[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-31947":3,"doc-seo-31947":27},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"file_id":15,"file_url":16,"file_type":17,"file_size":18,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":19,"is_downloadable":19,"audit_status":19,"page_count":20,"language":21,"language_code":22,"table_of_contents":23,"faqs":24,"seo_title":13,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":25,"read_time":26},31947,962075114765,"Quinn","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd",8,"Research & Report","Nothing Global in the Global War On Terror: Perspectives on Two-Decades of US Response to 9/11","The paper examines the United States’ response to 9/11 through an Indian perspective, arguing that the Global War on Terror (GWOT) did not follow the full logic of ‘just war’ theory. Instead of being truly global, US strategy proved selective, dynamic, and country-specific. After two decades and the 2021 NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan, GWOT could manage rather than eliminate terrorism, because Pakistan’s role as a breeding ground persists. The study also frames a key turning point in Indo-US relations, with Afghanistan reconstruction increasingly isolating as Taliban rule returns with Pakistan-backed support.","cbCaieAzn6QhIGNx","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaieAzn6QhIGNx","pdf",1398930,1,16,"English","en","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Background: 9/11 and Global Security Discourse\n## Scope and Research Questions\n# Ironies of America’s Response to 9/11","[{\"question\":\"What is the paper’s main critique of the US Global War on Terror after 9/11?\",\"answer\":\"The study argues the GWOT does not meet the parameters of ‘just war’ and is not genuinely global. US actions are described as selective, dynamic, and country-specific, focusing on managing rather than eliminating terrorism.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper evaluate the GWOT outcome after two decades?\",\"answer\":\"After NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan in 2021, the GWOT is assessed as able to manage terrorism rather than eliminate it worldwide. The persistence of terrorism’s breeding ground and epicentre—Pakistan—is presented as a key reason.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper connect US actions to Indo-US relations and India’s policy stance?\",\"answer\":\"The US response to 9/11 is described as a turning point in Indo-US relations. While India-US cooperation is unlikely to be adversely affected solely by Af-Pak instability, India is considered vulnerable to Taliban rule backed by Pakistan after the withdrawal.\"}]",1780520682,40,{"code":4,"msg":28,"data":29},"ok",{"site_id":30,"language":22,"slug":31,"title":13,"keywords":32,"description":14,"schema_data":33,"social_meta":84,"head_meta":86,"extra_data":88,"updated_unix":25},105,"nothing-global-in-the-global-war-on-terror-perspectives-on-two-decades-of-us-response-to-911","",{"@graph":34,"@context":83},[35,52,66],{"@type":36,"itemListElement":37},"BreadcrumbList",[38,42,46,49],{"item":39,"name":40,"@type":41,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":43,"name":44,"@type":41,"position":45},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":47,"name":12,"@type":41,"position":48},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":50,"name":13,"@type":41,"position":51},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/nothing-global-in-the-global-war-on-terror-perspectives-on-two-decades-of-us-response-to-911/31947/",4,{"url":50,"name":13,"@type":53,"author":54,"headline":13,"publisher":56,"fileFormat":59,"description":14,"dateModified":60,"datePublished":60,"encodingFormat":59,"isAccessibleForFree":61,"interactionStatistic":62},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":55},"Person",{"url":39,"name":57,"@type":58},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-06-03",true,{"@type":63,"interactionType":64,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":65},"ViewAction",{"@type":67,"mainEntity":68},"FAQPage",[69,75,79],{"name":70,"@type":71,"acceptedAnswer":72},"What is the paper’s main critique of the US Global War on Terror after 9/11?","Question",{"text":73,"@type":74},"The study argues the GWOT does not meet the parameters of ‘just war’ and is not genuinely global. US actions are described as selective, dynamic, and country-specific, focusing on managing rather than eliminating terrorism.","Answer",{"name":76,"@type":71,"acceptedAnswer":77},"How does the paper evaluate the GWOT outcome after two decades?",{"text":78,"@type":74},"After NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan in 2021, the GWOT is assessed as able to manage terrorism rather than eliminate it worldwide. The persistence of terrorism’s breeding ground and epicentre—Pakistan—is presented as a key reason.",{"name":80,"@type":71,"acceptedAnswer":81},"How does the paper connect US actions to Indo-US relations and India’s policy stance?",{"text":82,"@type":74},"The US response to 9/11 is described as a turning point in Indo-US relations. While India-US cooperation is unlikely to be adversely affected solely by Af-Pak instability, India is considered vulnerable to Taliban rule backed by Pakistan after the withdrawal.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":50,"og:type":85,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":57,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":87,"canonical":50},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":30}]