War on Terror

“International Law, International Relations, and the ‘War on Terror’”,

by Ruben Zaiotti

Editorial for the special issue of Journal of International Law and International Relations, Vol. 3. No. 1, pp. 2-8 (2007)

Litigating the Long War on Terror: The Role of Al-Aulaqi v. Obama

by Lesley Wexler

Loyola University Chicago International Law Review, Vol. 159, 2011

The U.S. government’s decision to list an American citizen on a kill list raises an important series of questions. At... more The U.S. government’s decision to list an American citizen on a kill list raises an important series of questions. At the time the government allegedly placed Anwar al-Aulaqi on a kill list, remarkably little was known about the procedures for listing and reviewing placements of individuals. How and under what authority did the government target Anwar al-Aulaqi? What legal standards guide the decision to list? Who makes the initial decisions about listing? What evidentiary standards do they use to determine if the legal standards are satisfied? Who reviews the determinations and how frequently? What opportunity, if any, exists for the listing individual to challenge his placement? Writ large, the pressing issue is whether the executive branch possesses unreviewable authority to order the targeted killing of an American that the President deems to be a threat to the nation.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed suit to find out the answers to the questions raised above. Although the actual case has drawn to a close, these questions remain important ones. Rather than attempt to resolve the numerous legal issues raised by the al-Aulaqi litigation, this short piece seeks to explain why the ACLU and CCR brought this lawsuit and then ultimately abandoned it. In short, al-Aulaqi’s case demonstrates both the potential for and the limitations of litigation as a strategy to curb executive authority during the so-called long war on terror. Even though Judge Bates rightly noted that al-Aulaqi’s case is a “unique and extraordinary” one, many issues raised by the litigation speak to more run of the mill terrorism cases. This article begins by identifying the ACLU and CCR’s successful challenge of a specific procedural burden, effectively ensuring greater access to lawyers for many of those designated as terrorists. In contrast, Part II of this article notes the ACLU and CCR’s general failures in accomplishing their immediate litigation goals. Their efforts to expand the standing doctrine and narrow the application of sovereign immunity, state secrets, and political question doctrines were largely futile. Yet, Part III suggests the ACLU and CCR’s real goals may have been the lawsuit’s extra-legal consequences and contributions. While they were unable to obtain a judicial review of the executive branch’s behavior, this part documents how they leveraged the litigation to provoke and influence a public debate over certain aspects of the war on terror. The lawsuit allowed the ACLU and CCR to raise and initiate the framework for legal and policy questions about the targeting of American citizens and the government has responded through leaks and speeches. In the wake of al-Aulaqi’s death, this framework is bearing some limited fruit as the push for greater transparency over legal standards for and reviewability of targeting decisions increases in strength and the demand for a rethinking of the policy wisdom of pursuing a targeting policy grows more fervent.

Magic for a People Trained in Pragmatism: Kenneth Burke, Mein Kampf, and the Early 9/11 Oratory of George W. Bush

by Jason C. Thompson

"Skylarking": Homosexual Panic and the Death of Private Kovco

by Robert Payne

Slavery and Colonialism: The Worst Terrorism on Africa

by Mohamed Eno

Co-authored with Omar A. Eno, Mohamed H. Ingiriis, and Jamal M. Haji; Published in African Renaissance, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2012.

Humans need not justify terrorism of any kind, regardless of whether one is Muslim, Christian or Jew, because it is... more Humans need not justify terrorism of any kind, regardless of whether one is Muslim, Christian or Jew, because it is the axis of evil and devastation of mankind. However, the deliberate use of the term terrorism in recent decades was carefully selected, mainly, against a certain religion (Islam). The idea was then globally politicized by the Western world. Leaving that scholarly view in its own right, we disagree with the opinion raising terrorism as the devil’s just-born child of evil, when in reality Africans had been terrorized for centuries as slaves and human chattel. Hence the basis for the concept of this thesis: conceptualizing the episode of ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist’ from the broader perspective of its practice from the Middle Passage or the Atlantic Slave Trade. To portray that argument and broaden the scope of the debate over this critically sensitive subject, we divided the discussion into three sections: an examination of what constitutes terrorism and terrorist; history of terrorism and terrorists from an Africa perspective; and the ideological constraints within the subject of terrorism as practiced by the US and its Western allies.

Geo-politics, the ‘war on terror’ and the competitiveness of the City of London

by Richard Woodward

Published in S.Barber (ed.) The Geo-Political and Strategic Environment for the City of London’s Financial Market (European Research Forum 2007)

Taking the Place of Martyrs: Afghans and Arabs Under the Banner of Islam

by Darryl Li

Arab Studies Journal 20(1), Spring 2012, pp. 12-39

This article examines how so-called “Afghan Arabs” – Islamist activists drawn to war-torn Afghanistan in recent... more This article examines how so-called “Afghan Arabs” – Islamist activists drawn to war-torn Afghanistan in recent decades – reconciled their pan-Islamist commitments with the experience of doctrinal and cultural difference vis-à-vis Afghans. Previous approaches to transnational Islamist activism have tended to either uncritically assume a monolithic Muslim identity or posit a rigid dichotomy between fanatic “foreign fighters” and the relatively moderate “local Muslims” who they putatively seek to indoctrinate. Eschewing both types of reification, this article argues that pan-Islamist projects should not be understood as attempts to erase intra-Muslim differences, but rather as endeavors to process them. Afghan Arabs struggled to understand, evaluate, and respond to doctrinal and cultural differences in ways that often defied the conventional juxtaposition of radical Salafi Arabs versus moderate Sufi/Hanafi Afghans. Diverse longstanding discursive traditions in Islam – including discussions over miraculous events [karāmāt] and visitation of saints’ tombs [al-ziyāra] – provided common terms of reference that Arab activists and their Afghan counterparts could invoke to ensure that even contentious disputes could contribute to a shared project.

The "War on Terror" Discourse and Militant Political Islam: How Did the Manifestation and Institutionalisation of a Domestic Discourse Affect American Policy and Attitudes Towards Hamas?

by Lani Shamash

Draft only

September 11th 2001 represented a critical juncture in American history. As a time of institutional and epistemic... more September 11th 2001 represented a critical juncture in American history. As a time of institutional and epistemic flux, the public, government and media attempted to make sense of the inconceivable. In this void of meaning the President acted strategically, using his elevated status to frame terrorism and Islamist politics in a very different way to his predecessor, Clinton. The “War on Terror” discourse began to manifest, and various alternative understandings and policy options were closed off, as a path-dependent process was unleashed.  Hamas was both directly and indirectly effected by Bush’s black-and-white “War on Terror” discourse, demonstrated through an exploration of the themes of legitimacy contested, the ideologisation of terror and Islamists in the security prism. The analysis will move on to Obama and the gulf between his rhetoric and practice, emphasising how the “War on Terror” discourse, institutionally and epistemologically embedded, sustained Hamas’ exclusion from the realm of legitimate politics.

knowns and unknowns

by Oliver Kessler

Listening to the Better Angels of Our Nature

by David Cohen

This is the Title {Page and Table of Contents of a book-length study of ethnicity, self-determination, and the... more This is the Title {Page and Table of Contents of a book-length study of ethnicity, self-determination, and the American Empire. It contains links to various chapters as I complete them and post them on Academcia.edu. The idea is to get my ideas out to a wider public, without having to wait for the long, involved process of publication. It must be remembered, however, that these chapters are rough drafts and are in need of additional editing and proof-reading.

“Abu Ghraib in the Art of Ayad Alkadhi”.

by Safdar Ahmed

Published in Third Text: Critical Perspectives on Contemporary Art and Culture, Vol. 25, Issue 3, May 2011, 1-10.

Immoral authorities: crusades, jihad and just war rhetoric

by Michele Acuto

This paper highlights the relevance of moral authority, and the role that egoistic ethical claims have in waging war.... more This paper highlights the relevance of moral authority, and the role that egoistic ethical claims have in waging war. This is done, in view of the just war tradition, by drawing a parallel between the crusades in the ‘kingdom of heaven’ proclaimed in 1095, and the present Islamic jihād, as well as the Bush administration's declaration of a war on terror. It maintains that the role of self-legitimized leaders is crucial in shaping the order of the jus ad bellum criteria, in both Christian and Muslim societies, and that the indiscriminate usage of just war rhetoric proves to be a formidable weapon. Moral authority is described as a power resource, capable of capsizing the relevance of ethics, subjecting the interpretation of justice to declare war to the self-proclaimed authorities, and moving masses on the grounds of enthusiasm.

Racism, Nationalism and Biopolitics: Foucault's Society Must Be Defended, 2003

by Mark Kelly

Contretemps 4, 2004

The Degüello: The Story of One Special Forces A-Team and the Mission of a Lifetime (Review)

by Jeff Emanuel

Review of "The Degüello," by Scott A. Zastrow (Lulu, 2011)

Libya 1986-2011: A Testing Ground for the Evolution of US Foreign Policy?

by Mattia Toaldo

Le misure di prevenzione del terrorismo e dei traffici criminosi internazionali ("The Measures of Prevention of International Terrorism and Criminal Trafficking")

by Lorenzo Pasculli

Versione definitiva in italiano della mia tesi di dottorato. Vietata ogni distribuzione o riproduzione non autorizzata (Final italian version of my Ph.D. dissertation. Do not distribute or copy without permission)

Università degli Studi di Trento (University of Trento)

Relatore (Tutor/Supervisor): Prof. Silvio Riondato

Obiettivo della presente ricerca è stata la ricognizione, la sistematizzazione e la critica delle misure di... more Obiettivo della presente ricerca è stata la ricognizione, la sistematizzazione e la critica delle misure di prevenzione negative praeter delictum del crimine globale previste dal diritto internazionale e sovranazionale. Si è cercato di adottare un metodo rispondente al carattere, appunto, globale della materia, nonché all’esigenza di offrirne una lettura sistematica universale. In questo senso, si è fatto largo uso della comparazione giuridica, al fine di individuare principi, categorie e prassi comuni, con cui interpretare anche il diritto internazionale e sovranazionale.

Il lavoro si è strutturato in quattro parti. Nella prima si è introdotto il problema della possibile confusione fra pene e misure preventive predelittuali, che, applicate senza idonee garanzie di certezza legale, si prestano a fungere da pene del mero sospetto. Nella seconda parte si è affrontata l’evoluzione della prevenzione negli ordinamenti contemporanei, con particolare riferimento all’impiego di misure negative da parte del potere politico in tempi di emergenza. Nella terza parte sono state esaminate, in un quadro d’insieme, le esperienze e le categorie maturate da vari ordinamenti nazionali in materia di prevenzione. Nell’ultima parte si è cercato di interpretare alla luce di tali strumenti i modelli di prevenzione di diritto internazionale e sovranazionale.

All’esito della nostra ricerca è emerso come il ricorso a misure di prevenzione negativa praeter delictum sia prerogativa comune ad ogni ordinamento giuridico, se non altro nei casi in cui vengano meno l’efficacia deterrente della pena e l’efficacia di interventi di prevenzione positiva. In certi paesi tali misure sono uno strumento ordinario di lotta alla criminalità pur sempre riconducibili ai principi garantistici del diritto penale, in altri contesti esse vengono usate quali misure eccezionali o di guerra, in una concezione utilitaristica che, in nome della ragione politica, tende a giustificare indiscriminati sacrifici delle libertà e dei diritti individuali, come la tortura e i “targeted killings”.

Nonostante alcuni significativi interventi della Corte di Giustizia dell’Unione europea, la disciplina delle misure negative adottate dagli ordinamenti internazionali e sovranazionali risulta ancora troppo legata a logiche politiche e troppo svincolata da principi e garanzie in grado di tutelare, quanto meno, un nucleo inderogabile di diritti e libertà fondamentali.

Co – opting Development: Failed States and Terrorism in the Post 9/11 Security Environment.

by Emily Algar

The terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001 in New York were, I believe a catalyst to how Western governments would... more The terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001 in New York were, I believe a catalyst to how Western governments would view, not only national security and the threat posed by failed states, but how development policies from then on, would be constructed. It also set in motion the assumption that failed states and terrorism are one in the same and are threat to states’ national security. This assumption is contested and far from simple, despite what Western governments depict. This has led to the spheres of security and development becoming entwined, where development policy is constructed to achieve security policies. It is none more clearly shown that DfID’s policy post 9/11, where development and aid has been increasingly re – directed towards states strategically important in the War on Terror. This securitization of development has come under increasing criticism from those within the development community who believe development aims are being subordinated in favor of states’ national security interests. In this dissertation my main argument is that the assumption that failed states and terrorism are linked is complex, contested and has little empirical evidence to support the relationship between the two. I also argue that this assumption has led to the policy of securitizing development. In part one I begin with the background to the assumption to the link between failed states discussing where the link originated from and how the post 9/11 security environment affected this. In part two, I discuss the policy that has emerged from this assumption; the securitization of development and how it has slowly been incorporated into DfID’s development policy. I will conclude that the link made between failed states and terrorism, which has enacted the policy of securitizing development, is misunderstood and lacks the empirical evidence for it to become an unwavering dominant policy discourse.

Strasbourg’s Bosnia Ruling Holds Lessons for Everyone

by Darryl Li

Balkan Insight, 9 February 2012

An op-ed on the European Court of Human Rights' handling of the the detention and deportation of Arab ex-combatants... more An op-ed on the European Court of Human Rights' handling of the the detention and deportation of Arab ex-combatants ("mujahidin") from Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Placing Conflict

by Simon Dalby

Paper presented to the Association of American Geographers April 2010

'Law, Terrorism and the Right to Know Response to Government Green Paper on Justice and Security', 6 Jan 2012, McNamara, L. & S. McIntosh

by Sam McIntosh