Policymakers' Statements:

• "A moment of transition": Pres. Obama explains that "Now we’re turning the page on a decade of war... the tide of war is receding" as he comments on the Defense Strategic Review (Jan. 5, 2012).  Yet, he also stated that "because we have global responsibilities that demand our leadership..., the defense budget will still be larger than it was toward the end of the Bush administration."   
• In his annual speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Sept. 21, 2011, President Obama reversed his pressure on Israel that was expressed one year earlier and in his own speech of May 19, 2011.  Designed to foreshadow the reasoning behind his threat to veto in the Security Council the Palestinian application for recognition as a state, Obama said: "Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations -- if it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians -- not us –- who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and on security, on refugees and Jerusalem."  The address is available as a video and as a transcript.
• "Moment of Opportunity:" President Obama's Major Address on the Middle East, at the U.S. Department of State on the Middle East (May 19, 2011).  In it he uttered these precedent shattering phrases: " The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state."  The address is available as a video and as the text was to be delivered in written form.  Also of related interest was this transcript and video of his address to the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) on May 22, 2011; and this joint press conference with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (May 20).
• National Security Strategy of the United States (May 27, 2010): "We are supporting the security and prosperity of our partners in Afghanistan and Pakistan as part of a broader campaign to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qa'ida and its violent extremist affiliates. Yet these wars-and our global efforts to successfully counter violent extremism-are only one element of our strategic environment and cannot define America's engagement with the world. Terrorism is one of many threats that are more consequential in a global age (p8)....a loose network of violent extremists.(p17)...The United States is waging a global campaign against al-Qa'ida and its terrorist affiliates. To disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qa'ida and its affiliates, we are pursuing a strategy that protects our homeland, secures the world's most dangerous weapons and material, denies al-Qa'ida safe haven, and builds positive partnerships with Muslim communities around the world. Success requires a broad, sustained, and integrated campaign that judiciously applies every tool of American power-both military and civilian-as well as the concerted efforts of like-minded states and multilateral institutions.(p19)  Finally, we reject the notion that al-Qa'ida represents any religious authority.  They are not religious leaders, they are killers; and neither Islam nor any other religion condones the slaughter of innocents.(p22)"
• New Afghanistan policy: "huge challenges remain.  Afghanistan is not lost, but for several years it has moved backwards."  After three months of intense debate about the war, at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, President Obama announced (Dec. 1, 2009) a substantial (30,000 troops) increase in U.S. war commitment to Afghanistan, along with the goals to better enlist Pakistan and the Afghanistan Army in efforts to defeat violent extremists including Al Qaeda.  "Our overarching goal remains the same:  to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future." Specific embrace of the goal of defeating the Taliban, however, was avoided.  Additionally, effort to begin withdrawal of U.S. forces in mid-2011 was suggested.  Link to video of address; Link to written transcript of address.
• Remarks by Pres. Obama at Arlington Cemetery (Sept. 11, 2009): "In defense of our nation we will never waver; in pursuit of al Qaeda and its extremist allies, we will never falter. "
• Cairo, Egypt Address to the Muslim World (June 4, 2009).  No mention of terrorists, but: "We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security -- because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject:  the killing of innocent men, women, and children.  And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people. The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together.  Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support.  We did not go by choice; we went because of necessity."
• "Security and Values," In the context of what to do about the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Pres. Obama's address of May 21, 2009 defined the enemy: "We are less than eight years removed from the deadliest attack on American soil in our history.  We know that al Qaeda is actively planning to attack us again.  We know that this threat will be with us for a long time, and that we must use all elements of our power to defeat it.... We're building new partnerships around the world to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates...  We are indeed at war with al Qaeda and its affiliates... [The threats] include people who've received extensive explosives training at al Qaeda training camps, or commanded Taliban troops in battle, or expressed their allegiance to Osama bin Laden, or otherwise made it clear that they want to kill Americans.  These are people who, in effect, remain at war with the United States. Let me repeat:  I am not going to release individuals who endanger the American people.  Al Qaeda terrorists and their affiliates are at war with the United States..."

John O. Brennan (Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism): 

• In the speech entitled "Securing the Homeland by Renewing American Strength, Resilience and Values" (May 26, 2010, to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C.), Brennan provided an in-advance interpretation of the new U.S. National Security Strategy that was released the next day.  At CSIS, Brennan emphasized the new diction about our enemies preferred by the Obama Administration: no more war on "jihadists," as this would confer undeserved religious "legitimacy" onto "murderers."  Though stating forcefully the view that the U.S. is no longer in a war on "terrorism," he nonetheless declared U.S. policy to be committed to fighting: "we will take the fight to al Qaeda and its extremist affiliates wherever they plot and train.  In Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and beyond."  It is, to Brennan, a conflict with "the cancer of violent extremism."  The actual National Security Strategy, however, employed variants of "terror" 58 times, while using Obama and Brennan's preferred substitute, "extremists" or "extremism," only 29 times, or exactly half as often.  Brennan closely adhered to the reigning pieties of the age, repeatedly emphasizing the isolation of U.S. enemies from most Muslims: "we will not cower in the face of a small band of cowards who hide in the shadows and send others to their slaughter and to slaughter the innocents."  For an excellent critique of this speech, see Barry Rubin's "President Obama's Ayatollah Explains Islam to the Muslims."
• "A New Approach to Safeguarding Americans," (August 8, 2009, to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C.)  The new approach delimits U.S. adversaries carefully, focusing almost exclusively on Al Qaeda and its allies, and recalibrating the scope and focus of current U.S. military activities: "the President does not describe this as a "global war." Separately, the U.S. is, according to Brennan, implementing a "plan to end the war in Iraq and to defeat al Qaeda and its allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan."  This is cast as necessary to prevent future attacks, even a WMD attack, on the American homeland, whose security Brennan emphasized as the top Administration priority.  Brennan conveyed that Obama's messages to the Muslim world now guide policymakers conception of the enemy.  Not only will he U.S. no longer use the phrase global war in speaking of the scope of activities, it will also drop another central phrase from the Bush years: "the President does not describe this as a 'war on terrorism.' " Though Brennan made passing reference to the religious context into which Al Qaeda would prefer to cast the conflict ("al Qaeda’s case is global domination by an Islamic caliphate") he did so to emphasize that the enemy's attempt at a religious appeal will not shape U.S. policy: "Nor does President Obama see this challenge as a fight against "jihadists." He suggests few Muslims support the enemy, asking: "Why should a great and powerful nation like the United States allow its relationship with more than a billion Muslims around the world be defined by the narrow hatred and nihilistic actions of an exceptionally small minority of Muslims?"  Toward this "exceptionally small minority" who take "actions," Brennan speaks of a continuing struggle, suggesting that the U.S. will also act against "the scourge of violent extremists who would use terrorism to slaughter Americans abroad and at home."... "we are at war with Al Qaeda... [and] its violent extremist allies who seek to carry on al Qaeda’s murderous agenda."

(former) President George W. Bush:  Official versions of Bush statements and papers from during the White House years are available here:

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/  

• Pres. George W. Bush's statement of September 11, 2001
• Pres. George W. Bush's statement of September 18, 2001 on the occasion of signing the Congressional Resolution "Authorization of Use of Military Force"
• Pres. George W. Bush's statement of October 7, 2001
• Pres. George W. Bush's speech to the United Nations of November 10, 2001
• Pres. George W. Bush's statement of November 26, 2001, (i.e.: "my message is, is that if you harbor a terrorist, you're a terrorist.  If you feed a terrorist, you're a terrorist.  If you develop weapons of mass destruction that you want to terrorize the world, you'll be held accountable...")
• Pres. George W. Bush's State of the Union Address, January 29, 2002
• Pres. George W. Bush's Statement on the Middle East conflict, April 4, 2002
• Pres. George W. Bush's Commencement Speech, U.S. Military Academy at West Point, NY June 1, 2002, which included: "... Our war on terror is only begun... If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long... [O]ur security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives.... There can be no neutrality between justice and cruelty, between the innocent and the guilty. We are in a conflict between good and evil, and America will call evil by its name."
• Pres. George W. Bush's statement calling for a new leadership for the Palestinians' (June 24, 2002)
• Pres. George W. Bush speech to United Nations (Sept. 12, 2002) in which ultimatum regarding Iraq was given.
• National Security Strategy of the United States (September 2002) which abandons deterrence and embraces pre-emptive action. PDF format.
• Pres. George W. Bush's speech on Iraq (Cincinnati OH, October 7, 2002)
• "This nation will not live at the mercy of any foreign power or plot" Pres. George W. Bush's statement on Iraq when signing Congressional authorization of Use of Force against Iraq: "In 1991, Iraq was given 15 days to fully disclose all weapons of mass destruction. The dictator has successfully defied that obligation for 4,199 days..." (October 16, 2002)
• "The United States of America will not live at the mercy of any group or regime that has the motive and seeks the power to murder Americans on a massive scale....the full disarmament of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq will occur." Pres. George W. Bush's comments upon passage of U.N. Resolution 1441 (Nov. 8, 2002)
• "Apparatus of Lies" (January 22, 2003) White House document on Iraq's disinformation and propaganda, 1990-2003
• George W. Bush: State of the Union Address (Jan. 28, 2003): "If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.... [S]ometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all."
• George W. Bush: Press Conference on Iraq (March 6, 2003): "so long as there's a terrorist network like al Qaeda, and others willing to fund them, finance them, equip them -- we're at war... If I thought we were safe from attack, I would be thinking differently. But I see a gathering threat. I mean, this is a true, real threat to America. And, therefore, we will deal with it."
• George W. Bush: Speech to the Nation (March 19, 2003) announcing the start of military action in Iraq: "this will not be a campaign of half measures, and we will accept no outcome but victory."
• "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on." George W. Bush, speech on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln (May 1, 2003)
• George W. Bush: Speech to the United Nations General Assembly (Sept. 23, 2003).  Of note because the next day Sheikh Yassin, leader of Hamas, stated that by this speech "Bush declares war on Islam"
• George W. Bush: "The United States has adopted a new policy, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East." (November 6, 2003) "... Iraqi democracy will succeed -- and that success will send forth the news, from Damascus to Teheran -- that freedom can be the future of every nation.  The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution."
• George W. Bush and Tony Blair: Press Conference of Nov. 20, 2003
• George W. Bush: State of the Union speech (Jan. 20, 2004): "There is a difference, however, between leading a coalition of many nations, and submitting to the objections of a few. America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country."
• George W. Bush and Hosni Mubarak (Pres. of Egypt), joint news conference of April 12, 2004 on the barrier posed by "suiciders." Bush: "There will never be a Palestinian state, in my judgment, if terrorists are willing to kill."
• George W. Bush: Prime-time Press Conference of April 13, 2004, re: September 11, 2001: "we weren't on a war footing. The country was not on a war footing, and yet the enemy was at war with us. And it's -- it didn't take me long to put us on a war footing. And we've been on war ever since. The lessons of 9/11 that I -- one lesson was, we must deal with gathering threats."
• George W. Bush: Oral statement on the Middle East supporting Israel's plans, and joint press conference with Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel (April 14, 2004); plus Bush's formal written statement on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, and Bush's letter to Sharon; both issued on this same date.
• George W. Bush: Speech to the U.N. General Assembly (Sept. 21, 2004).  Bush-the-idealist in vintage form: "In this young century, our world needs a new definition of security.  Our security is not merely found in spheres of influence or some balance of power; the security of our world is found in the advancing rights of mankind... When it comes to the desire for liberty and justice, there is no clash of civilizations. People everywhere are capable of freedom, and worthy of freedom."
• George W. Bush: Remarks to Canadians (Halifax, Nova Scotia, December 1, 2004).  On the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, Bush omits mention of steps needing to be taken by Israel, pointing instead to "the heart of the matter, which is the need for a Palestinian democracy."
• George W. Bush: Second Inaugural Address (Washington, Jan. 20, 2005).
• George W. Bush: Remarks about Iraq, the need for Syria to change, and "grave concern" about Iran's nuclear program (Washington, Sept. 13, 2005)
• George W. Bush: Speech to United Nations Plenary Meeting (New York, Sept. 14, 2005), telling that body "We must complete the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism that will put every nation on record: The targeting and deliberate killing by terrorists of civilians and non-combatants cannot be justified or legitimized by any cause or grievance....the whole world has a vital interest in the success of a free Iraq." 
• George W. Bush: Speech on War on Terror to the National Endowment for Democracy (Washington, Oct. 6, 2005): "Islamic radicalism is more like a loose network with many branches than an army under a single command... Their tactic ... has been consistent for a quarter-century: They hit us, and expect us to run. They want us to repeat the sad history of Beirut in 1983, and Mogadishu in 1993... The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity. And we must recognize Iraq as the central front in our war on terror... Evil men, obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience, must be taken very seriously -- and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply... We will never back down, never give in, and never accept anything less than complete victory."  Bush then went on to warn others: "...we're determined to deny radical groups the support and sanctuary of outlaw regimes. State sponsors like Syria and Iran have a long history of collaboration with terrorists, and they deserve no patience from the victims of terror. The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they're equally as guilty of murder.  Any government that chooses to be an ally of terror has also chosen to be an enemy of civilization. And the civilized world must hold those regimes to account."
• George W. Bush: State of the Union, 2006 (Jan. 31, 2006): "...[O]ne of the main sources of reaction and opposition is radical Islam -- the perversion by a few of a noble faith into an ideology of terror and death. Terrorists like bin Laden are serious about mass murder -- and all of us must take their declared intentions seriously. They seek to impose a heartless system of totalitarian control throughout the Middle East, and arm themselves with weapons of mass murder.  Their aim is to seize power in Iraq, and use it as a safe haven to launch attacks against America and the world. Lacking the military strength to challenge us directly, the terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear. When they murder children at a school in Beslan, or blow up commuters in London, or behead a bound captive, the terrorists hope these horrors will break our will, allowing the violent to inherit the Earth. But they have miscalculated: We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it... Our offensive against terror involves more than military action. Ultimately, the only way to defeat the terrorists is to defeat their dark vision of hatred and fear by offering the hopeful alternative of political freedom and peaceful change. So the United States of America supports democratic reform across the broader Middle East. Elections are vital, but they are only the beginning. Raising up a democracy requires the rule of law, and protection of minorities, and strong, accountable institutions that last longer than a single vote...  American leaders -- from Roosevelt to Truman to Kennedy to Reagan -- rejected isolation and retreat, because they knew that America is always more secure when freedom is on the march.  Our own generation is in a long war against a determined enemy -- a war that will be fought by Presidents of both parties, who will need steady bipartisan support from the Congress. And tonight I ask for yours..."
• National Security Strategy of the United States (March 2006).  Highlights U.S. purpose as "ending tyranny."  Argues that to accomplish this, the U.S. faces a challenge similar to Cold War: "The 20th century witnessed the triumph of freedom over the threats of fascism and communism.  Yet a new totalitarian ideology now threatens, an ideology grounded not in secular philosophy but in the perversion of a proud religion.... An ideology that justifies murder."  Reiterates 2002 American doctrine of preemption: "Defeating terrorism requires a long-term strategy and a break with old patterns. We are fighting a new enemy with global reach. The United States can no longer simply rely on deterrence to keep the terrorists at bay or defensive measures to thwart them at the last moment. The fight must be taken to the enemy, to keep them on the run." Identifies Iran as leading threat. 
• Bush statement of August 10, 2006: "this nation is at war with Islamic fascists."  Statement was made after Britain broke up extremists' plot to blow up multiple U.S.-bound airplanes over the Atlantic Ocean.
• Bush speech to the U.N. General Assembly (Sept. 19, 2006). "Today, I'd like to speak directly to the people across the broader Middle East: My country desires peace."

---

(former) Vice President Richard Cheney:

Vice President Richard Cheney's interview of October 12, 2001

Vice President Richard Cheney speech on Iraq (to Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, August 7, 2002)

Vice President Richard Cheney speech on Iraq (to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Nashville TN, August 26, 2002)

---

(former) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld:

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's OpEd of November 1, 2001

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's Press Briefing of September 3, 2002:  re Iraq: "they have not lived up to their obligations under the U.N. resolutions and the agreements that they signed at the conclusion of the Gulf War."

Rumsfeld's War: PBS Documentary analyzes the Secretary's role in shaping responses to 9.11, Iraq, and reluctance in the Army (PBS Frontline, Oct. 26, 2004)

(former) Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor (2001-05), Secretary of State (2005-2009):

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice on November 8, 2001: "You cannot help us with al Qaeda and hug Hezbollah. That's not acceptable."

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice makes case for war against Iraq to BBC (August 15, 2002)

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (PBS Newshour, Sept. 25, 2002) "high ranking detainees, have said that Iraq provided some training to al-Qaida in chemical weapons development."

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice interview with the Financial Times of London (Sept. 23, 2002)

Revealing responses in the Arab World critique Rice in unusually sharp (and some might say racist) ways (MEMRI Institute, October 11, 2002).

"Why We Know Iraq is Lying." National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (Jan. 23, 2003)

"9.11 for the Record" National Security Advisor Rice recalls the events of the day and rebuts claims by others (e.g., Richard Clarke) that Bush was inattentive to Al Qaeda prior to 9.11, or obsessed with attacking Iraq after the event (Washington Post, March 22, 2004); no longer available online at the Post website: use Lexis-Nexis, accessed via MBC Library, to obtain a copy.  MBC ID required.

Dr. Rice on the War on Terror (August 19, 2004) to the U.S. Institute of Peace

"The Power-Values Approach to Policy." Glenn Kessler analyzes Rice's world view and policy influence (Washington Post, Nov. 21, 2004, pp. 8-9).

David Samuels, "Grand Illusions," Atlantic Monthly (July 2007): An excellent portrait of Rice's diplomacy in the Middle East.

Office of the Director of National Intelligence: main website

"Annual Threat Assessment: Statement by D.N.I. Dennis Blair to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee"  (March 10, 2009)

"Annual Threat Assessment: Statement by D.N.I. John Negroponte to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence," (Jan. 11, 2007)

"Annual Threat Assessment: Statement by D.N.I. John Negroponte to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence," (Feb. 2, 2006)

CIA  Website. Home of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency

F.B.I. statements, wanted lists, documents and links about the war on Terrorism

U.S. Department of Defense website.  Includes links to activities about the war on terrorism and other D.O.D. activities.

F.E.M.A. resource guides: background; what to do to respond to various sorts of terrorist attacks, etc.

Former U.S. Officials:

(former) Secretary of State (2001-January 2005) Colin Powell:

• Secretary of State Colin Powell: Presentation on Iraq to the U.N. Security Council, Feb. 5, 2003: "Saddam Hussein and his regime have made no effort to disarm.... How much longer are we willing to put up with Iraq's non-compliance before we, as a council, we, as the United Nations, say: ``Enough. Enough.'' "
• Secretary of State Colin Powell's interview of November 25, 2001
• The Powell Doctrine

---

(former) Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz:

Transcript of interview with Vanity Fair (May 9, 2003) on his 1993 Memorandum outlining U.S. policy for the 1990s ("Regional Defense Strategy of January, 1993") and beyond.  Critiques and shows continuities of Clinton approach to Bush I and Bush II.  Discusses the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001 and his view re Iraq: "There was a long discussion during the day about what place if any Iraq should have in a counterterrorist strategy. On the surface of the debate it at least appeared to be about not whether but when."  Describes influences on his thought (e.g., A. Wohlstetter), the relationship between strategy and weapons, the Tomahawk missile's near death, pragmatism versus ideological approaches, post-war Iraq, democracy versus dictatorship in the Middle East, and much more.

(former) Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith:

Influential Pentagon strategist explains his Sept. 20, 2001 memo advocating that policy in the war on terrorism be viewed in light of "the worldwide nature of the conflict." (Washington Post, August 7, 2004)

News item reporting the pending Summer 2005 resignation of Douglas Feith (Washington Post, January 27, 2005)

Public Opinion Polls on the Conflict:

Link to Polling Organizations worldwide (maintained at P.I.P.A.)

Pew Global Attitudes Project: link to main page

Polls of Americans' attitudes:

Poll: 44 percent of Americans think Saudi Arabia supports international terrorism (Washington Post, Feb. 26, 2002; no longer online at this site; use Lexis-Nexis to find, via MBC Library - MBC ID required )

Iran: Poll: 56% support going to war with Iran to stop their nuclear weapons from menacing us (ABC-Washington Post poll, June 24, 2003)

Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) survey of Americans' views on Middle East, Israel-Palestinian conflict (April 2005)

Public Agenda poll (sponsored by the Ford Foundation) of Americans' attitudes toward Middle East, war, illegal immigration and other issues (August 2005)

Bush's popularity hits all-time low, but majority of public does not support setting a deadline for withdrawal from Iraq (Washington Post, August 31, 2005)

Chart: impact of the Iraq war on Pres. George W. Bush's popularity (Gallup polls charted by Prof. Bowen)

Confidence of U.S. public about U.S. Foreign Policy Index: Anxious Public Pulling Back From Use of Force (Public Agenda poll, vol. 4: 2007).

American Muslims' views: Pew Research study and poll (Pew: May 22, 2007): summary, full report.

Americans support Israel in fight with HAMAS (Ipsos/McClatchy Poll: January 12, 2009).

Americans divided on whether to send more troops to Afghanistan (ABC/Washington Post poll: October 21, 2009).

---

Polls of Middle Eastern, Iranian, and key South Asian publics' attitudes:

Feb. 2002 poll: Most Muslims dislike U.S. (Agence France Presse)

70 percent of Palestinians will support Iraq if the U.S. goes to war against Iraq; a majority support suicide bombings (i.e.: attacks against civilians) in Israel (Palestine Center for Public Opinion poll, reported in Jerusalem Post, Sept. 25, 2002; no longer online at this site.

December 2002: Summary of Pew Center poll shows attitudes toward U.S., toward U.S. war on Iraq, with survey made in all world regions; reports significant support for suicide bombings in many states, e.g. Lebanon 73% approve of it.  (full survey here).

June 2003: Pew Center Poll "Views of a Changing World."  Reports publics' views on U.N., U.S., war on terrorism and more.  Read how 71 percent of Palestinians, 58% of Indonesians, 55% of Jordanians, 49% of Moroccans, and 45% of Pakistanis regard Osama bin Laden as a leader in whom they have confidence he will "do the right thing." 

March 16, 2004: Pew Center Poll: "A Year after Iraq War: Mistrust of America in Europe Higher than Ever; Muslim Anger Persists.  A Nine Country Survey" (link above to full survey; link here to summary)

June 8, 2004: Washington Post reports a private opinion poll sponsored by the Saudi Government: 48 percent of Saudis find favorable "Bin Laden's sermons and rhetoric"; 36.4% are unfavorable.  But only 4.7 percent want him to be president.  Also in the poll, Saudis opinions on "strong and close relations with the U.S.": 56.7 percent unfavorable to this (41.4 percent favorable).  Less than one percent find terrorism the No. 1 domestic problem of the nation.

February 2005: University of Jordan (Amman, Jordan) poll of Muslims' attitudes toward the West, toward Islamic Law, and many other issues.  Conducted in five nations.  Reveals substantial majorities favor Islamic Law as the sole source of law in Jordan, Palestine, and Egypt.  Graphic summarizing this finding is linked here; full study is linked here.  Contains stunning sections concerning attitudes toward terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda, and attitudes toward the acts they commit.

June 23, 2005: Pew Research Center poll on international attitudes toward the U.S. found slight improvement in an overall negative image of the U.S. held by publics abroad.

July 14, 2005: Pew Research Center poll, “Islamic Extremism: Common Concern for Muslim, Western Publics" found declining support for suicide bombing, and declining support for Osama bin Laden, among most Muslim publics.  But the poll also found disturbingly high levels of mistrust toward the U.S., toward Christians, and toward Jews. Moreover, Pew found rising support for suicide bombing in some states (i.e., Jordan) and rising levels of confidence in Osama bin Laden in two key states: Jordan and Pakistan.

June 22, 2006: Pew Research Center poll, "The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other" follows up on earlier polls, and adds a new focus onto the attitudes of European Muslim minorities.  (Read the Summary introduction; or the full study).

September 26, 2006: News report showing Palestinians Approve of War Crimes, but 77 percent want a cease fire.  These and other contradictory findings emerged from a  jointly designed and conducted Israeli-Palestinian poll of Palestinians' attitudes, which shows over 60 percent to favor tactics used by Hezbollah in the 2006 war (i.e., indiscriminate rocket attacks on civilian residential areas).  From International Herald-Tribune.

September 27, 2006: Iraqis of all ethnicities don't like Al Qaeda; majorities everywhere but Kurdistan want the U.S. to leave, and other findings from the Program on International Policy Attitudes, or PIPA.  Poll was administered in January 2006.

April 24, 2007: "Muslim Public Opinion on U.S. Policy, Attacks on civilians, and Al Qaeda," Program on International Policy Attitudes (P.I.P.A) at the University of Maryland.

Sept. 10, 2008: Stunning 2008 poll finding: doubt about Al Qaeda's responsibility for 9/11 remains widespread in Muslim world and elsewhere (World Public Opinion poll, Sept. 10, 2008).  Read the executive summary or the whole poll, but the findings are equally disturbing.  Only 11 percent of Jordanians, 16 percent of Egyptians, 39 percent of Turks and 42 percent of Palestinians think Al Qaeda was responsible, and in each place larger percentages believe the U.S. Government, or Israel, or both committed the 9/11 attacks. Still, this is comparable to the mere 33 percent of Mexicans who think Al Qaeda did it (30 percent of Mexicans blame the U.S. Government for 9/11 !).

Sept. 17, 2008: "Unfavorable Views of Jews and Muslims on the Increase in Europe," Pew Global Attitudes Project.  Includes surveys of U.S., European and Muslims nations' publics on questions of role of religion, terrorism, attitudes toward other religious groups, etc.  Spins the story to the effect that support for terrorism is declining among Muslims, yet actual data in full report show support for terrorism rising in Egypt and staying steady in several other states.  A press release accompanying the report (and data reported on page four of the report itself), however, included this statement: "substantial numbers of Muslims continue to express confidence in bin Laden in Nigeria (58%), Indonesia (37%) and Pakistan (34%)."

December 9, 2008: Muslim publics' support for democratic norms varies cross nationally.  Turk, Palestinian, Egyptian, Jordanian, Indonesian and many other publics' attitudes toward press freedom, religious freedom, women's rights and other issues were presented.  European and U.S. samples also are included.  (World Public Opinion.org, a part of PIPA, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland).

February 25, 2009: World Opinion.org / PIPA (the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland) released a poll entitled "Muslim Publics Oppose Al Qaeda's Terrorism, But Agree With Its Goal of Driving US Forces Out," reviews Muslims' opinions toward Al Qaeda, Islamization of politics, and attacks on U.S. forces in the Middle East, and on American civilians in the U.S.  Publics in Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Palestinian territories and other states are reported.  Despite the slightly encouraging title of the study, troubling insights again emerge from a close reading, e.g., 39 percent of Palestinians support attacks on U.S. civilians in the U.S.  Link to full study.

March 2009: Pew Poll of Pakistanis finds "Few in Pakistan support extremists" (Pew Center for Research).

July 1, 2009: World Public Opinion / PIPA (the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland) poll of Pakistanis' attitudes toward the U.S., Islamist militants, and other topics.

July 10, 2009: Political scientist C. Christine Fair and World Public Opinion / PIPA (the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland) follow up on their July 1, 2009 poll with a poll analyzing attitudes in Pakistan toward Islamist militancy, Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, the Pakistani and Afghani Taliban, and related issues.  Compares attitudes measured in Sindh, Punjab, Northwest Frontier, and Baluchistan provinces.

July 23, 2009: Pew poll finds "Confidence in Obama Lifts U.S. Image Around the World: Most Muslim Publics Not So Easily Moved" (July 23, 2009: Pew Center for Research).  Link to full study.

November 2009: Public Opinion on Global Issues.  The prestigious Council on Foreign Relations presented results of various other organizations' polls over recent years on Middle Easterners' (and others') attitudes about terrorism, bin Laden, the U.S., etc.  Link to full study.  (November 2009: Council on Foreign Relations).

February 4, 2010: "Mixed Views of Hamas and Hezbollah in Largely Muslim Nations: Little Enthusiasm for Many Muslim Leaders" (Pew Center for Research).

April 18, 2010: Attitudes toward the United States improve, except in Turkey and Pakistan (World Public Opinion / BBC Poll).

December 2, 2010: Muslim Publics Divided on Hamas and Hezbollah (Pew Research Center). Full study can be downloaded from that address.

May 2, 2011: Osama bin Laden Largely Discredited among Muslim Publics in Recent Years (Pew Research Center)

May 17, 2011: Arab Spring Fails to improve U.S. image (Pew Research Center).

June 21, 2011: U.S. image in Pakistan falls no futher following Bin Laden killing (Pew Research Center): link to full report.

March 2012: Arab Opinion Index 2011 (Measurement of Arab Public Opinion Project, Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, Doha, Qatar): provides access to the executive summary, only, of its survey.  But the summarized evidence there (and in a news release accompanying) shows little worry about Iran.  Predictably, Israel (51 percent) and the U.S. (22 percent) in this 2011 poll are shown to then have been perceived as the greatest threats to the Arab states; and more than 80 percent of respondents across the region remained opposed to diplomatic recognition of Israel.  Interestingly, no questions seem to have been asked, and no responses are reported, about the security issues of greatest interest to Americans, e.g. how many support suicide terrorism, how many sympathize with Al Qaeda, how U.S. troops in the region are viewed, etc.

Pechter Polls: frequent small sample polls focused on the views of Middle Eastern publics

 

Polls of Israeli publics' attitudes:

August 24, 2002: Israeli opinion: concessions made to Palestinians at Oslo in 1993 now are viewed as a mistake (Jerusalem Post)

 Oct. 8, 2002: Poll: Mood of Israelis and Israeli Arabs (Ha'aretz)

March 12, 2007: Israeli Arabs' and Israeli Jews' attitudes: each side fears the other (from Ha'aretz).

February 9, 2009: News report about a poll of Israelis' attitudes about prospects for a Palestinian state, broken down by political party of respondents (Jerusalem Post, Feb. 9, 2009).

September 8, 2009: Israeli attitudes on risk of war (News item in Jerusalem Post citing August-Sept. 2009 survey by Evans Program for Conflict Resolution Research of Tel Aviv University).  Shows Israelis on the left see lower risk of major attack on Israel that do those in center or on the right in Israeli politics.

January 13, 2010: News item about Evans Program for Conflict Resolution Research at Tel Aviv University Poll of Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs on several issues.  The poll finds differing explanations of the relatively low level of violence in 2009, with Jews crediting IDF efforts and Israeli Arabs emphasizing decisions of the Palestinian leaders.  Still, one in 5 Israeli Arabs agree with Israeli Jews that security policies of the IDF mattered most (Jerusalem Post, Jan. 13, 2010).

April 10, 2010: Truman Institute / P.I.P.A. poll of Israelis' attitudes about peace, settlements on the West Bank, etc.  Compares general Israeli sample with a sample of settlers' views.

September 2, 2010: Comprehensive summary of polls by worldpublicopinion.org, Truman Institute, and many other reputable polling organizations comparing Israeli and Palestinian attitudes regarding issues involved in peace negotiations between the two parties. Coinciding with the re-starting of negotiations in Washington, D.C. the polls reveal sharp differences on solutions, and agreement among each people about which issues are of greatest importance to each.

December 2010: Sammy Smooha, "Arab-Jewish Relations in Israel: alienation and rapprochement," Peaceworks 67 (Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace, 2010).  A rare, long term study of Israeli Arabs' and Israeli Jews' attitudes toward each other and toward the key issues, 1976-2009.  Ample data is assembled to analyze which major thesis, alienation or rapprochement, best fits trends in attitudes toward one another held by the two major Israeli communities.  Many interesting findings suggest that the popular complete alienation hypothesis is not borne out by the data.  Other nuggets include the finding that only small percentages of Israeli Arabs choose to self-identify as Palestinian Arabs.

Polls of Palestinian publics' attitudes:

Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) publishes frequent polls on attitudes in Gaza, the West Bank, and among all Palestinians

Jerusalem Media and Communication Center, a Palestinian polling organization with frequent polls

January 2009: News report about a poll done by the Beit Sahour-based Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, surveying Palestinians' attitudes toward HAMAS, Fatah, attitudes toward truce with Israel, and other issues.  Compares West Bank residents to Gazans' views. (Jerusalem Post, Feb. 9, 2009).

April 12, 2010: An Najah University (Nablus, Palestinian Territories) poll of Palestinians' attitudes toward peace with Israel, borders, Fateh vs Hamas, and other issues.  Generally shows support for Hamas falling, and continuing support for Fateh, the party most closely associated with the Palestinian Authority.

September 2, 2010: Comprehensive summary of polls by worldpublicopinion.org, Truman Institute, and many other reputable polling organizations comparing Israeli and Palestinian attitudes regarding issues involved in peace negotiations between the two parties. Coinciding with the re-starting of negotiations in Washington, D.C. the polls reveal sharp differences on solutions, and agreement among each people about which issues are of greatest importance to each.

---

Polls of European and other publics' attitudes (see also the Pew polls above):

April 2002: what do foreign publics think of the U.S., its war, etc.? (Zogby International)

German Marshall Fund polls compare U.S. and European attitudes about international policy, Iraq, Iran, NATO, the mission in Afghanistan, terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism, and each other.  Read together these polls identify the several dimensions of "a friendship under strain."

• 2002
• 2003
• 2004
• 2005
• 2006
• 2007
• 2009: Features evidence of a strong "Obama bounce" in improved attitudes toward the U.S., but shows reluctance to support NATO in the Afghan War to be growing in Europe.  Separate country reports illuminate the different national trends, with Turkey the clear odd man out bucking the overall trends.

March 16, 2004: Pew Center Poll: "A Year after Iraq War: Mistrust of America in Europe Higher than Ever"...

January 2007: The Policy Exchange, a British think tank, public opinion study of growing extremism among British Muslims: "Living Apart Together: British Muslims and the Paradox of Multiculturalism".

May 2010: IPSOS poll on the British electorate on the 2010 General Election

U.S. Allies' roles:

Joint Statements by Allied Governments

Full text of declaration in support of the U.S. position toward Iraq (BBC, January 29, 2003), issued by heads of government of : Spain, Portugal, Italy, United Kingdom, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Denmark

U.S.-U.K. Joint Statement of Nov. 20, 2003

NATO response to Terrorism Statements from the alliance, last updated in August 2008.

News Sources from Allied states:

Sources from Britain and from the British Government

Jerusalem Post

Analytic Essays and Op-Ed Pieces about U.S. Allies:

Bat Yeor (National Review, October 9, 2002) analyzes the effect of two decades of European ties to Arab states and the Palestinian cause, and its impact on U.S.-European relations

Are America and Europe divorcing?  Arnold Beichman (Hoover Institution, September 2002) reminds us of the tendency of Western European democracies to favor "tossing the weak off the speeding sled in hopes of appeasing the wolves," historically and today.

David Brooks (Weekly Standard, April 15, 2002) critiques the cultural phenomena of "bourgeoisophobia" that engenders non-sympathy with the War on Terrorism among Europeans and others

Problems in Europe: Ha'aretz analyzes the rise of, and social acceptance of, anti-Semitism in the UK and Europe since Sept. 11 (March 8, 2002)

Greece: rising anti-semitism, and continuing inaction against it by the Greek Government are documented (Sharon Sadeh in Ha'aretz, January 21, 2003)

---

Britain:

official statements:

British Government report of Nov. 14, 2001: "The attacks of the 11 September 2001 were planned and carried out by Al Qaida"

Prime Minister Blair on whether Iraq is next (BBC, March 1, 2002) and still more openly advocating this on March 2.

Parliamentary debate about widening the war to Iraq gets nasty, violates House of Commons norms (BBC, March 6, 2002), which widened into a near revolt within the Labour Party (BBC, March 8, 2002). 

Graphs depicting final vote in House of Commons that approved war (March 18, 2003).

Prime Minister Tony Blair's statements on Iraq

press and analysis:

Conservative Party Leader Iain Duncan Smith's views on Hamas, Middle East terrorism, and the bias in the West which impedes understanding the nature of the threat we face (from BBC, Dec. 10, 2001)

The new anti-Semitism: Commentary on attitudes among the British by Barbara Amiel (various sources, Dec. 2001)

"Parroting lies:" Tom Gross (National Review, May 13, 2002) critiques the British press' performance in covering the Battle of Jenin during Spring 2002

More Trouble on the Left: Labour MP George Galloway gives a revealing interview to a friendly Al-Ahram (Cairo, Egypt: Jan. 16-22, 2003).  Especially instructive is his lament for the fall of the Soviet Union: "It was a bitter and devastating blow to me." (Galloway, of course, was later implicated in the U.N. cozy "oil for food" scandal with Iraq.)

---

Turkey:

News from Turkey as gathered together and presented by the private Turkish Press, a Plymouth, Michigan based clearinghouse.  Contains archives since 1997.

Zaman: online news from Turkey

Radical Islam: Lessons Turkey could teach Europe (Washington Institute for Near East Policy study, Nov. 2, 2005).

---

Israel:

Debka, a source from Israel

Lawrence Kaplan (New Republic, Feb. 18, 2002) argues that  Yasser Arafat's lies to President Bush about the "Karine A" arms shipment from Iran caused Bush to redefine US policy toward Israel and the Palestinians ...No longer available online: use Library collections or online indexes to obtain full text via MBC Library).

Steven Plaut (in the National Review) on how talk of a Palestinian State seems from Israel 

The Weekly Standard's V. Matus recaps how the reputation of Israel's Mossad intelligence agency has advanced the anti-terror effort

Poll: Mood of Israelis and Israeli Arabs (Ha'aretz, Oct. 8, 2002)

Going beyond the Mitchell Plan: Pres. Bush speech which suggests Israeli suspension of settlements need occur only after Palestinians stop terror, not before; plus analysis of this speech (Washington Post, Feb. 26-27, 2003; no longer available at Post website, but can be accessed via Lexis-Nexis, via MBC Library)

Daniel Pipes summarizes and critiques all proposed plans to "solve" the problems created by the Arab War against Israel (Commentary, Feb. 2003; may be obtained in library stacks, or through use of online indexes at MBC library - MBC ID required)

Other International Actors, in the Middle East and beyond

U.N. Background: U.N. Documents on the Middle East conflict: everything from the Balfour Resolution, through the debates about and final resolution of U.N. 242 (1967), down to the present situation.

U.N. website on Terrorism features resolutions, activities of the General Assembly, U.N. agencies, etc.

Canadian Government national security website  Includes documents on anti-terrorism activities.

Reliable analytical websites: Prof. Bowen recommends the following for continuing sound analysis of regional events and other phenomena related to the War on Terrorism:

National Counterterrorism Center, U.S. government clearinghouse website.  Features include links to searchable pages to monitor various terrorist and criminal acts worldwide, multimedia resources, and a calendar of events related to the history of terrorism and counter-terrorism.  Additional links assist job seekers, which are also valuable for students seeking internships within the intelligence community.

Middle East Forum: an analytic website located in Philadelphia, PA affiliated with Middle East expert Daniel Pipes

Daniel Pipes' editorials and source guide to understanding the Middle East

• List of links to full text version of Pipes' OpEd articles and other articles available online

Martin Kramer's website is not only a useful lens through which to see new developments.  Elsewhere on the site, he also has available portions of his Ivory Towers in Sand, the seminal critique of anti-American bias found in many Middle Eastern "experts" interpretations and books, a theme to which Kramer devotes an unusually large amount of effort.

Washington Institute for Near East Policy less focused on day-to-day events, this prestigious analytic organization offers free copies of many of its serious short, medium, and book length studies for download. The respected organization presents well organized offerings addressing all major issues in the region, and U.S. policy therein.  Its studies are professional quality by leading experts and practitioners.  Much is free, but consider buying their books to enlarge your library and your understanding.

Debka, a usually well informed source from Israel: provides original commentary on regional events.

Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), provides translations of Arabic and Farsi language publications, speeches, sermons, television commentaries, and much more.  Contains smaller sections of its own research and analysis of trends in the region.  Heavily focused on issues of interest to a student studying the War on Terrorism, MEMRI is absolutely unmatched among outlets that provide free access to translations of Arab, Middle Eastern, and Iranian sources.

Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a Washington, D.C. research and advocacy group, offers plentiful resources and links to articles and editorials that support the Global War on Terrorism.

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, pointed analysis of regional and global terrorism issues from well-informed Israelis.  Especially valuable are its studies on Radical Islam/Iran.

International Institute for Counter-Terrorism, Israeli experts provide fully documented academic articles and studies on global, regional and local terrorist threats.

Prism: Project for the Research of Islamist Movements, led by Reuven Paz at the Global Research in International Affairs Center, Herzliya, Israel.

Sada: The Carnegie Endowment for international peace presents this website as a forum on political changes and challenges in the Middle East.  Largely a hub that indexes analyses about countries and trends in the Middle East, it links readers to many valuable materials at its own websites and others' websites.

South Asian Intelligence Review presents regularly updated news and analysis from Indian experts.  Excellent coverage of events throughout South Asia, but of special interest to students of how to combat terrorism is their coverage of events in Pakistan.  Site also includes occasional analytic articles including some real gems by analyst Ajai Sahni, e.g.: this one from 2006.

Site Insititute, U.S.-based web clearinghouse presents reliable set of links to current news stories about the War on Terrorism, and its own analysis.  Maintained by respected expert Rita Katz.  Katz and her project were profiled in the New Yorker (May 29, 2006 issue).  Charges fees. 

Andrew McCarthy: former federal prosecutor of the 1993 attackers of the World Trade Center and of other important anti-terrorism casess, he writes on many matters of the law and terrorism, and related issues. Here also is a list of his dozens of editorials and articles , all linked so you can read the full text.

Individual Countries and their policies on terrorism:

France:

French Pres. Chirac's statement of Nov. 12, 2001: war should be "strictly limited to Afghanistan"

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin states that force will be used against Iraq if Saddam does not comply with UN 1441 (BBC November 12, 2002)

French appeasement about Iraq, critiqued by Robert Kagan and William Kristol (Weekly Standard, January 30, 2003). 

---

Germany:

The Week in Germany: news and official information from the German Government

103 German Intellectuals critique the U.S. war effort (May 2002)

Victorino Matus, "The Best of Times, The Wurst of Times," The Daily Standard online version of the Weekly Standard (Sept. 25, 2002) provides excellent analysis of the 2002 German election campaign, and what it means for German - U.S. relations.

Judith Winkler (Ha'aretz, March 21, 2003) analyzes the motives behind, and meaning of, Germany's shift toward an anti-war, anti-American foreign policy

---

Egypt:

Egypt: National Review author Steven Stalinsky recounts the vicious anti-Americanism of their press, before and after Sept. 11

Egypt: Claudia Winkler (Weekly Standard, March 2002) reports the vicious anti-Semitism, and anti-Americanism, found in the Egyptian Government sponsored weekly Akher Sa'a in Jan. 2002

Egypt: Martin Indyk (Foreign Affairs, Jan/Feb 2002) critiques U.S. policy in the 1990s

Egypt: Terry Eastland (Dallas Morning News/Weekly Standard, August 2002) on the Saad Eddin Ibrahim case

Egypt: 2002 MEMRI Institute compilation of the fawning worship of Pres. Mubarak in the unfree Egyptian press 

Egypt: Read what bothered Egyptian journalists after U.S. Ambassador to Egypt David Welch criticized Egyptian press denials of Al Qaeda's responsibility for Sept. 11.  You guessed it: it was us.  (MEMRI Institute, October 1, 2002)

Egypt: DEBKA analyzes President Mubarak's balancing act, and concludes he "seeks coexistence" with terrorism (DEBKA, December 2, 2002)

Egypt: Al Ahram Weekly in English can keep readers up on current thinking.   This semi-official newspaper long was supportive of the Mubarak Government that fell from power in early 2011.

Egypt's Arab Spring: comprehensive website profiling Egyptian political parties, movements, leaders and other political personalities, explaining election rules, etc. Created and maintained by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

MBInEnglish: Cairo-based website that translates Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood statements into English.

---

Saudi Arabia:

Translations of Saudi social, religious, and political leaders' statements by the MEMRI Institute; regularly updated.

R. James Woolsey, "The Elephant in the Middle East Living Room: Watching Wahhabis," National Review  (December 14, 2005).  Argues that Al Qaeda ideology and Wahhabism are largely identical, but that tactical choices alone divide these branches of "IslamoNazism".

"Saudi Money finances terrorism" this is not a new charge.  But the location of the pot stirring, Michigan, is new.  (Rita Katz in National Review, March 11, 2003)

Some ally:  "Our worry is the new emerging fundamentalism in the United States and in the West," says Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal.  This insight comes from the land of the fifteen September 11, 2001 fundamentalists and is paired with his condemnation of a potential U.S. "war of aggression" against Iraq (BBC, Feb. 17, 2003).

"The Scandal of Saudi-U.S. Relations," by Daniel Pipes (National Interest, Winter 02/03): analyzes why the U.S. cooperates with discrimination against its women, dual national children, observant Christians, and Jews, in its dealings with the kingdom.

Council on Foreign Relations report documenting that Saudi charities fund Al Qaeda (Oct. 17, 2002): "For years, individuals and charities based in Saudi Arabia have been the most important source of funds for al-Qaeda; and for years, Saudi officials have turned a blind eye to this problem."

"America, the civilization that arose on the skulls of others" and other disturbing tidbits from the regime-backed Saudi press, August 30, 2002, courtesy of the MEMRI Institute

153 Saudi intellectuals critique U.S. war efforts (May 2002)

The News item (in Washington Post, October 24, 2002) reporting Saudi Government banning of publication of U.S. scholars' reply to the 153 Saudi intellectuals no longer is accessible at the Post website; use Lexis-Nexis to obtain a copy.

U.S. Scholars' reply to the Saudis (Oct. 23, 2003)

Prof. Bowen's Critique of Saudi Policy (April 23, 2002), and the version of this op-ed published June 2, 2002 in the Staunton News Leader

Terry Eastland, publisher of Weekly Standard (April 29, 2002), critiques Saudi - U.S. relations

Saudi Press praise for suicide bombers in Israel including the bomber of the Passover Seder (published April 1, 2002 in Al-Jazirah)

Saudi Ambassador to Britain published a poem praising suicide bombers (originally in Al Hayat; then in Washington Post, April 19, 2002; no longer available at Post website; use Lexis-Nexis to obtain a copy)... And on August 21, he wrote: "there is an 'orchestra' carefully leading and feeding the attack on Saudi Arabia. This orchestra receives instructions from a conductor, which is the extremist right-wing Christian alliance supported by the Zionist lobby." (MEMRI Institute, August 30, 2002)

London Sunday Times reported a news item on August 28, 2002 that the Saudi Royal Family paid Bin Laden 200 million British pounds not to attack Saudi Arabia.  No longer available at the London Sunday Times website, it may be available via other online sources.

---

"The more things change...": Saudi Arabia's Peace Plan for the Middle East

as seen by Reuel Marc Gerecht in the Weekly Standard

as seen in Michael Steinberger in the National Review

as seen by the President of Tel Aviv University, a respected Israeli academic, writing for the MEMRI Institute

---

Saudi Arabia: Martin Indyk ("Back to the Bazaar," Foreign Affairs, Jan/Feb 2002) critiques U.S. policy in the 1990s. Only a small excerpt remains accessible, but with bibliographic details linked here, a copy can be found in library stacks or through online indexes.

Saudi Arabia: Interview with Crown Prince Abdullah in the Washington Post, January 28, 2002, in which he blames Israel, not his own citizens for recent terrorism.  No longer available at the Post website, it can be obtained via Lexis-Nexis.

A series of analytic 4 articles on U.S.-Saudi relations by David Ottoway (and others) appeared in the Washington Post during February 2002; no longer available at the Post website, they can be obtained via Lexis-Nexis.

John O'Sullivan ("Sizing up the Saudis," National Review, Feb. 20, 2002) argues that, warts and all, reforming Saudi Arabia is a better policy option than other choices.

Poll: 44 percent of Americans think Saudi Arabia supports international terrorism (Washington Post, Feb. 26, 2002; Story no longer available at Post website: use Lexis-Nexis to obtain a copy)

U.S. State Department cites Saudi Arabia for denial of religious liberty, charging the kingdom with "particularly severe violations of religious freedom" (Also: Washington Post news story on this, Sept. 16, 2004)

---

Pakistan

Long War Journal.  Indispensable day-to-day coverage of developments relating to terrorist groups and politics within Afghanistan and Pakistan. Includes regularly updated charts that chronicle the use of U.S. drones targeting terrorists inside Pakistan.

The Express Tribune (from Pakistan). Thorough coverage of national news about Pakistan.  Includes regional sections with news from Sindh, Punjab, Palochistan, KP and FATA, Jammu and Kashmir, and Gilgit Baltistan

Dawn: newspaper/news agency from Pakistan.  Includes substantial OpEd section.  Readers' comments, largely Pakistanis', can also offer glimpses into the country's political culture.

The Express Herald: another news source from Pakistan

Asia Times. Well informed independent news and analysis, especially regarding Pakistan, Afghanistan and the rest of South Asia

Articles about Pakistan:

Pakistan: Nov. 21, 1979 burning of U.S. Embassy recalled by U.S. survivors (Cameron W. Barr, "A Day of Terror Remembered," Washington Post, Nov. 27, 2004, p. A20)

Pakistan's former president Pervez Musharraf: interview with Lally Weymouth (Newsweek magazine interview, excerpted in the Washington Post January 25, 2004, but no longer accessible at Post website: use Lexis Nexis to obtain).

Pakistan: area experts on PBS News Hour assess the situation as of Oct. 15, 2001, and debate Pakistan's role

What scandalizes Pakistanis in 2012?  Read about the "insult" to its intelligence services by a Pakistani actress (January 11, 2012, AF/PAK Channel and Wall Street Journal).

---

Jordan and Kuwait:

Jordan: News item concerning October 28, 2002 assassination of USAID official Laurence Foley, plus enumeration of other U.S. diplomats killed by terrorists in Middle East over recent years (Washington Post, Oct. 28, 2002; story no longer accessible via Post website; use Lexis Nexis to obtain.)

Kuwait: Victor Davis Hanson (National Review, March 11, 2002) explains the bizarre spin Sept. 11 has taken in the sheikdom we saved in 1991.

---

The Palestinians:

Palestinians: Steven Plaut (National Review, Oct. 10, 2001) argues that splitting "good terrorists" from "bad terrorists" makes bad anti-terrorism policy

Palestinians: An Interview by CNN with Saeb Erakat of the Palestinian Authority, November 9, 2001  in which he claims Israel's proper borders are the ones drawn in 1947, and rejected then by all Arab states

Remember the "Jenin Massacre" (sic)?  Richard Starr (Weekly Standard, May 8, 2002) debunks this canard in his article "The Big Jenin Lie"

Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace: assesses school curricula of the P.A.

---

Other Regional States and Issues:

Getting the American Message to the Islamic Peoples: Kevin McNamara proposes the US Government create a radio station (from National Review, Oct. 23, 2001)

Syria, Iran, Sudan: Lawrence Kaplan differentiates between necessary, helpful and unhelpful allies in the region (article no longer online at New Republic; consult online indexes to obtain article dated September 20, 2001)

Syria: Interview with Pres. Bashar al-Assad (MEMRI Institute, March 28, 2003)

Syria: Secretary of State Powell warns Syria not to further aid Iraq and to make choice regarding world terrorism mindful of the "consequences" (Washington Post, March 31, 2003: story no longer available at Post website, but accessible via Lexis-Nexis)

Tajikistan: David Skukman introduces us to the anti-terrorism ally no one knows (from National Review, Oct. 23, 2001)

Maps:

U.S. Armed Forces' Deployments: 1969-2004.  PBS Frontline collection of U.S. Department of Defense maps identifies numbers of troops deployed in all world regions under the last several U.S. presidents (PBS, Oct. 26, 2004)

Maps of Afghanistan and surrounding areas

Maps of Afghanistan from University of Texas collection

Maps of regions of Afghanistan from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Maps of the Middle East

Ralph Peters' proposed redrawn Middle Eastern borders, from Armed Forces Journal (2006)

Israeli - Palestinian Conflict Maps:

Historic Maps (reprinted from Reform Judaism, Fall 2002):

Map Number 1:  Jewish Palestine: 1000 BC to the Arab Conquest

Map Number 2:  Map of 636 to 1880

Map Number 3. Map of 1880 to 1914

Map Number 4: Map of 1920

Map Number 5: Map of U.N. Partition Plan of 1947

Map Number 6: Borders 1949-1967

Map Number 7: 1967

Maps of Contemporary Israel and conflict in Palestinian areas (from the Jerusalem Post)

Maps of Gaza and West Bank (from University of Texas collection; chiefly C.I.A. in origin)

Maps of the Middle East (from University of Texas collection)

Main collection and general regional maps

Iraq Maps

Lebanon Maps

Saudi Arabia Map

Information Sources about the Conflict:

Data Bases:

START: the global terrorism incidents database maintained at University of Maryland for the Department of Homeland Security

Specialized News Sources about the War on Terrorism:

Debka, an unusually well informed source from Israel

Middle East Media Research Institute, provides translations of Arabic and Farsi language publications, and its own research and analysis of trends in the region.  Access to many sections is free, but some materials require a paid membership.

MBInEnglish: Cairo-based website that translates Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood statements into English.

Site Insititute, U.S.-based web clearinghouse presents reliable excerpts from communiqués from terrorist organizations, a set of links to current news stories about the War on Terrorism, and its own analysis.  Maintained by respected expert Rita Katz.  Charges fees.  

Coalition Provisional Authority: official website of the U.S. occupation forces in Iraq (which ended on June 28, 2004).  Provides access to the documents issued during the historic U.S./coalition occupation, 2003-04.

B'Tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories provides background analysis onto news stories, statistics on casualties, and other information focused on the condition of security and human rights for Israelis and Palestinians.

CAMERA: The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America.  Studies the accuracy of news sources' stories and editorial biases of major U.S. news organizations' coverage of news from the Middle East and about the wars.  Contains extensive focused studies of all major outlets.

Global Terrorism Analysis by the Jamestown Institute. Features in-depth analyses of terrorism events abroad, terrorist organizations, and groups that support them. Archives contain materials back to 2003.

Specialized News Analysis about the War on Terrorism:

Daniel Pipes' editorials and source guide to understanding the Middle East

Martin Kramer's website is not only a useful lens through which to see new developments.  Also available is his Ivory Towers in Sand, the seminal critique of anti-American bias found in many U.S.-based Middle Eastern experts' interpretations and books.

Andrew McCarthy: former federal prosecutor of the 1993 attackers of the World Trade Center and of other important anti-terrorism casess, he writes on many matters of the law and terrorism, and related issues. Here also is a list of his dozens of editorials and articles , all linked so you can read the full text.

---

General News Sources

BBC from London

Washington Post

Jerusalem Post, the leading Israeli daily paper

Middle East Media Research Institute, provides translations of Arabic and Farsi language publications, and its own research and analysis of trends in the region

Honest Reporting.  News analysis from the Middle East in text and video.

Al Jazeera (Qatar) in English

Gulan Magazine: news and analysis in English from the Kurdistan region of Iraq

The Hindu: national online newspaper from India

The Times of India: news from India

Dawn: news from Pakistan

The Express Herald: news from Pakistan

Asia Times. Well informed independent news and analysis, especially regarding Pakistan, Afghanistan and the rest of South Asia

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty: coverage of Russian news, war news as seen in Russia and also of special interest, the political situation in the Former Soviet Republics of Central Asia

MBC Political Science Department's Research links contains sections linking to diverse news sources, journals of opinion, polling organizations, academic journals, reference resources, and more.

Brookings Institution Foreign Policy Studies Program: includes frequently updated links to editorial columns written by Brookings' scholars which have been published in various media

D.O.D.: Information from the Pentagon (U.S. Dept. of Defense)

Homeland Security Dimensions in the War:

U.S. Public Opinion on the War: The "Rally Round the Flag" impact of: 

• Sept. 11, 2001
• The Iraq War  

  ---

Islamist terrorists, and those who support them in America and the West

The late Oriana Fallaci's remarks in New York (Nov. 28, 2005) about the threat to Europe and America (Front Page magazine, Nov. 30, 2005)

Islam: David Forte argues that Islam is not the enemy (in National Review)

The Investigative Project on Terrorism. Features investigative reports, news, and analysis about incidents, organizations and individuals it identifies as advancing the aims of America's enemies in the part of the global war being waged at home inside the USA. Long analytic pieces expose various organizations, e.g. Council on Islamic American Relations (C.A.I.R), Muslim Public Affairs Council (M.P.A.C.), and others. Interactive map allows visitors to quickly learn about individuals and incidents in their area, or any part of the country.

The "Holy Land Foundation:" Stephen Schartz (Weekly Standard) dissects American fundraisers for Palestinian Hamas terrorists

The case of Abdurahman Alamoudi: Daniel Pipes on what the case of convicted felon Alamoudi points to in terms of distinguishing between militant and moderate Islam 

The Weekly Standard on the "prophetic" Steve Emerson (Feb. 2002)

The role of National Public Radio in efforts to discredit Emerson and his viewsafter he stated "NPR has consistently suppressed news stories about militant Islamic groups in the United States operating under false cover."

Sami al-Arian: the story of the University of South Florida professor who was a leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Tried in South Florida, Al-Arian pleaded guilty to charges, served his time, then refused to answer questions about separate issues when they were posed to him by a Virginia grand jury. Awaiting deportation, al-Arian has remained uncooperative and under the grand jury subpoena though he was not incarcerated as of last available information.

• 2006 Department of Justice news release after al-Arian's conviction and sentencing to 57 months in prison for assisting a terrorist organization
• Investigative Project on Terrorism website on the case.  Includes links to IPT's video collection of jihadist videos, including al-Arian videos advocating jihad.