Twenty-five years after September 11, 2001, the most enduring legacy of 9/11 may not be the destruction of the World Trade Center or even the wars that followed. It may lie in something less visible but more enduring: the transformation of the Muslim from a religious and political identity into a security subject. The attacks were an act of mass terrorism, but their historical significance lies equally in how governments subsequently interpreted and responded to them. The question, therefore, is not only why 9/11 happened, but how its aftermath changed the meaning of security itself.

The immediate response was understandable. The United States declared a “War on Terror”, invaded Afghanistan and subsequently Iraq, expanded intelligence cooperation and transformed counterterrorism into a central principle of international security.

Yet securitisation theory, particularly the Copenhagen School, reminds us that threats are not simply discovered; they are politically constructed as existential threats that can justify exceptional measures. After 9/11, terrorism was elevated into precisely such a category.

Yet securitisation theory, particularly the Copenhagen School, reminds us that threats are not simply discovered; they are politically constructed as existential threats that can justify exceptional measures. After 9/11, terrorism was elevated into precisely such a category.

Security consequently expanded from military defence into immigration, borders, surveillance, policing, finance and social policy.

The more complicated question is what happened to Islam within this process. It would be analytically simplistic to describe the War on Terror as a war against Islam. American leaders repeatedly distinguished Islam from terrorism, and Muslim governments themselves became important partners in counterterrorism. Yet the absence of explicit anti-Islamic rhetoric does not mean that Islam escaped securitisation. Clara Eroukhmanoff’s The Securitisation of Islam (2026) makes this paradox central:

governments can publicly describe Islam as peaceful while simultaneously implementing counterterrorism and counter-extremism practices that make Muslim communities objects of suspicion.

governments can publicly describe Islam as peaceful while simultaneously implementing counterterrorism and counter-extremism practices that make Muslim communities objects of suspicion.

This is what makes the........

© Middle East Monitor