspect.

For the securely verified, however, greater verification can mean speed: pre-vetted travelers can cross borders with little more than a biometric scan. Biometric identification thus increasingly differentiates the speed of mobility according to how confidently identity can be established. This is the paradox of the post-9/11 identification infrastructure. Twenty-five years later, the world is increasingly organized around verifiability: the ability to prove who you are can accelerate movement and secure membership, while the inability to do so can render a person “illegal,” immobile, or effectively stateless.

Photo by Gary Fabiano/SIPA USA via AP

“25 years after 9/11, our own arrogance is undermining the very source of our American strength.”

Jack Weinstein, professor of the practice of international security, Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies. Weinstein, a retired lieutenant general in the US Air Force (USAF), deployed to Southwest Asia as director of space forces for operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom in 2005.

On September 11, 2001, I was serving as an Air Force colonel at the US Strategic Command Operations Center in Omaha, Nebraska. From that vantage point, I observed firsthand President George W. Bush communicating with the secretary of defense and the vice president as they responded to the most devastating terrorist attack ever carried out on US soil.

Despite repeated efforts to shift strategic attention toward the Indo-Pacific, beginning with the Obama administration’s “Pivot to Asia,” the United States has been unable to fully disengage from the Middle East. In reality, the US military’s significant presence in the region predates 9/11, having expanded during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The attacks on 9/11, however, entrenched America’s military and intelligence commitments, rendering disengagement a fairy tale. More recently, Operations Midnight Hammer and Epic Fury have further tied the US to the Middle East, diverting resources and military capabilities needed for the Indo-Pacific and once again drawing America into the quicksand of the region.

As significant as the military legacy, including the deaths and injuries to armed combatants, civilians, and the trillions of dollars expended, are the changes within the US itself. America’s greatest strategic advantage has been the unparalleled network of allies and partners that has amplified US influence around the globe. The current administration’s view of foreign policy through the catchphrase “America First” has created a fissure in America’s power and influence.

As geopolitical competition intensifies, undermining allied confidence and cooperation is the antithesis of maintaining American strength. Twenty-five years after 9/11, our own arrogance is undermining the very source of our American strength.

Photo by Beth A. Keiser via AP

“The horrific events of September 11, 2001 forever altered the framework of United States’ immigration law and policy.”

Sarah Sherman-Stokes, clinical professor law and associate director, Immigrants’ Rights and Human Trafficking Program, School of Law

The horrific events of September 11, 2001 forever altered the framework of United States’ immigration law and policy, firmly conflating terrorism with immigration and leading to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2003. Today, the proposed DHS budget is a record $118.39 billion, and at the time of this writing, 65,765 people are held by ICE in over 200 jails and prisons across the United States. The detention population has more than tripled in the last 25 years; more than 5 million people have been deported and another 200 people have died in ICE custody.

Post-9/11 immigration policies like the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), a program specifically targeting Arab, Muslim, and South Asian communities for “special registration,” surveillance, detention and deportation, did not result in a single terrorism prosecution, but shifted what rights we are willing to trade away for the false promise of “security” in sinister ways, laying the groundwork for Muslim bans and the present-day targeting of pro-Palestine activists for arrest, detention, and deportation.

As conversations around policing and abolition grow, now is the moment—25 years after September 11—for us to critically reflect on our missteps, to consider the power of real transformative justice, and to take the path that truly brings us greater peace, safety, and healing.

Photo by Tom Horan via AP

“We are still living in a world of excessive surveillance hastened by our government’s reaction to September 11.”

Woodrow Hartzog, Andrew R. Randall Professor of Law, School of Law

The surveillance aftermath of September 11 is the reason I am a privacy scholar. I was a law student in 2001. In the student lounge that day, my classmates and I watched the towers fall in horror and fear. In the months that followed, lawmakers dramatically expanded the government’s surveillance powers by passing the Patriot Act, ostensibly to prevent another attack. This legislation amplified the government’s ability to surveil people by requiring less justification for broad and indiscriminate monitoring and data collection. This significant expansion of power over people struck me as dangerous and unjust.

I started law school as a student without much critical instinct. Back then, I think I figured most laws were probably passed for good reasons. But when lawmakers began dramatically expanding America’s surveillance rules to better spy on entire groups of people based on their race, cultural background, or religion, I realized how important our civil liberties were and how far our privacy laws had gone astray. I began to see how surveillance causes people to withdraw or conform, and how it suppresses the free expression, search for knowledge, and uninhibited social exchange necessary for a functional democracy. I saw how marginalized communities like people of color and Muslims felt the brunt of that surveillance first and hardest.

It is now clear to me that without strong legal protections, surveillance trends in only one direction—more. Once you build infrastructure and institutional practices around spying, its inertia is difficult to resist. Rollbacks are rare. People become acclimated to unjust surveillance and hoping for voluntary restraint by those in power is just wishful thinking.

We are still living in a world of excessive surveillance hastened by our government’s reaction to September 11. Thanks to facial recognition, data brokers, and smartphones, it is cheaper and easier than ever for the government (and everyone else) to spy on people. One of the vital lessons from September 11 is that we can only keep our civil liberties if we protect them in times of crisis.

Photo by David Lloyd/The Tribune-Democrat via AP

“In the aftermath of 9/11…the financial costs to protect our [military] bases continue to rise.”

Jonathan Martin (GRS’28). Martin is earning a PhD in political science at BU. He previously served 21 years in the US Army, where he did two tours of duty in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. He retired from the Army with the rank of lieutenant colonel in 2022.

When the first plane struck the World Trade Center on September 11, I was in an M1A1 tank on a range at Fort Knox, Kentucky, waiting to fire my first main gun round. A recently commissioned second lieutenant in the Army, I was at the Armor Officer Basic Course, learning to fight tanks and lead a tank platoon. A net call came that the range was cold and we were to return to the ammunition point. Securing the post became the top priority.

One of the legacies of 9/11 is the construction of this notion of fortress America, and it has come with tremendous financial and social costs. Prior to 9/11, most of our military installations at home and abroad were open posts. At Fort Knox, the United States Bullion Depository was fortified, but with US Route 31W bisecting the installation, there was freedom of movement between the post and the surrounding community. In the aftermath of 9/11, the United States has spent trillions fortifying our bases and embassies. With the proliferation of drones, the financial costs to protect our bases continue to rise.

In addition to the financial costs, fortifying our domestic bases adds to the disconnection of the American people from their military. While there is still great cooperation in military communities across America, gates have an isolating effect. Convenience alone guides day-to-day decisions that separate those who live on post from their surrounding communities. Overseas, bombproofing our embassies and installations has been undermining America’s image as a welcoming country long before today’s immigration backlash began. The 9/11 attacks initiated the transformation of the United States from a “shining city on a hill” to a dark fortress. It’s a sad legacy of that day.

Photo by Beth A. Keiser via AP

“One of the most unrecognized yet enduring [legacies of 9/11] is the change in how the United States funds its wars.”

Rosella Cappella Zielinksi, associate professor of political science, College of Arts & Sciences

The attacks on 9/11 led the United States into two wars—Afghanistan and Iraq—and spurred counterterrorism operations affecting upwards of 85 countries. The nonprofit Costs of War Project estimates that $8 trillion has been spent on these collective military actions. These costs will continue: caring for veterans will reach between $2.2 and 2.5 trillion by 2050 and interest payments on these debt funded actions will reach $2 trillion by 2030. These economic costs pale in comparison to the human (direct and indirect deaths in the millions), social (human rights and civil liberties curtailed), and environmental costs.

Of all these legacies, one of the most unrecognized yet enduring is the change in how the United States funds its wars. In every other war fought by the United States, there was some immediate financial sacrifice by its citizens and Congress funded the wars “on-budget” within congressional spending limits. The 9/11 military actions were financed entirely by debt and outside traditional budgetary processes, earning the name “The Ghost Budget” from Linda Bilmes, a Harvard University expert on budgetary and public financial issues.

The Ghost Budget legacy lives on. Today, as the costs of current military actions in Iran mount, Americans are once again not being asked to sacrifice financially. Once again, this war is going on the nation’s credit card, but at much higher interest rates.

Photo by Mark Lennihan via AP

“The US wounded itself unnecessarily, and tragically, continues to do so.”

Joseph Wippl, professor of the practice of international relations, Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies

This year’s 9/11 is the 25^th anniversary of the terrorist attack by Al Qaeda against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in Washington D.C. Al Qaeda’s intention was to provoke a reaction in order to further its political agenda. It succeeded in its intention, but it is unknown whether it has reconsidered whether the cost of its attack was worth it. The planners of the attack are either dead or imprisoned.

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, US intelligence and military forces quickly overthrew the Taliban government in Afghanistan, which had provided a safe haven for Al Qaeda to plan the 9/11 attack. (The US remained in Afghanistan for the following two decades in order to build a constitutional order, but eventually left, reflecting historical events that others who occupied Afghanistan had eventually wished they had not and they, too, were forced to leave.) Al Qaeda operatives were captured and interrogated for intelligence on the 9/11 operation, future Al Qaeda plans for terrorist operations, and identification of Al Qaeda operatives. “Black Sites”overseas were open in which the US government sanctioned “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques,” a number of which included torture. Initially, international support for the US response to 9/11 was near universal, but Bush administration policies and actions gradually eroded that support.

The citizens of the United States came together in their support of the government. Within months of the attack, Congress passed, and President Bush signed, the Patriot Act enhancing the government’s intelligence and policing authorities. The Patriot Act has since been amended numerous times to ensure compliance with privacy laws. Among many measures to increase security, the Department of Homeland Security was created, and security measures at ports of entry were increased worldwide.

The Bush administration used the Global War on Terrorism to pursue another agenda. The target was Iraq and its leader, Saddam Hussein. The motivations were many, including regime change leading to stability in the region and settling scores against this brutal dictator. A case was made that Hussein was pursuing weapons of mass destruction to use against Iraq’s enemies. Unverified foreign sources were used to make the case against him.

The invasion of Iraq by American and allied troops took place. A murderous dictator was overthrown but no weapons of mass destruction were found. Almost 5,000 American military personnel were killed, 32,000 were wounded, many more suffered from mental challenges, and the total financial cost of the war came to over 2 trillion dollars. Upwards of 200,000 Iraqis died.

After the devastating terrorist attack on 9/11, the US had a right and an obligation to respond with force against those responsible, including overthrowing the Taliban government that harbored the terrorists. Instead of getting even—which the US had every right and responsibility to do—policymakers used the event in an unreasonable way to further foreign policy agendas against perceived enemies. What eventually happened after 9/11 was that the United States wounded itself unnecessarily and, tragically, continues to do so.

Photo by Art Wager via iStock

September 11 – 25 Years Later, BU Experts Discuss

25 Years Later, the Events of 9/11 Continue to Shape the World

BU experts on how the response to terrorist act has impacted geopolitics, intelligence, and so much more

Latest from BU Today

Mitchell Zuckoff Wrote Boston Globe Stories about 9/11

September 11 – 25 Years Later, BU Experts Discuss

This Weekend @ BU: September 10 to 13

BU Men’s Soccer to Host Army West Point in Patriot League Home Opener Saturday

A Snapshot of BU’s Class of 2030

BU Launchpad Connects Rising Sophomores with Valuable Summer Internships

BU Study Abroad Expo

Eight Boston Experiences Every BU First-Year Should Try

Where to Eat When You’re Hungry at BU

Boston University’s 2026 Menino Scholars and Community Leaders Scholars Arrive Ready to Change Their World

10 BU Hacks Every Terrier Should Know

Everything You Need to Know about Splash (and Why You Should Attend)

“Tony” – Anthony Bourdain Biopic of Iconic Chef and TV Host

Your Guide to BU Student Discounts, Freebies, and Terrier Card Perks

This Weekend @ BU: September 3 to 7

Design, Build, Drive: Meet Terrier Motorsport

Meet Boston University’s New Provost, Colin Duckett

Your First Year at BU: A Guide for International Students

Boston University Matriculation 2026: Welcome Class of 2030!

Marine Science Career Accelerator Helps Student Careers

25 Years Later, the Events of 9/11 Continue to Shape the World

BU experts on how the response to terrorist act has impacted geopolitics, intelligence, and so much more

Share

Share

Latest from BU Today