University of the Philippines Cebu

Lahug, Cebu City

Social Science Division




Research Paper on PS 188 Foreign Policies of Major Powers
Terrorism: Japanese Anti Terrorism Measures after 9/11 and impacts




Submitted by:
Mary Stephanie G. Bontuyan
B.A. Political Science IV







Submitted to:
Prof. Zenaida D. Ligan
PS 188 Professor







March 28, 2012
Background of the Study
The September 11 terrorist attacks to the World Trade Center buildings and Pentagon in
the United States in 2001 was an important event in the history of international politics.
1
The
attacks killed nearly 3,000 people from 93 nations; 2,753 people were killed in New York, 184
people were killed at the Pentagon and 40 people were killed on Flight 93 which crashed down
to the empty field of Pennsylvania (9/11memorial.org, 2014). The events of 9/11 were shocking
to Japanese as it was to the whole world. Japanese citizens were also among the victims of the
attacks in the 9/11.

2
There were 24 Japanese who were among the 2,998 victims of the attacks, consisting of
22 who were working in the World Trade Center buildings and 2 were among the passengers of
the hijacked planes. Although, it is incomparable to the thousand victims of United States
citizens, still it is already an alarming fact that even innocent people are victims. Immediately
after the attacks, Japanese Prime Minister Junichirou Koizumi expressed his condolences and his
support to the United States Government in its debacle against terrorism (Matsui, 2008).

3
Moreover, Japanese showed its support to the United States through several manners.
Primarily, it supported US on its attack against the Taliban government in Afghanistan where
Japan allowed its self-defense force (SDF) to give humanitarian assistance (Cherian, 2004).
4
In
2003, Japanese Self- Defense Force inclusive of ground, navy and air force personnel were also
sent to Iraq to engage in securing safety in the area when United States attacked Iraq (McCurry,
2004).

1
http://www.911memorial.org/faq-about-911
2
Matsui, Shigenori (2008). Anti-terrorism legislation and Civil Liberties in Japan
3
Cherian, John (2004). Japanese Troops for Iraq
4
McCurry, Justin (2004). Japan to Send Troops in Iraq
Statement of the problem
Terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, greatly altered the course of
international politics, including Japan as one of US allies. Thus, this study aims to determine the
international efforts of Japan, particularly on anti-terrorism, along with US after 9/11.
Furthermore, the study seeks to answer the specific questions:
1. What are the subsequent developments of the policies of Japan on terrorism and
factors that lead Japan to adopt anti-terrorism laws after 9/11, specifically, Anti-
Terrorism Special Measures Law of Japan?
2. What are the cooperative measures of USA and Japan in combating the global
war on terror?
3. Is there any increase in Japanese budget for self-defence? Increase in military
personnel?
4. What are the impacts of these changes in the Japanese Laws in the civil liberties
of the people? To the partner countries of Japan? To the international arena in
general?





Rationale / Objectives/Significance of the Study
The antagonism of terrorism was heightened after the 9/ 11 crisis whereby a hijacked
planed crushed the World Trade Center which is the symbolism of capitalist leaning of the
United States. With this, international politics was greatly alarmed by the threat posed by
terrorists, most specially the Al-Qaeda of Osama Bin Laden. In the advocacy of the global war
on terror, the United States is accompanied by its allies such as Japan. Bilateral partnerships with
the United States were structured. Moreover, individual countries created their foreign policies
that are against the proliferation of terrorism and the protection of their citizens from such. It is
within this sphere that the study seeks to assess the responses of the Japanese government,
immediate and long term, in combating the war on terrorism.
Several bilateral relations have been concluded between the governments of Japan and
United States. With this, the research would also assess the areas of cooperation between the
two governments in its battle against terrorism. Furthermore, the study seek out the various
foreign policies or international policies that the Japanese government implemented on the
aftermath of the 9/11 crisis. Lastly, the study will also analyze the impacts that the new anti-
terrorism policies of Japan brought to the civil liberties of the Japanese nationals.
This war on terrorism was globally spread, wherein US allies are also involved in its
combat which includes Japan. Consequently, the study will bestow a further understanding to the
readers on the situation of the Japan Foreign Policy in its joint combat with the United States
against terror. It would add a more critical analysis concerning the effects of the US war on
terror and its effects to the policies of other countries. Moreover, the perspectives and the
conclusion of the study might be able to aid in the analysis of international politics students in
line with their future research.
Scope and Limitation of the Study
As referring to terrorism, the study will be limited to the Japanese responses on the
aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Moreover, the scope of the research will be more centered
on the anti-terrorism policies of Japan and its effects to the civil liberties of the Japanese, and the
bilateral cooperation of the United States and Japan on battling the Global War on Terror.
Definition of Terms
Terrorism the use of force and violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a
way of trying to intimidate or compel a government or international organization
to prevent from doing such acts. (Meriam Webster Dictionary)
Al-Qaeda an Islamic extremist group headed by Osama Bin Laden, and the
group responsible for the attacks on 9/11
9/11 also known as the September 11 attacks;
5
were a series of four
coordinated terrorist attacks launched by the Islamic terrorist group al-
Qaeda upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C.
metropolitan area on Tuesday, September 11, 2001. (CBC News, 2004)
US Patriot Act-
6
is an Act of Congress that was signed into law by President
George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The title of the act is a ten-
letter acronym (USA PATRIOT) that stands for Uniting

5
CBC News. October 29, 2004. Retrieved 2011-09-01. "Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message
aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the
United States."
6
gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ56/html/PLAW-107publ56.htm
and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to
I ntercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001
Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law the Law adopted by Japan as a
response to the threat of terrorism
Theoretical Framework
Realism/ Neo -Realism
The study will anchor on the theory of Realism in analyzing the changes in the policies of
the Japanese government after the threat that terrorism possess to any country in the world. The
primary concern of realism is security. This principle will be utilized to substantiate on Japans
adaptation of anti-terrorism laws, particularly that of the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law
(ATSML). Specifically, realisms concept of state egoism will be utilized in the analysis of how
Japan how Japan conducted its statecraft for the prioritization of its national interest. The theory
also sees the state as the most important actors in the international arena and therefore these
states should acquire power, either through economic or military. Generally, this view can be
applied in delving into how Japan reacted when 9/11 symbolized the possible threat of terrorism.
On the other hand, it wasnt only realism that could be utilized to fully understand the
actions of Japan in its policy of war against terrorism but Neo-realism as well. Neorealists
believe that each state actor is responsible for ensuring its survival unlike in the domestic
politicsand do not believe that states must entrust its survival to another international actor
(Baylis and Smith, Globalization of World Politics: Introduction to International Relations). In
the issues of civil liberties vis--vis the anti-terrorism policies of Japan, this view will be used.

Liberalism/ Neo-Liberalism
Liberalism asserts the idea that people and their countries share a common interest, thus
considers the notion of collaboration and cooperation. Moreover, it claims that people have a
shared bond which extends beyond the limitations of the territorial boundaries of their countries,
enabling them to forge ties with other people globally (John Rourke, International Politics on the
World Stage 12
th
Edition). This concept of cooperation will be used in the analysis of how Japan
agreed to United States to cooperate in its global war on terror.
According to neo liberalism, another branch of liberalism that emerged in the 70s and
80s, the international society is marked by complex interdependence.
Interdependence is a condition where states are affected
by decisions taken by others. It can be symmetric wherein both
sets of actors are affected equally, or it can be asymmetric,
where the impact varies between actors. (John Baylis and Steve
Smith, Globalization to World Politics: An Introduction to
International Relations 2
nd
Edition).
means countries are tied together through trade and
many other economic, social and other exchanges that both
increase cooperation and limit conflict. (John Rourke,
International Politics on the World Stage 12
th
Edition).
In addition to that, neo liberalists includes in their policy prescription the idea in
promoting democratization, develop coordination and the concept of collective response in
global issues. The study will make use of neo liberalism, in the context of collective response
and interdependence, as a tool for evaluating the impacts of Japans international measures and
policies to combat terror on its partnership with other countries, and the international arena as a
whole.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Figure 1 shows process of analysis of the anti- terrorism efforts of the Government of
Japan particularly in its policies implemented, its cooperation measures with the United States
after the attacks of September 11, 2001. The flow of the analysis will consider the framework for
Analyzing World Politics, which includes factors individual, global and state or internal. These
mentioned factors (inclusive of threats posed, cooperation, individual head of states and etc ) will
be analyzed as to how it lead Japan to its efforts on anti-terrorism through the theories of
Liberalism and Realism.



Anti- Terrorism Measures of
Japan
State or
Internal
Influences
individual
influences
Global
Influences
(9/11)
Liberalism Realism
Methodology
The study on the response of the Japanese Government with threat pose by terrorism will
adhere to the theories of Realism and Liberalism, including their branches such as Neo-Realism
and Neo-Liberalism. As qualitative research, the studys informations will solely rely on
secondary sources such as books, news clips, which are primarily gathered with the use of
internet.
Historical Background
Terrorism, as defined by the UN Security Council in the Resolution 1556 in 2004, is
defined as:
7
any criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the
intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with
the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group
of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a
government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing
any act whether of a political, philosophical ideological, racial, ethnic or
religious nature. (UN Security Council resolution 1556)

8
Moreover, a UN Panel also described terrorism as any act that intends to cause death or
any serious body harm to non-combatants and civilians with a purpose of intimidating a
population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from

7
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sc8214.doc.htm
8
http://www.azdema.gov/museum/famousbattles/pdf/Terrorism%20Definitions%20072809.pdf
doing any act (UN, 2005).
9
The US Patriot Act also defined terrorism as those activities that
threats, conspires or attempts to hijack airplanes, buses, oats or any vehicle. Moreover
committing or conspiring to commit violence towards protected persons such as government
officials are also considered as acts of terrorism. Lastly, the US Patriot act also considered any
crime using dangerous device or weapons with a purpose of endangering lives of people than just
personal monetary gain. With all these definitions of terrorism, a vehement and popular example
of a terrorist activity was that of the 9/11 attacks.
September 11, 2001, marked the deadliest day of the United States. All parts of the
world were focused in New York City.
10
There were19 militants associated with the Islamic
extremist group al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners and carried out suicide attacks against targets in
the United States. On a clear Tuesday morning of 9/11/2001, an American Airlines Boeing 767
loaded with 20,000 gallons of jet fuel crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center in
New York City. The impact left a burning hole which instantly killed hundreds of lives. After 18
minutes, a second Boeing 767United Airlines Flight 175appeared out of the sky, turned
sharply toward the second tower of the World Trade Center. In the same hour, the third plane hit
the Pentagon and the last plane, which is possibly routed down to White House collision had
went down to Pennsylvania (history.com, 2014).
11
The attacks killed nearly 3,000 people from
93 nations; 2,753 people were killed in New York, 184 people were killed at the Pentagon and
40 people were killed on Flight 93 which crashed down to the empty field of Pennsylvania.
(9/11memorial.org, 2014)

9
http://www.azdema.gov/museum/famousbattles/pdf/Terrorism%20Definitions%20072809.pdf
10
history.com/topics/9-11-attacks
11
http://www.911memorial.org/faq-about-911
The attackers were known to be Islamic terrorist from Saudi Arabia and several Arab
Nations which were financed by the Saudi fugitive Osama bin Ladens al-Qaeda terrorist
organization. According to reports, the attack was primarily retaliation for the support of
America towards Israel in the Persian Gulf War and its continued military presence in the Middle
East.
12
The attacks also bear symbolic meaning since the Twin Towers were widely considered
to be symbols of America's power and influence. The Pentagon is the headquarters of the US
Department of Defense (bbc.co.uk, 2014).
In the aftermath of the attacks, the Bush administration immediately announced the
global war on terror.
13
By October 7, 2001, Bush started the military campaign in Afghanistan to
destroy the Al Qaeda network and the Taliban regime that was hosting them. Along with his
campaign are the military and economic sanctions to any countries harboring terrorist groups.
There was also the Bush Doctrine that focused both on preemptive and preventive action. In
USs operations, it deployed 19,000 U.S. military personnel in and around Afghanistan. U.S.
Special Forces are also operating in Afghanistan and are primarily concerned with capturing or
killing Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders. Moreover, US also invaded Iraq accusing Saddam Hussein
of developing nuclear weapons and tied Hussein to Al-Qaeda. (Jones, 2004).
14
Proliferation of
US humanitarian assistance was also perceivable through the workings of USAID NGOs and
lastly, was the creation of the US Patriot Act which was greatly about combating terrorism
(Rowen, 2014).

12
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/events/the_september_11th_terrorist_attacks
13
http://usforeignpolicy.about.com/od/defense/a/Us-Foreign-Policy-After-9-11.htm
14
http://www.infoplease.com/us/history/911-anniversary-government-changes.html

15
Several countries, those allies and non-allies of the United States, have shown their
concern for the US and caution for terrorist attacks. On September 12, the 19 ambassadors of the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) declared that the attack on the United States was an
attack on all of the member nations. Also, the United Nations Security Council called on all
nations to redouble their efforts to thwart and prosecute terrorists. In the end, almost 30 nations
pledged military support to the United States, and many more offered other kinds of
cooperation.
16
In the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attacks, the international community has been
continuing the Global War on Terror" in order to eradicate terrorism. Even recent days,
terrorism incidents allegedly related to Al-Qaida continue to take place all over the world: Saudi
Arabia (Jedda, December 2004), Philippines (Manila, February 2005), Egypt (Sharm el-Sheikh,
July 2005), and London (July 2005) and Bali (October 2005), and threat of terrorist attacks
persist (mofa.go.jp, 2005). And in relation to the topic, is the response of a specific US ally,
Japan, after the attacks in 9/11, which includes the cooperation it had with the United States in
combating terrorism and the proliferation of its anti- terrorist laws. Thus, this will be discussed in
the next chapter.
Discussion and Analysis
As stated in the constitution of Japan, ARTICLE 9. Aspiring sincerely to an
international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese People forever renounce war as a
sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international
disputes. (2) To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as

15
http://www.history.com/topics/reaction-to-9-11
16
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/terrorism/effort0510.html
well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will
not be recognized.
However, still, Japan maintains a de facto armed forces, the Self-Defense Forces, which
are sometimes considered as the forces of peace. However, indeed, the 9/11 event made effect
towards the international and national policies of countries. The very main factor that lead the
Empire of Japan to adopt such law, that of the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures law (ASTML)
was the posing threat of terrorism as espoused in the September 11 series of attacks. It served as
a global influence that may have cause Japan, and even other countries to make drastic measures
for security and for prevention of further proliferation of terrorism around the world. Basing the
realist perspective, the very main purpose for Japans integration of anti-terrorism policies,
especially the ATSML, was state security and survival vis--vis the threat of terrorism.
Before the discussion of the ASTMl, first we must discuss other policies, although
domestic, but was promulgated after the 9/11 series of attacks. Firstly is the Citizen Protection
act, which has an impact on the civil liberties in Japan. Based on this act, the government has a
responsibility to prepare for the armed attack and protect the citizens with the aid of their public
designated organizations (corporations holding utilities such as water, electricity, etc.).
17
With
this act, the several designated public organizations have no choice but to follow the orders of
the government based on the amendments of the act to protect the citizens. As an example,
during armed attacks, the telecommunication organizations have the responsibility to provide
telephone services to the citizens that are evacuated. Moreover, food companies have the
responsibility to distribute foods to the citizens, and if they refuse to do so, the government has
all the rights to confiscate all the foods stocks of those companies. The same goes with the

17
Matsui, Shigenori (2008). Anti-terrorism legislation and Civil Liberties in Japan
electricity companies, natural gas companies, postal services, and hospitals (Matsui, 2008). All
of these mentioned groups are to provide free services and must do their roles without any
hesitation to the citizens.
In the perspective of the government, they are not infringing any economic right and civil
liberties. But in a deeper sense of analysis, still, it is a form of infringement. Although, it is
stipulated in the constitution of Japan, still these companies bear such responsibilities and, thus,
it possess dangers to their lives as well, especially those of the transportation groups. It is a form
of infringement of their basic right to life, since in a way, they are to prioritize the safety and
services to the evacuated citizens, than securing their own safety. In the realist perspective, the
conduct of statecraft of Japan in times of crisis, is indeed, focused on the preservation of national
interest. As inclusive of that national interest is the protection of citizens. We might be able to
say that in this form, the government is moral for it also secures the safety of its citizens. On the
other hand, as what realist said, statecraft is not guided by moral principles, in the sense where
the moral and civil rights of the corporations, who are designated as public organizations, are
therefore not respected.
Another heightened act of Japan after 9/11 was that of the immigration act, whereby
mandatory fingerprinting is needed especially for all foreign residents. This act of Japan, is the
same with that of the United States. Although it is indeed an effective action against terrorism, it
is a form of infringement of the rights of the foreigners. It is like submitting your most personal
information to the authorities for the purpose of state security. Yet it is an infringement in a way
where foreigners are treated like criminals, and they are misjudged, just because they are not a
national from the place.
Generally, basing on the realist perspective, as repeated, moral principles are not as
important as it is perceived to be in the conduct of statecraft, domestically nor internationally.
States, and even local governments, prioritizes its national interests despite the consequences or
possible impacts of its actions. In some ways, realistically speaking, in the conduct of statecraft
in Japan in times of armed attacks, security and survival are most priority, even though it already
infringes on the basic rights of its citizens, as long as it is able to secure for its interest security.
All of the previously mentioned laws and acts are embedded in the government but are
much highlighted on the aftermath of the 9/11. But aside from those, the Anti-Terrorism Special
Measures Law was the latest.
18
In this mentioned law, Japan states it support and assistance to
other states for their sanctions (military and economic) against Afghanistan. As a 2-year term
law, this was a groundbreaking for Japanese, since it enabled the Japanese Self Defense Force
(SDF) to dispatch its forces abroad. Aside from its humanitarian service purpose, Japan also
logistically supported the United States through mid-ocean refueling of US ships and other
countries ships. Moreover, it also assisted in the transport of soldiers and materials and military
bases through the ships that it provided (Sant, et al, 2007). Basically, this law, serves as support
of the
19
US Patriot Act which deters and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the
world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes (USA Patriot Act
of 2001). Basically, the Patriot Act and the Japanese ATSML has neither differences nor
commonalities, but the Japanese ATSML is a form of support of the purpose of the US Patriot
Act. However, the citizens, primarily, the Diet of Japan have not supported the further
implementation of the ATSML. Thus, the diet of Japan served as the internal influence which is

18
Sant, Van John et al. (2007). Historical dictionary of United States-Japan Relations
19
USA Patriot Act of 2001
also important in the mechanism of the Empire of Japan in its collaborative efforts with United
States in combating terrorism.
Japanese-US anti-terrorism measures were also instill when US attacked Iraq for
accusing Saddam Hussein for proliferating nuclear weapons.
20
Japan supported US through its
Iraq Special Measure Act. Similar with ATSML, here Japan still provides logistical assistance
such as humanitarian assistance, utilization of the SDF air transportation for assistance of
equipment for the allied nations, and was only limited to non-combat zones (Iraq Special
Measure Act of 2003). With all these acts enabling the Japanese SDF to go out of their country
to serve and support the US war on terrorism, the Japanese budget for defense rose from 1% of
their GDP to 3% of their GDP in 2003. Yet, its growth is not as much as that of the United
States.
Aside from these acts which supported US in its military sanctions in Afghanistan and
Iraq,
21
Japan also signed the International Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism on October
30, 2001. Moreover the government froze the assets of persons related to Taliban and terrorist
based upon the resolutions of the UN Security Council (UN Security Council Resolution 1373).
Based from the mentioned data, it is very obvious that the United States remains a great
influence in letting countries adopt its measures. On the framework explained, the United States
was the individual factor, specifically, Bush, had a great influence to Japans cooperation in its
missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. As to analyze and explain the cooperation that Japan showed
to United States, it will be further explained using the theories of liberalism and neo-liberalism.
It is observable that both United Staes and Japan share a common interest, and that is of course,
survival and the extermination of terrorist groups and prevention of its further proliferation. Here

20
Iraq Special Measure Act of 2003
21
UN Security Council Resolution 1373
we can see, that both countries share the common goal, that although they have their own
national interest, they were able to realized that some of these national interest would only be
possible with the collaboration of countries to achieve the goal which is to have a much safer
international arena, and in return the survival and security of the nations.
Moreover, interdependence is greatly highlighted, most especially in the US missions
in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is a symmetric relations in within the mission. Firstly, even
though the United States has the biggest expenses for the mission, the fact that Japan is
cooperating, and it cooperation is an assurance of being an ally when desperate situations come.
On the side of Japan, although it made a great leap which was dispatching its SDF abroad and its
logistic assistance, still United States gave Japan and all other nations a big favor through leading
the war on terror. In which, if no actions have been provided, much more casualties could
happen to these other countries, which are targets of the terrorists, such as that of Japan.
Furthermore, not only Japan and United States play roles in the missions in
Afghanistan and Iraq, but several countries more. According to the neo-liberal view, this is a
form of collective response to the pressing threat of terrorism. Moreover collective response was
also seen in the collaboration of Japan and other nations with the signing and joining in
conventions, and even with the collaboration with the United Nations body. The specific
collaboration of United States and Japan as seen in the international arena has led to further more
cooperation and interdependence within the allies of US and allies of Japan. The cooperation of
countries lead to a more members cooperating in combating terrorism, since this would made
them realize that they too are affected by the possessed-threat of the terrorism in the international
arena.

Conclusion
It is perceivable that no country is safe with the threat of terrorism around. It is alarming
for every country to know that event the United States, who is a hyperpower, is even attacked by
terrorist whereby thousands of lives were lost. It is disturbing to know that even the most hi-tech
country with strict security was permeable of terrorist activities. Thus, terrorists does not choose
who to attack as long as those countries does not support the terrorists, then they are on the list of
these terrorist.
However, threats would only remain as threats and would eventually fade into history if
countries are cautious and take measures to address these concerns. As shown in this paper,
realism provided the explanation of the behavior of the state vis--vis its constituents and its
citizens. Moral and civic rights are deemed of low priority, when it comes to the preservation of
national security and interest. With the realist position stating that security is one of the most
important aspect, this security is further provided by the collaborative efforts of many countries
and international bodies in countervailing terrorism.
Lastly, yet most importantly, the study shows that there is a difficulty in balancing
national interest and fair hearing. As expounded by realism, national interest would always come
first before anything else, even to the point where civil liberties are infringed. As for Japan, the
problems as regards to civil liberties vis--vis international policies on terrorism, there is not
much of an issue. On the other hand on the domestic level, there is a small problem. However,
regardless if its small or big, it would, directly or indirectly, hamper the policies that a country
will implement.

Bibliography
News articles
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/events/the_september_11th_terrorist_attacks
Cherian, John (2004). Japanese Troops for Iraq
McCurry, Justin (2004). Japan to Send Troops in Iraq
CBC News. October 29, 2004. Retrieved 2011-09-01. "Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin
Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first
time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sc8214.doc.htm

PDFs
USA Patriot Act of 2001
Iraq Special Measure Act of 2003
UN Security Council Resolution 1373
Matsui, Shigenori (2008). Anti-terrorism legislation and Civil Liberties in Japan
Sant, Van John et al. (2007). Historical dictionary of United States-Japan Relations

Other internet sources
http://www.911memorial.org/faq-about-911
gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ56/html/PLAW-107publ56.htm
http://www.azdema.gov/museum/famousbattles/pdf/Terrorism%20Definitions%2007280
9.pdf
history.com/topics/9-11-attacks
http://usforeignpolicy.about.com/od/defense/a/Us-Foreign-Policy-After-9-11.htm
http://www.infoplease.com/us/history/911-anniversary-government-changes.html
http://www.history.com/topics/reaction-to-9-11
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/terrorism/effort0510.html