Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's plea agreement marks a milestone in the judicial process.

The recent agreement between the United States and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, considered the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001 attacks, marks a significant milestone in a legal process that has been stalled for nearly two decades. Mohammed, along with two accomplices, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi, have pleaded guilty in exchange for avoiding the death penalty. This development has elicited diverse reactions among the families of the victims, human rights organizations, and the general public. The three defendants have been held at Guantanamo for 18 years, and their path to justice has been fraught with controversies, particularly regarding the allegations of torture they have faced. The guilty pleas from Mohammed and his accomplices come after years of litigation that have exposed the flaws in the military justice system operating at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. This plea agreement not only implies an admission of responsibility for the attacks that resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 people but also offers the defendants the opportunity to respond to the questions of the victims' families. This measure has been met with some relief by certain relatives, such as Patrick White, a cousin of one of the victims, who expressed that life imprisonment and the guilty plea were what he expected from these negotiations. However, the decision has also been subject to criticism. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has praised the resolution, arguing that it is "the only practical solution" after years of litigation and highlights the inherent problems associated with the use of torture and military tribunals in Guantanamo. Human rights advocates have maintained that this agreement is a necessary step toward justice, though not without its controversies. When the September 11 attacks occurred, the intellectual authorship was initially attributed to Osama Bin Laden, but later investigations revealed that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was, in fact, the main architect of the operation. His capture in 2003 in Pakistan and subsequent transfer to Guantanamo symbolize the long road of a judicial system that has faced numerous challenges in its quest for justice. Since his arrival at Guantanamo, Mohammed has been at the center of a debate over the use of torture. Reports indicate that he was subjected to interrogation techniques that violate basic human rights principles, leading many to question the validity of his confessions and the ethics of his treatment. The allegations of torture have been a significant obstacle in advancing judicial proceedings, causing a stalemate that has lasted for years. The context of the September 11 attacks remains relevant in the debate over national security and civil liberties in the United States. The way Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's case and those of other detainees at Guantanamo have been handled raises important questions about the balance between justice and security, as well as transparency in military judicial processes. The families of the September 11 victims, who have waited so long for justice, find themselves in a complex position regarding this agreement. While some may view the guilty plea and life sentence as a step forward, others may feel that complete justice has eluded their loved ones. This dilemma resonates at the heart of debates on how to manage the memory of those who lost their lives in the attacks. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's case is a window into the difficulties faced by the American judicial system in the context of the war on terror. The way this case has unfolded reflects not only the struggle for justice but also the tensions between human rights and security measures. As this chapter closes, the plea agreement offers a partial resolution to a conflict that has marked a generation. However, the repercussions of these events will continue to resonate in public discourse and U.S. politics for years to come. The story of the September 11 attacks, and the nation's response, will serve as a lasting reminder of the complexities of justice and memory in a post-terrorist world.