The After Effects of 9/11 in suspected players and US:
THE RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT:
9/11 caused a global shift to the Right, in tune with Putin’s “conservatism”.
Mission accomplished!
Search:
How did Israel benefit geopolitically from 9/11?
How did Schroeder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11
RIGHTIST REALIGNMENT after 9/11
Putin’s conservatism— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
Author: wawiimuy
Wer August Hanning vor Gericht verteidigt, führt direkt in einen bemerkenswerten politischen Kreis. Es ist der Hamburger Strafrechtler Leon Kruse von der Kanzlei Schwenn Kruse Georg, der das Mandat für den verhafteten Ex-BND-Präsidenten August Hanning übernommen hat.
Das Mandat für das Spionage-Verfahren ist dabei nicht die erste Verbindung: Der Hamburger Strafverteidiger vertrat den Ex-Geheimdienstchef bereits im spektakulären „Block“-Komplexrund um die Entführung der Steakhaus-Kinder, bei dessen Ermittlungen die brisanten Dokumente überhaupt erst ans Licht kamen.
Dass ausgerechnet diese Kanzlei gerufen wird, hat Tradition. Gründer Johann Schwenn verteidigte in den 90er-Jahren den DDR-Spionagechef Markus Wolf, der engste Kontakte nach Moskau und zum KGB pflegte.
Heute führt Kruses Mandantenliste von diesem geheimdienstlichen Umfeld direkt ins Zentrum der Hamburger Finanzpolitik. Kruse vertritt parallel zu Hanning die Hamburger Finanzbeamtin, die im Cum-Ex-Komplex rund um die Warburg-Bank angeklagt ist. Die Staatsanwaltschaft wirft ihr vor, schützend ihre Hand über die Bank gehalten zu haben, um die Rückforderung von 90 Millionen Euro Steuergeldern zu verhindern.
Über diese Cum-Ex-Spuren schließt sich der Kreis zu dem ehemaligen SPD-Abgeordneten Johannes Kahrs, der als politischer Strippenzieher für den Warburg-Bankier Christian Olearius agierte.Genau hier kreuzen sich die Wege von Ex-BND Hanning und Ex-Politiker Kahrs wieder. Beide fanden in einer umstrittenen Lobby-Organisation zusammen: dem Deutsch-Aserbaidschanischen Forum. Hanning saß dort im Vorstand, Kahrs im Kuratorium. Der Verein bringt über Jahre deutsche Politiker mit dem autoritären Regime in Baku zusammen.
Angesichts der aktuellen Spionage-Vorwürfe gegen Hanning muss vor allem das Deutsch-Aserbaidschanische Forum genauer unter die Lupe genommen werden. Organisationen wie LobbyControl kritisieren diese Institution seit Jahren als intransparente Lobby-Drehscheibe für das autoritäre Regime in Baku.
Dass mit Hanning nun ein langjähriges Vorstandsmitglied unter Spionageverdacht steht, gibt dieser alten Lobby-Achse ein neues, brandgefährliches Gewicht.Vic (@vic_010100)August Hanning: Vom Chef des BND zum international vernetzten Sicherheitsberater mit Verbindungen nach Tschetschenien, Russland und Aserbaidschan und schließlich zum Hauptverdächtigen in einem der schwersten deutschen Spionagefälle.
🧵1/25— https://x.com/vic_010100/status/2107899236385960122
— @vic_010100 Oct 10, 2026
Political shift to the Right in US after 9/11 – Google Search google.com/search?q=Politica…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
Political shift to the Right in US after9/11 – Google Search google.com/search?q=Politica…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
How did Israel benefit from 9/11? – Google Search google.com/search?q=How+did+…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
How did Israel benefit from 9/11? – Google Search google.com/search?q=How+did+…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
How did Putin’s Russia change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
The September 11 attacks served as a major catalyst for Vladimir Putin to reshape Russia’s domestic and foreign policy. Putin leveraged the global War on Terror to consolidate domestic political power and launch a dramatic, albeit short-lived, geopolitical pivot toward the West.
This period fundamentally transformed how Russia interacted with global powers and accelerated its transition toward centralized authoritarianism.
Geopolitical Transformations
The immediate aftermath of 9/11 marked a radical departure from traditional Russian foreign policy paradigms. [1]The Westward Pivot and Tactical Partnership: Putin was the first foreign leader to call U.S. President George W. Bush after the attacks, offering immediate condolences and strategic alignment. Overruling heavy pushback from his own military and security apparatus, Putin announced a five-point support program for the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan. This included sharing intelligence, opening Russian airspace for humanitarian flights, and giving the green light for U.S. forces to utilize military bases in former Soviet Central Asian republics. [2, 3, 4]
Reframing the Chechen War: Domestically, Russia had been fighting a brutal civil war against Chechen rebels, whom the Kremlin previously labeled as “bandits” or regional separatists. After 9/11, Putin successfully reframed the conflict to the international community as a front-line battle against global Islamic terrorism. This effectively shielded Russia from Western criticism regarding human rights abuses in Chechnya and legitimized his “strongman” political identity. [5, 6, 7]
The Souring of Relations: The post-9/11 geopolitical alignment was brief. Moscow expected a quid pro quo that respected Russia’s pre-eminence and sphere of influence in the former Soviet space. Instead, the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002, expanded NATO into the Baltic states, and invaded Iraq in 2003 despite fierce opposition from Russia, France, and Germany. By 2002–2003, Putin’s brief experiment with Western integration gave way to deep disappointment, laying the groundwork for a highly aggressive, anti-Western foreign policy. [4, 7, 8, 9, 10]Political and Domestic Transformations
Domestically, the post-9/11 climate allowed Putin to accelerate the centralization of state authority under the banner of national security.Authoritarian Consolidation: Putin utilized the global focus on anti-terrorism to justify the systematically top-down restructuring of the Russian state. Over the years that followed—further catalyzed by domestic tragedies like the 2004 Beslan school siege—the Kremlin eliminated the direct election of regional governors, heavily tightened its grip on mass media, and severely restricted political opposition. [7, 9, 10]
Marginalization of the Oligarchs: To unify the state, Putin dismantled the political influence of the 1990s oligarchs. He made it clear that their wealth and corporate standings were strictly conditional upon absolute personal loyalty to the Kremlin and total abstention from domestic politics. [7]
National-Patriot Narrative: The political landscape shifted from the chaotic, nascent democracy of the Yeltsin era toward a highly nationalistic, sovereign model. Putin successfully blended economic modernization with a narrative of state survival, gradually shifting his rhetoric to portray Western institutions not as potential partners, but as existential threats seeking to encircle and weaken Russia. [5, 7, 9, 11]For further analysis on this historical pivot, you can read the comprehensive breakdown of the post-Soviet transition in Politics Trove or explore the archived analysis of Russia’s immediate reaction via the Brookings Institution.
[1] marshallcenter.org
[2] nids.mod.go.jp
[3] ibs.colorado.edu
[4] chathamhouse.org
[5] sciencedirect.com
[6] ibs.colorado.edu
[7] britannica.com
[8] link.springer.com
[9] scholarship.shu.edu
[10] oxfordpoliticstrove.com
[11] online.ucpress.edu– Google Search google.com/search?q=How+did+…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
How did Schroerder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11?
Following the September 11 attacks, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s Germany experienced a profound political transformation and structural geopolitical shift, fundamentally moving away from its post-WWII military reluctance toward an assertive, independent role in global security.
Political Changes: Domestic Security and Coalition StrainThe Proclamation of “Unlimited Solidarity”: Immediately after the attacks, Schröder declared Germany’s “unlimited solidarity” (uneingeschränkte Solidarität) with the United States. This was a massive psychological pivot for a nation deeply anchored in post-war pacifism.
The 2001 Vote of Confidence: To fulfill his promise of military support in Afghanistan, Schröder faced fierce resistance from fundamentalist factions within his own center-left SPD-Green coalition. To force compliance, he tied the deployment of 3,900 Bundeswehr troops to a vote of confidence in November 2001. He narrowly won, consolidating his leadership but exposing deep ideological rifts on the German left.
Domestic Anti-Terror Legislation: Domestically, Germany enacted sweeping security reforms. Prompted by the discovery that the “Hamburg cell” (including Mohamed Atta) had used Germany as a launching pad, the government passed the “Otto Schily” anti-terror packages. These laws banned extremist religious associations, enhanced intelligence sharing, and tightened immigration and border surveillance.
The 2002 Electoral Rescue: Defying poor economic forecasts, Schröder weaponized his evolving foreign policy during the 2002 federal election. His strict, popular refusal to join the upcoming U.S. campaign in Iraq rallied his base and saved his coalition from defeat.Geopolitical Changes: A Sovereign and Independent Foreign Policy
Breaking Post-WWII Military Taboos: Following its 1999 intervention in Kosovo, Germany further shed its historic “culture of restraint” by sending troops to Afghanistan. It eventually became one of the largest troop contributors to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), signaling that German security was now to be defended far beyond its borders.
The Transatlantic Rift (The “German Way”): While 9/11 initially drew Berlin and Washington closer, the relationship fractured over the 2003 Iraq War. Schröder forcefully opposed the U.S.-led invasion, arguing it would jeopardize the global anti-terror coalition. For the first time since 1945, Germany openly defied a major American military initiative.
The Paris-Berlin-Moscow Axis: Rejecting Washington’s unilateralism, Schröder oriented German geopolitics toward a diplomatic axis with Jacques Chirac’s France and Vladimir Putin’s Russia. 9/11 catalyzed a “partnership for modernization” with Moscow, as Schröder used the anti-terror paradigm to soften criticisms of Russia’s actions in Chechnya, paving the way for deep energy dependencies like the Nord Stream pipeline agreement.Through these shifts, the post-9/11 era transformed Germany from a “civilian power” hiding behind its past into a sovereign actor prepared to project military force abroad, while asserting geopolitical autonomy from the United States.
Would you like to explore the specific details of the 2001 vote of confidence, or would you prefer a closer look at how the post-9/11 anti-terror laws affected Germany’s privacy regulations?– Google Search google.com/search?q=How+did+…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
How did Schroerder’s Germany change politically and geopolitically after 9/11? – Google Search google.com/search?q=How+did+…
— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Oct 10, 2026
⚡️️️️️️️US demands Kyiv halt refinery attacks, threatens to suspend intelligence sharing.
The U.S. said it would cut off intelligence sharing that has helped Kyiv strike targets inside Russia, a source told the Kyiv Independent.
kyivindependent.com/exclusiv…— @KyivIndependent Oct 10, 2026