The global war on terror as a heuristic modality of security protocol

The terrorist attacks on the 11th of September 2001 activated a security protocol of the global war on terrorism. Irrespective of its symbolic, emotional and geostrategic implications, 9/11 had an enormous impact on security governance and safety management on the global scale. The response of U.S. authorities to that spectacular act of terrorism was a remarkable example of the use of protocol as a heuristic tool. The United States as a global power had to react immediately to the abrupt failure of the national security system and its tarnished reputation as the world’s most powerful nation. The enactment of a heuristic-driven security protocol addressed the sources of public confusion and justified the failure of the state security apparatus by limiting popular reflection and deliberation on the real causes of unpredictability of the traumatic events and the breakdown in national security. The argument developed throughout this paper holds that the protocol of the global war on terrorism came out of the state whose power and predominance, justified by military, civilizational and moral arguments, was questioned worldwide. The state-born protocol engaged U.S. authorities individually and institutionally. President George W. Bush as a head of the state performed the role of (en)actant due to his formal, institutional and symbolic status. Findings presented in this paper are based on a reflexive methodology combining theorization of security protocols with qualitative content and discourse analyses, supplemented by framing theory and actor-network theory.