L'attaque terroiste du 11 septembre 2001 aux USA (document en anglais)

The terrorist attacks of 11th September 2001 have shaken the world. The USA were hit on their territory right in New-York city and in Washington DC. By targeting the American economic and administrative centres and through the terrific violence of the attacks, the authors have symbolically hit all of the Western world. These events have led the governments to strengthen their security policies in order to cope with these threats of a new kind. Indeed, the aggressors were based thousands of miles away, allegedly in Afghanistan, making the world realize how small the international space has become, where a country which seems to be far away can appear to be closer than your next door neighbour.

It is in this context that Robert Cooper, British diplomat, has written an article called “Re-ordering the world: the long-term implications of 9/11”. It was published by the well-known think-tank “The Foreign Policy Centre”, in April 2002. In this article, Cooper comes forward with the idea that today’s world needs to be re-ordered by what he calls “a new kind of imperialism”, an imperialism that would meet people’s expectations in terms of human rights and universal values such as freedom and peace.

Throughout our analyse, we will try to show that, though his arguments seem to be logic and well-sustained at first sight, his thesis nevertheless remains very arguable in many aspects and that it has been widely criticised in the intellectual circles.

Cooper begins his imperialist lesson by distinguishing states in three categories – there are what he calls “the modern states” which are states ruled by Machiavelli’s principles and raison d’état (like China or Pakistan); then there are “the premodern” and “the postmodern” states. These two categories are the most interesting as they constitute in fact the basis of his thesis. He describes by premodern states the countries that have faced a decisive and brutal evolution (often decolonisation) but instead of progressing towards a stable state, they have fallen into disorder and anarchy, where the state has lost the monopoly of the use of legitimate violence (like Somalia or Afghanistan). Regarding the postmodern states, they represent the model of a successful adaptation to the new life conditions of the civilization. For Cooper, these countries “have grown honest”, meaning that they have eradicated the idea of conquest or violent aggression between themselves. This enables them to ensure their mutual security by establishing common rules and laws which are eventually enforced by international institutions to whom they have transferred some of their sovereignty. For the author this is the model of the future and he gives as an example the European Union (which he seems to be so proud of though the several crisis it has and is still going through) by asserting that it is the most advanced postmodern states system, where security is ensured by mutual transparency and interdependence. The borders therefore become obsolete.

Until this point, Cooper is only describing the reality. This is how it works. There is indeed a breaking down of the distinction between domestic and foreign affairs. Moreover, many “postmodern lookalike systems” have emerged – ASEAN in South-East Asia and MERCOSUR in South America. They are practical examples of Cooper’s idea of integrating premodern (and modern) states into the postmodern world. Also an important feature to be highlighted is the voluntary aspect of this integration. In point of fact, for Cooper, this is truly what makes the difference between the colonial imperialism in the past and the new kind of imperialism he defends. The former was based on conquest and submission, the latter would be built upon the wish of the states to become a member of this empire. This is what he calls a “voluntary imperialism”. Cooper enjoys the support of some influential conservative historians such as Niall Ferguson, who is vigorously in favour of a world empire led by the USA , and Andrew Roberts who, as incredibly as it sounds, calls for “a recolonization of Africa” …

The imperialist lesson goes on. In order to protect the postmodern states from a threatening premodern world, Cooper proposes a new voluntary imperialism, human rights friendly, which would take two forms:

• An Economic Imperialism – it aims to financially support the countries in need through international financial institutions such as the IMF or the World Bank. This would help these states to find their way back into the global economy, investment and prosperity.

• An imperialism of neighbours – it would allow international intervention in unstable and threatening zones of the premodern world. These interventions would be directed under United Nations mandate to bring stability and order. For Cooper, “instability in your neighbourhood poses threats which no state can ignore”…

As we said earlier, this seems to look logic and well-sustained as the author uses practical examples to support his thesis. However, Cooper misses several critical points to which we will try to bring some precisions in order to show how his argument is very debatable.

Firstly, what about religion and

...