Strategic Differences Between Pearl Harbor And 9/11

The most significant strategic and tactical intelligence failures of the 20th and 21st centuries can be summed up in the events of Pearl Harbor and September 11th. Both events took the nation by “surprise” although the type of surprise for each was different as there was some knowledge acquired by American intelligence prior to the events that hinted at the possibility of an attack. Mark Lowenthal (2015) makes the distinction between strategic and tactical surprise, arguing that strategic surprise occurs when a nation is unaware of a potential attack directed towards them by another party and is therefore insufficiently capable of immediate response. Tactical surprise is when a nation may have some knowledge of the possibility of an attack, but the timeline, method, and location are not apparent. Tactical surprises are also not as debilitating as strategic surprises as they do not threaten national existence, although it is psychologically damaging (p.3).
policy makers anticipated a move by Japan but did not foresee that the attack would be against the United States directly. This was ultimately due to a breakdown in communication and lack of accountability between the Army officers and Navy analysts who failed to keep track of the Japanese aircraft carriers. 9/ 11 was a tactical surprise. Prior to September 11, it was evident that a significant terrorist attack on the U.S. was a certainty as the United States was engaged in a war with Al Qaeda throughout the 1990s. In 2001, the CIA had received increased reporting from U.S. allies in Europe and the Middle East regarding a pending attack by Al Qaeda against the U.S. but were unaware of the exact location and when they would strike (Johnson & Wirtz, 2015,