The project investigated the events that led the United States from September 11, 2001 to the current war in Iraq. The specific time frame examined was the period beginning on September 11, 2001 and ending with the first pre-emptive attacks in Iraq on March 19, 2003.

Résumé of the master thesis: Contemporary Terrorism in Ethiopia: its Origins and Motivation. Pavel Nováček This paper focuses on the factor of terrorism in Ethiopia. There is suspicion, repeatedly declared by the Ethiopian government, that there are groups operating on its territory, that are using terrorism as a method of combat. Some of those groups are suspected to be affiliated to the global jihadist network that is active in the neighbouring Somalia. Ethiopia takes an active part in the US-led war on terror, and is the most important ally of the US in the region. This has resulted in a flow of humanitarian aid to Ethiopia, and the US is also providing military training, building their counter-terrorism capacities and providing Ethiopia with analytical support and other military aid. However, there is suspicion that Ethiopia is abusing its participation in the war on terrorism in order to oppress the legitimate opposition, by describing some of the rebel groups as terrorist, and even as affiliated to the global jihadist network in Somalia. This is despite the possibility that these ethnic based groups might be legitimately fighting to gain the right of self- determination, something that is granted to all people living in Ethiopia by the constitution. The government however, systematically attacks the...

The objective of the master thesis is to evaluate the factors that have influenced the operational capability of al-Qaeda. In order to determine current operational capacity of al-Qaeda, the analysis is divided into three time periods and on the basis of external and internal factors affecting the changes in the structure and thus the functioning of the group, then the network, we have achieved results that we can consider as a basis for assessment of its ability to act today. Analysis of the structure of the al-Qaeda by network analysis based on the theory derived from the article of Ronald Diebert and Janice Stein entitled "Hacking Networks of Terror" is in the thesis considered to be a basis for understanding of the functioning of the network structure as well as its impact on the internal functioning of the network compared with hierarchically organized structure characteristic for the period before the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. The other two periods analyzed in the work are: the period after the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, their impacts and the third period is the period after 2011, when bin Laden, leader of al-Qaeda was killed, the revolutions of Arab Spring took place and the long-term impact of the war on terror will be included in the analysis as well. Analysis of...

Scholars of human rights and constitutional law have described in great detail the abuses perpetrated by the armed forces and secret services of the United States in the context of the ‘war on terror’. There is copious literature explaining why these violations of fundamental human rights are not justifiable, and why they are not consistent with international treaties or that nation’s constitution. This thesis builds upon this research, but strikes out in a new direction. It does so by asking whether these abuses, combined with the changes to the legal order of the United States that made them possible, have produced a qualitative transformation of its constitutional structure. In particular, this thesis tracks the empowering of the executive. Increasingly, whenever it purports to act in the interests of national security, the executive claims the authority to act unilaterally in a manner that overrides even non-derogable rights. These novel constitutional reserve powers, which this thesis demonstrates were derived from President Nixon’s theory of the executive, were used to justify indefinite arbitrary detention, torture, mass surveillance without warrants, and extra-judicial execution. This thesis seeks to determine if the constitutional crisis inaugurated by this theory of executive supremacy over the laws has been terminated, or whether it has continued into the Obama Administration. If this theory is current within the executive branch, and especially if the violations of jus cogens norms has continued, it signifies a cross-party consensus about a paradigm shift in American constitutionalism. Accordingly, given the fact that the abuse of executive supremacy is what led to the development of the rule of law, this thesis will ask the question of whether the United States is being governed in accordance with its basic minimum norms. This thesis explores whether the executive is still subject to checks and balances from the legislature and the judiciary, such that it cannot violate non-derogable rights at will and with impunity. If the contrary proposition is true, it demonstrates that the crisis of the rule of law in the United States is ongoing, and this permanent state of exception demands significantly more scholarly attention. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLD

2001年9月11日發生在美國本土的自殺式恐怖襲擊事件之後，當時的小布希總統堅決宣示展開全面性「全球反恐怖主義戰爭」（Global War on Terrorism）。美國不僅以其強大的軍事力量，對付支持及庇護蓋達組織及其分支的國家，也與各國合作共同打擊恐怖主義。由於這是一場與傳統戰爭迥然不同的鬥爭，因此美國反恐的策略不但依賴軍事武力，還必須透過政治、外交、情報、金融與教育等多元途徑，並靈活運用國際的力量，徹底打擊恐怖主義。其中情報工作在反恐戰爭中扮演著非常重要的角色，因為恐怖分子在發動任何攻擊之前，可能會有些徵兆，若在事先能獲得蛛絲馬跡的情報，就能夠防患未然並且將危機消弭於無形。 在國際方面，9/11反而促成各國的合作，美國情報單位在這場反恐戰爭中也被賦予重要的任務，將反恐情報合作的觸角伸向全世界各個角落。由於美國與各國的合作程度影響全球打擊恐怖主義的成效，故有必要對美國主導的國際情報合作進行研究。美國在國際間致力反恐情報合作之際，同時也對其國內情報機制進行改革與重整。因為9/11的發生，很多人歸咎於國內情報單位的失職，美國政府於是開始對其情報圈，展開自杜魯門總統於1947年7月26日簽署《國家安全法案》以來，最重大的改革。因此也有必要對美國在9/11後的情報改革進行探討，以瞭解美國在此事件後所進行的國內情報改革情形及成效。 / In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001, the U.S. President George W. Bush launched the “Global War on Terrorism”. The U.S. has fight against countries that support Al-Qaeda and its affiliate with powerful military strength and cooperated with various countries on combat terrorism. This is a disparately untraditional war and consequently America’s counterterrorism strategy is multi-faceted that includes not only military but also diplomacy, financial action, intelligence, education, etc. Intelligence, in particular, plays a pivotal role in this war. Signs of terrorist threat may be discovered and attacks can possibly be prevented if intelligence agencies received information about the plots in advance. The September 11 attacks have facilitated bilateral and multilateral cooperation between countries in the globe. The U.S. especially undertakes great responsibilities in fighting against Al-Qaeda and its affiliates, and attaches strings to its counter terrorism cooperation around the world. Since the strength of the cooperative movement between the U.S. and other countries may affect the outcome of the global cooperation, conducting a study on the U.S.-led international intelligence cooperation is critical. While endeavoring to enhance international intelligence cooperation on anti-terrorism, the U.S. has conducted reform and adjustment of the domestic intelligence community. Owing to its intelligence failure on the September 11 attacks, the U.S. government initiated the greatest reform on intelligence mechanism since the former President Truman had signed the National Security Act of 1947. Therefore, study on and analysis of the results and achievement of the U.S. intelligence reform after the September 11 attacks is a must-do.

Thesis (MPhil (Political Science))--University 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This dissertation’s primary focus is why torture is used when torture is not an effective means of gathering intelligence. To answer this question the argument for the use of torture, commonly known as the ticking time bomb argument, is discussed. Due to psychological and physiological processes during torture interrogation it was found that torture cannot be relied upon to deliver truthful information. Torture was also found to adversely affect the institutions that are needed for its establishment. After torture has been found to be of no utility in terms of the appropriation of information the question of why torture is still used is answered by means of discussing societal dynamics as well as the political process surrounding torture. On the societal front it was found that American public opinion towards torture is ambivalent. The reason for this includes a host of socio-psychological factors such as the in-group out-group bias as well the War on Terror as a political ideology in its own right. The notion that anybody is likely to torture is also explored by means of discussing the Milgram’s Obedience Experiment as well as the Stanford Prison Experiment. On the political front the notion that the abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay were the work of a few bad apples is dispelled since it formed part of a deliberative political process that tried to make torture a legitimate foreign policy measure. The reason for the existence of this process is the failure of international and domestic checks and balances. On the international front U.S. unilateralism as foreign policy principle is cited as the reason for the ineffectiveness of international measures to stop torture. On the domestic front the permanent rally around the flag effect due to the permanent state of mobilization in the War on Terror is cited as the reason for the failure of domestic checks and balances. The lessons learnt from the research enables the creation of measures on how to stop torture even when it is found that the necessary political will is not present within the Obama administration. In the absence of political will it must be manufactured by means of the actions of civil society, the free press and the international community. It was found that the most effective means would be the creation of a committee of inquiry to create the political memory of the use of torture and how it was established. Additionally a memorial must be erected as well seeing that inquiries create political memories but they do not sustain it. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis se fokus is om na te vors waarom marteling gebruik word as dit nie ‘n effektiewe wyse is om inligting in te win nie. Om hierdie vraagstuk te beantwoord word die argument vir die gebruik van marteling naamlik die tikkende-tydbom-argument bespreek. Asgevolg van sielkundige en fisiologiese prosesse tydens ondervragings wat gebruik maak van marteling kan daar nie op marteling staatgemaak word om die waarheid op te lewer nie. Dit was ook bevind dat marteling die instansies, wat nodig is vir die gebruik daarvan, op ‘n negatiewe wyse beïnvloed. Nadat daar vasgestel is dat marteling geen nutswaarde aangaande die inwinning van informasie bied nie word die vraagstuk waarom marteling steeds gebruik word beantwoord. Op die samelewingsvlak kan daar gestel word dat die Amerikaanse samelewing onseker is oor of marteling gebruik moet word al dan nie. Verskeie redes vir hierdie opinie word aangevoer waarvan die in-group out-group bias en die Oorlog teen Terreur as politieke ideologie slegs twee daarvan uitmaak. Dat enige persoon in staat is tot marteling onder die regte stel omstandighede word ook bespreek na aanleiding van die Milgram’s Obedience Experiement en die Stanford Prison Experiment. Op die politiese vlak is daar vasgestel dat die menseregteskendings in Abu Ghraib en Guantanamo Bay nie die werk was van slegs `n paar indiwidue was nie, maar deel uitmaak van ‘n doelbewuste politiese proses wat marteling as ‘n legitieme buitelandse beleidskwessie wil afmaak. Die rede waarom die beleidsproses bestaan kan toegeskryf word aan die mislukking van inter- en intranasionale wigte en teenwigte. Op die internasionale vlak kan daar gestel word dat die Verenigde State se unilateralistiese modus operandi die rede is vir die mislukking van internasionale maatreëls teen marteling. Op die intranasionale front kan daar gestel word dat die Amerikaanse publiek verkeer in ‘n permanent rally around the flagtoestand asgevolg van die permanent mobilisasie in die Oorlog teen Terreur. Uit die lesse wat geleer is uit die navorsing kan daadwerklike stappe gedoen word om die gebruik van marteling stop te sit alhoewel die Obama-administrasie se politiese wil ontbreek. Met die tekort aan politiese wil moet die politiese wil geskep word deur die burgerlik samelewing, the vrye pers asook die internasionale gemeenskap. Daar was gevind dat die mees effektiewe wyse om marteling stop te sit sal deurmiddel van ‘n kommissie van ondersoek wees. Die kommissie se doel sal wees om te bepaal hoe marteling tot stand gekom het en ‘n politiese herinnering te skep. Daar moet ook ‘n bykomende maatreël wees, naamlik die oprigting van ‘n monument aangesien kommissies van ondersoek politiese herinneringe skep maar nie in stand hou nie.

According to conventional wisdom winning hearts and minds is one of the most important goals for defeating terrorism. However, despite repeated claims about U.S. efforts to build popular support as part of the war on terror during the first seven years after 9/11, a steady stream of polls and surveys delivered troubling news. Using a counterinsurgency and social movement informed approach, I explain why the United States performed poorly in the race for Muslim hearts and minds, with a specific focus on problems inherent in the social construction of terrorism, the use of an enemy-centric model while overestimating agency, and the counterproductive effect of policy choices on framing processes. Popular support plays wide-ranging roles in counterterrorism, including: influencing recruitment, fundraising, operational support, and the flow of intelligence; providing credibility and legitimacy; and, sanctifying or marginalizing violence. Recognizing this the U.S. emphasized public diplomacy, foreign aid, positive military-civilian interactions, democracy promotion, and other efforts targeting populations in the Muslim world. To explain the problems these efforts had, this thesis argues that how Americans think and talk about terrorism, reflected especially in the rhetoric and strategic narrative of the Bush administration, evolved after 9/11 to reinforce normative and enemy-centric biases undermining both understanding of the underlying conflicts and resulting efforts. U.S. policy advocates further misjudged American agency, especially in terms of overemphasizing U.S. centrality, failing to recognize the importance of real grievances, and overestimating American ability to implement its own policies or control the policies of local governments. Finally, the failure to acknowledge the role of U.S. policies counterproductively impacted contested framing processes influencing the evolution of mobilization. The resulting rhetoric and actions reinforced existing anti- American views, contributed to the perception that the war on terror is really a war on Islam, and undermined natural counter narratives.

Approved for public release, distribution is unlimited / This thesis compares the Western response to two radical challenges in eras considerably removed in time: the 1900-1901 Boxer rebellion in China and today's Islamic terror. It brings a much-needed historical perspective to bear in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the contemporary Western conceptualization of the al-Qaeda and Taliban threat as a "clash of civilizations." It demonstrates that the current struggle against Islamic fundamentalism is not an altogether new challenge to Western interest and values. Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are in the end an expression of the same forces of resistance that also led to the origination of the Boxers in 19th century China. The cultural pressure that the West unavoidably developed by its imperialistic policy in the 19th and early 20th centuries was replaced by the penetration of the world with values, standards and symbols of the Western way of life and civilization in the course of globalization. The West ought to understand that the current terrorist threat is not "the next stage of history," as some scholars erroneously puts it, but a known historical phenomenon in a new form, for which neither the West nor other cultures bear the blame. / Major (GS), German Army

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Educational Leadership / Sarah Jane Fishback / A new group of learners is emerging in the adult learning environment as a result of the United States being at war for more than 10 years. More than two million warriors served in the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). Educational institutions across the United States are experiencing growing numbers of students who are military combat veterans of the GWOT. These numbers will continue to grow as more of them transition back into life after combat. These students are arriving in class with varying levels of combat trauma experience and possibly Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), major depression, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) or a combination of these and other difficulties. The purpose of this research was to learn from military veteran students how their combat experience affects them in the classroom. Specifically it looked at the types of combat experiences they have and the types of physical and mental effects they report experiencing while attending and participating in educational learning activities. This research h sought to gain insight into how combat experience influences the learning experience for GWOT military combat veterans who participate in an educational learning environment. It explored the types of experiences these students bring into that learning environment and how their participation in learning activities is affected.

<p>Essay in Political Science, Advanced Course, by Christoffer Hagström</p><p>“The Bush Administration´s view on international cooperation and international</p><p>law and political-theoretical traditions influence on the administration´s foreign</p><p>policy”</p><p>Supervisor: Jan Olsson</p><p>The purpose of this paper is to analyze the American foreign policy, particularly with regard to</p><p>international cooperation and international law. The two following research-questions are used in</p><p>order to fulfil the purpose: (1) what is the Bush-administrations´s view of of the place for</p><p>international cooperation and international law in American foreign policy?, and (2) how does the</p><p>administration´s foreign policy correspond to dominant political-theoretical thought-traditions? The</p><p>traditions used are: liberalism, realism and neoconservatism. The sources of the study mostly</p><p>include literature and policy-documents. The author conducts qualitative and quantitative content</p><p>analysis of the Bush-administration´s policy document National Security Strategy of the United</p><p>States from March 2006. First the document is summarized based on different criteria followed by</p><p>categorizations of ideas connected with realism, liberalism and neoconservatism in the document. In</p><p>the quantative analysis value-words that are appropriate for the various traditions is chosen. The</p><p>frequency of those words can be seen as indications of the influence of the traditions in the thoughts</p><p>of the Bush-administration, but is mostly seen as a complement to the qualtative analysis. The main</p><p>conclusions of the paper are that the Bush-administration most often wish to act according to</p><p>international law and to cooperate with other actors internationally in the long run, it may even be</p><p>necessary. In the short run however, it may act outside the parameters of international organizations</p><p>and international law in order to accomplish foreign policy-goals. Matters related to the security of</p><p>the American state and people is considered much more important than international cooperation</p><p>and law. Liberalism seems to be the tradition that has most affected the Bush-administration´s</p><p>foreign policy. It is followed shortly thereafter by realism and neoconservatism seems to have had</p><p>the least influence on the the thought-traditions. All of the them has been active in the making of the</p><p>foreign policy.</p>