As we solemnly mark the 15th anniversary of 9/11, the nation is more sharply divided along partisan lines than ever before about the government’s ability to fend off terrorism and prevent another Sept. 11-style attack.
A new poll by the Pew Research Center shows that for the first time, a majority from one of the two political parties – in this case, the Republicans – now believes terrorists have a greater ability to attack the U.S. than they did on 9/11.
The survey found that 58% of GOP voters say we’re worse off than on Sept. 11. That compares to 40% of the public overall. That figure is the highest since Pew first asked that polling question in 2002.
About a third (31%) say terrorists’ abilities to attack are the same as at the time of 9/11, while just 25% say their ability to launch a major attack is less than at that time. That dim viewpoint would probably astound most military and counter-terrorism experts across the nation, even as the government’s post-9/11 track record remains complex.
The Pew poll, conducted Aug. 23-Sept. 2 among 1,201 adults, finds that the growth in the belief that terrorists are now better able to launch a major strike on the U.S. has come almost entirely among Republicans.
Only about one-third of independents (34%) and Democrats (31%) say terrorists are now better able to hit the U.S. than they were in 2001.
Pew analysts point out that opinions about terrorists’ capabilities to attack the U.S. have long been divided along partisan lines, though far less than negative than they are today.
During George W. Bush’s presidency, Democrats were often more likely than Republicans to fear a major strike was a greater possibility than at the time of 9/11. The reverse has been true during Barack Obama’s administration. But that view had never been expressed by a majority of Democrats or independents.
The polling trends suggest that a turning point came shortly before the 2010 mid-term elections, when the tea party was a driving force behind anti-Obama rhetoric and the birther movement was going strong.
In an October 2010 Pew survey about seven-in-ten (69%) said the government was doing very (15%) or fairly well (54%) in reducing the threat of terrorism. But partisan factors were becoming more apparent.
Here’s how Pew described the situation at the time:
Democrats are now more likely than Republicans to say the government is doing very or fairly well in reducing the threat of terrorism. Fully 84% of Democrats give the government positive ratings compared with 64% of Republicans.
During the Bush administration, the partisan gap was reversed. In February 2008, 84% of Republicans and 57% of Democrats expressed positive views of the government’s anti-terror efforts …
Of course, the positive views expressed in 2008 were more in line with reality – as is the case, even more so, today. After U.S. spending of about $1 trillion since 9/11 on intelligence and homeland security and counterterrorism measures, most experts say the complex type of plot hatched on Sept. 11, 2001, would be discovered and thwarted in advance with today’s protective measures.
In a piece written for Vox on Friday, Daniel Byman, a professor and senior associate dean at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, said that the country undoubtedly is safer. At the same time, the lone-wolf terror attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11 have been blown far out of proportion.
The total death toll of 94 people killed here by jihadists over the past 15 years, Byman pointed out, is less than single mass-casualty attacks like the 2015 strikes in Paris (130 dead), the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing (168 deaths), or the 1988 Lockerbie bombing (270 deaths), to say nothing of the almost 3,000 killed on Sept. 11.
Byman, who also works as a senior fellow in the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings, offers this assessment on the 15th anniversary of America’s darkest day:
Luck no doubt explains part of this surprising track record, and near-misses like the 2001 shoe bomber or the 2009 underwear bomber should give us pause. Yet there are several factors that have contributed to making the US homeland a safer place than it was 15 years ago.
The first factor is the relatively small number of actual American jihadists. After 9/11, fears quickly arose of large pockets of American Muslims lying in wait to attack.
These were false: Few American Muslims support radical groups, and those who do tend to be isolated and not part of a broader organization. Within this small pool, many are often incompetent.
… The political debate in the United States, however, seems to have it all backward. Politicians on both the right and left call for turning inward, ignoring how terrorist groups are devastating whole communities around the world.
At the same time, fulminating against American Muslims and playing up the chances of mass-casualty ISIS attacks misses the true reality of the threat and is self-defeating. American Muslims regularly cooperate with law enforcement, and alienating this community would be disastrous.
Photos: Department of Homeland Security, National Park Service
