Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 129

Key Concepts in American History

Terrorism

Set Contents

Key Concepts in American History

Abolitionism

Colonialism

Expansionism

Federalism

Industrialism

Internationalism

Isolationism

Nationalism

Progressivism

Terrorism

Key Concepts in American History Terrorism Trevor Conan Kearns Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D. General Editor
Key Concepts in American History Terrorism Trevor Conan Kearns Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D. General Editor
Key Concepts in American History Terrorism Trevor Conan Kearns Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D. General Editor

Key Concepts in American History

Terrorism

Trevor Conan Kearns

Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D.

General Editor University of Kansas

Key Concepts in American History Terrorism Trevor Conan Kearns Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D. General Editor University

Key Concepts in American History: Terrorism

Copyright © 2010 by DWJ BOOKS LLC

DEVELOPED, DESIGNED, AND PRODUCED BY DWJ BOOKS LLC

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher. For information contact:

Chelsea House An imprint of Infobase Publishing 132 West 31st Street New York NY 10001

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Kearns, Trevor Conan. Terrorism/Trevor Conan Kearns; Jennifer L. Weber, general editor. p. cm. – (Key concepts in American history) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-60413-226-7 (hardcover) ISBN 978-1-4381-3231-0 (e-book)

1. Terrorism–History–Chronology–Encyclopedias, Juvenile. 2. Terrorism–History–20th century–Encyclopedias, Juvenile. 3. Terrorism–History–21st century–Encyclopedias,

II. Title.

Juvenile.

I. Weber, Jennifer L., 1962–

HV6431.K37 2009

363.32503—dc22

2009025287

Chelsea House books are available at special discounts when purchased in bulk quantities for businesses, associations, institutions, or sales promotions. Please call our Special Sales Department in New York at (212) 967-8800 or (800) 322-8755.

You can find Chelsea House on the World Wide Web at http://www.chelseahouse.com

Cover printed by Bang Printing, Brainerd, MN Book printed and bound by Bang Printing, Brainerd, MN Date printed: May 2010 Printed in the United States of America

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Acknowledgments

p.

1: AP Photo/Al Jazeera; p. 14: AP Photo/Hamid Jalaudin; p. 24: Reuters/STR/Landov;

p.

39: Reuters/DOD/Landov; p. 46: Reuters/Tim Cocks/Landov; p. 66: Library of Congress,

Prints and Photographs Division; p. 79: AP Photo/JamesNachtwey/VII; p. 97: Reuters/

U.S. Navy/Landov; p. 100: AP Photo/Lower Manhattan Development Corp./File; p. 108:

AP Photo/Jae C. Hong.

Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  
Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  
Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  
Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  
Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  
Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  

Contents

Contents List of Illustrations vi Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism vii  

List of Illustrations

vi

Reader’s Guide to Terrorism Milestones in Terrorism

vii

 

(1920–Present)

viii

Preface

x

What Is Terrorism?

1

Terrorism from A to Z

Afghanistan

9

Then & Now: “The Graveyard of Empires”

11

Al Jazeera

13

Al

Qaeda

15

Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab

 

(1966–2006)

17

Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )

19

American Taliban

20

Baghdad

21

Bali Attacks (2002)

22

Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

24

History Speaks: Osama bin Laden After the 9/11 Attacks

26

Bush, George W. (1946– )

27

Cyberterrorism

29

Department of Homeland Security

30

Then & Now: Abraham Lincoln and the Secret Service

31

Ecoterrorism

33

Fatwa

34

Gaza Strip and the West Bank

36

History Makers: Mahmoud Abbas (1935– )

37

Guantánamo Bay, Cuba

38

Hamas

41

Hizbollah

42

Iran

44

Iraqi War

45

History Makers: Saddam Hussein (1937–2006)

49

Islamic Fundamentalism

50

Istanbul Bombings (2003)

55

Jihad

56

Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998)

57

London Bombings (2005)

59

History Speaks: Tony Blair on the London Bombings

60

Madrid Bombings (2004)

61

Mujahideen

63

Mullah Omar (1959?– )

64

New York City Attack (September 16, 1920)

65

Oklahoma City Bombing

67

Pakistan

68

History Makers: Benazir Bhutto (1953–2007)

70

Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) History Makers: Yasir Arafat

71

(1929–2004)

73

Patriot Act (2001)

George W. Bush on

75

Pentagon

77

September 11, 2001 (9/11)

78

History Makers: Rudolph Giuliani (1944– )

82

Shoe Bomber

86

Sleeper Cells

86

Somalia

88

Symbionese Liberation Army

89

Taliban

90

History Speaks:

Toppling the Taliban

92

Terrorist Organizations

93

Unabomber

95

USS Cole Bombing (2000)

96

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs)

98

World Trade Center, One

99

v

vi

Terrorism

Viewpoints About Terrorism

Speech After the Tanzania and Kenya Bombings, President William Clinton, 1998

101

War on Terrorism Speech, President George W. Bush, September 20, 2001

102

Condolences to the U.S., Russian President Vladimir Putin, 2001

104

Iraqi War Resolution, 2002

105

List of Illustrations

Photos

Osama bin Laden

1

Newsroom at Al Jazeera

14

Aftermath of attacks in Bali

24

Holding cells at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba

39

U.S. troops in Iraq

46

Aftermath of 1920 attack on Wall Street, New York

66

World Trade Center devastation

79

Speech at Annapolis, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, 2007

106

Inaugural Address, President Barack Obama, January 20, 2009

108

Glossary of Key Terms

110

Selected Bibliography

113

Index

116

USS Cole after bombing near Yemen

97

Artist’s rendering of One World Trade Center, New York City

100

President Barack Obama

108

Maps

Terrorist Attacks Around the Globe

8

Flight Paths and Crashes of Hijacked Planes, 9/11

80

Reader’s Guide to Terrorism The list that follows is provided as an aid to readers
Reader’s Guide to Terrorism The list that follows is provided as an aid to readers
Reader’s Guide to Terrorism The list that follows is provided as an aid to readers
Reader’s Guide to Terrorism The list that follows is provided as an aid to readers

Reader’s Guide

to Terrorism

The list that follows is provided as an aid to readers in locating articles on the big topics or themes in the study of terrorism in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The Reader’s Guide arranges all of the A to Z en- tries in Key Concepts in American History: Terrorism according to these 7 key concepts of the social

studies curriculum: Countries, Cities, and Nations; Economics and Trade Issues; Government and Law; People and Society; Policies and Programs; Religion; and Social Movements. Some arti- cles appear in more than one cate- gory, helping readers see the links between topics.

Countries, Cities, and Nations

Afghanistan Baghdad Bali Attacks (2002) Gaza Strip and the West Bank Guantánamo Bay, Cuba Iran Iraqi War Istanbul Bombings (2003) Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998) London Bombings (2005) Madrid Bombings (2004) Oklahoma City Bombings New York City Attack (September 16, 1920) Pakistan Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Somalia

Economics and Trade Issues

Al Jazeera Al Qaeda Bali Attacks (2002) Cyberterrorism Ecoterrorism New York City Attack (September 16, 1920) One World Trade Center Terrorist Organizations

Government and Law

Cyberterrorism Department of Homeland Security Ecoterrorism

Enemy Combatants (See Guantánamo Bay, Cuba) Iraqi War Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Patriot Act (2001) Pentagon Symbionese Liberation Army Taliban USS Cole Bombing (2000) Weapons of Mass Destruction

Policies and Programs

Al Jazeera Enemy Combatants (See Guantánamo Bay, Cuba) Fatwa Hamas Hizbollah Guantánamo Bay, Cuba Iraqi War Islamic Fundamentalism Jihad Patriot Act (2001) Taliban Terrorist Organizations

People and Society

Abbas, Mahmoud (1935– ) (See Gaza Strip and the West Bank) Al Jazeera Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab

(1966–2006)

Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– ) American Taliban Arafat, Yasir (1929–2004) (See Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)) Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

vii

Bhutto, Benazir (1953–2007) (See Pakistan) Bush, George, W. (1946– ) Cheney, Richard B. (1941– ) (See Bush, George W.) Clinton, William J. (1946– ) Giuliani, Rudolph (1944– ) (See September 11, 2001) Hussein, Saddam (1937–2006) (See Iraqi War) Mujahideen Mullah Omar (1959?– ) Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Shoe Bomber Sleeper Cells Symbionese Liberation Army Taliban Terrorist Organizations Unabomber USS Cole Bombing (2000)

Religion

Al Jazeera Al Qaeda Bin Laden, Osama (1957– ) Fatwa Islamic Fundamentalism Jihad Mullah Omar (1959?– ) Taliban

Social Movements

Al Jazeera Al Qaeda Islamic Fundamentalism Jihad Sleeper Cells Symbionese Liberation Army Terrorist Organizations

Committing acts of violence against others for political purposes can be traced throughout history. Beginning in the twentieth century, how- ever, such acts of violence took on a new significance. With the growth of the mass media, the impact of terrorist acts of violence could be spread around the globe instantaneously. No longer did a bombing or killing affect just a single city or country. With the advent of television and the Internet, the horrible emotional toll of violent death was brought into peoples’ homes. Terrorism—acts of violence meant to kill and injure as many people as possible—is a part of everyday life in the twenty-first century.

1920

Anarchists carry out terrorist bombing in New York City; the case is never solved.

1964

Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is founded.

1978

President Jimmy Carter (1977– 1981) secures the Camp David Accords, establishing peace between Israel and Egypt.

1979

The Iranian Revolution estab- lishes a fundamentalist govern- ment in Iran; Soviet forces invade Afghanistan; Muslim fighters from many countries come to Afghanistan, forming the mujahi- deen to fight the Soviets.

1988

George H. W. Bush (1981–1989) is elected the 41st president of the United States.

1990

Iraq invades Kuwait.

1991

Allied troops force Iraqi troops to flee Kuwait in the Persian Gulf War.

1993

Oslo Accords establish a frame- work for peace between Israel and the Palestinians; President Bill Clinton (1993–2001), PLO

Leader Yasser Arafat, and Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin oversee the signing of the his- toric accord in Washington, D.C.

1998

Al Qaeda, an international terror- ist organization, bombs U.S. embassies in the East African nations of Kenya and Tanzania; in retaliation, President Bill Clinton orders cruise missile attacks on suspected targets in.

2000

Terrorists attack the USS Cole while it is refueling off the coast of Yemen, killing 17 American sailors.

2001

September 11 terrorist attacks:

two hijacked airplanes crash into the World Trade Center in New York City; a third plane crashes into the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.; a fourth plane crashes in Somerset County, Pennsylvania; Osama bin Laden, leader of the terrorist organization al Qaeda, praises the attacks; Patriot Act passed by Congress and signed into law by President George W.

al Qaeda, praises the attacks; Patriot Act passed by Congress and signed into law by President

viii

Terrorism (1920–Present)

Bush (2001–2009); the United States invades Afghanistan.

2001 Iraq War Resolution is passed by the U.S. Congress; U.S. Depart- ment of Homeland Security (DHS) becomes the 15th cabinet department.

2002 Iraq War Resolution is passed by the U.S. Congress; U.S. Depart- ment of Homeland Security (DHS) becomes the 15th cabinet department.

2003 The United States and its allies invade Iraq in March, toppling dictator Saddam Hussein; terror- ist bombings occur in Istanbul, Turkey in November.

2004 Terrorists set off a series of bombs on commuter trains in Madrid, Spain, killing 191 and injuring thousands.

2005 Terrorists bomb the London subway system, killing 12 and injuring hundreds.

2006 Saddam Hussein, the deposed dictator of Iraq, is found guilty of war crimes by an Iraqi court and executed; Hezbollah, which many

Western nations identify as a terrorist organization, invades Israel from Lebanon, setting off

the 2006 Lebanon War; a U.N. cease-fire ends the war in August

2006.

2007 Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto is assassinated; the militant Palestinian organization Hamas takes over the Gaza Strip.

2008 The United States and Iraq reach an agreement to remove all American troops from Iraq by 201l; Pakistan’s President Perez Musharraf, a strong ally in the war on terrorism, resigns; Asif Ali Zadari, the widower of Benazir Bhutto, is elected president, ending more than eight years of military rule.

2009 Israel responds to Hamas rocket

attacks and refusal to continue

a cease-fire by sending troops

into the Gaza Strip; Israel begins

a blockade of the Gaza Strip;

al Qaeda threatens terrorist attacks in Germany if that nation’s

troops are not withdrawn from Afghanistan.

Strip; al Qaeda threatens terrorist attacks in Germany if that nation’s troops are not withdrawn from

ix

Preface T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution
Preface T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution
Preface T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution
Preface T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution
Preface
Preface
Preface T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution were
Preface T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution were

T he United States was founded on ideas. Those who wrote the U.S. Constitution were influenced by ideas that began in Europe: reason

over religion, human rights over the rights of kings, and self-governance over tyranny. Ideas, and the arguments over them, have continued to shape the nation. Of all the ideas that influenced the nation’s founding and its growth, 10 are perhaps the most important and are singled out here in an original series—KEY CONCEPTS IN AMERICAN HISTORY. The vol- umes bring these concepts to life, Abolitionism, Colonialism, Expan- sionism, Federalism, Industrialism, Internationalism, Isolationism, Nationalism, Progressivism, and Terrorism. These books examine the big ideas, major events, and influential indi- viduals that have helped define American history. Each book features three

sections. The first is an overview of the concept, its historical context, the debates over the concept, and how it changed the history and growth of the United States. The second is an encyclopedic, A-to-Z treatment of the people, events, issues, and organizations that help to define the “-ism” under review. Here, readers will find detailed facts and vivid histories, along with referrals to other books for more details about the topic. Interspersed throughout the entries are many high-interest features:

“History Speaks” provides excerpts of documents, speeches, and letters from some of the most influential figures in American history. “History Makers” provides brief biographies of key people who dramatically in- fluenced the country. “Then and Now” helps readers connect issues of the nation’s past with present-day concerns. In the third part of each volume, “Viewpoints,” readers will find lon- ger primary documents illustrating ideas that reflect a certain point of view of the time. Also included are important government documents and key Supreme Court decisions.

,” time lines

that will enable readers to quickly sort out how one event led to an- other, a glossary, and a bibliography for further reading. People make decisions that determine history, and Americans have generated and refined the ideas that have determined U.S. history. With an understanding of the most important concepts that have shaped our past, readers can gain a better idea of what has shaped our present. Jennifer L. Weber, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of History, University of Kansas General Editor

The KEY CONCEPTS series also features “Milestones

x

What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned,
What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned,
What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned,
What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned,
What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned,
What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned,

What

Is

Terrorism?

What Is Terrorism? W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned, attacks

W hat exactly are acts of terrorism? These are systematic, or planned, attacks designed to

create fear among the public, often to further a po-

litical or fundamentalist religious agenda. Terror- ism is also used as a tool to influence the government policy of a nation. Terrorism is different from con- ventional warfare. Although, since the beginning of history, na- tions and other groups have used violent attacks and warfare in attempts to force opponents into submission, past violence was usually directed at a specific enemy. For example, the ancient Persian Empire attacked the Greek city-states from 600 to 800 B.C. in an attempt

to control their wealthy

commercial ports. Be- fore the outbreak of the American Civil War (1861–1865), proslav- ery settlers and anti-

slavery settlers brutally attacked each other in the Kansas Territory, each trying to force its views upon the other. After the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan,

views upon the other. After the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan, Osama bin Laden, the

Osama bin Laden, the leader of the terrorist organization al Qaeda, praises God after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Bin Laden’s message, in which he threatened that America “will never dream of security” until “the infidel’s armies leave the land of Muhammad,” was broadcast by Al Jazeera, the popular Arabic-language news network.

a white supremacist

group, murdered, beat, and terrorized recently freed African Ameri- cans and their white supporters. The Klan also sought to prevent African Americans

from attending school,

1

2

Terrorism

getting better jobs, and voting. In other words, these groups targeted another group. During World War II (1939–1945), the Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler attacked neighboring countries to spread German power, enslave conquered peo- ples, and create a so-called Aryan race. An essential part of his plan included the extermination of all Jews living in Europe. Indeed, Hitler’s troops mur- dered more than 6 million Jews during the Holo- caust, in addition to millions of other targeted groups. Despite the death and destruction caused by such events, these violent acts differ from modern terrorism in one essential way: They were directed toward a specific group—whether it was another na- tion or a definite people. Terrorism in the twenty- first century is targeted toward everyone—civilians and the military, blacks and whites, Jews and Gentiles. Terrorists, those who perpetrate acts of terror- ism, lack regard for human life—even their own. Thus, terrorists are willing to kill themselves as part of their plan to inflict death and destruction on the public. In general, their goal is to injure as many people, cause as many deaths, and destroy as much property as possible. In this way, terrorists try to cause as much fear within society as they can.

TOLERANCE IN THE UNITED STATES Terrorism tends to thrive in countries or regions that deny their citizens basic or essential freedoms. One of the basic strengths of the United States as a nation is its open, free society. Toleration is guaran- teed by the Constitution. American citizens enjoy a culture that accepts a wide range of personal beliefs and private behaviors. These freedoms, called civil liberties, allow Americans to be active members of a political party, or to not vote at all. They allow Americans to practice the faith of their choice, or to not practice or believe in any religion at all. They also provide Americans with the freedom to experi- ment, to share ideas, and to learn from one another. In a free society, creativity and individual expres- sion flourish.

Terrorism

3

Freedom to Learn and Fail More importantly, Americans have the freedom to fail in their endeav- ors and to learn from their failures. Thanks to the open pursuit of science, Americans, as well as the peoples of many other nations, continue to learn about the world and can apply new knowledge in productive ways. This capacity for learning, both from failure and from science, translates into a key advantage of open societies—they are mechanisms for self- correction. In other words, open societies have the means to change themselves for the better. For ex- ample, if one elected government pursues policies that lead to negative consequences for the nation, citizens of that nation can speak out, organize, and apply political pressure in a number of peaceful ways to change those policies. They also can vote into office a new government with better policies. This ability to peacefully change how society func- tions is perhaps the most powerful means for self- correction that Americans possess as a nation.

Necessity of Civil Liberties Seen in this way, consti- tutionally guaranteed civil liberties are not mere luxuries; they are necessities for an open society. Americans and other peoples who live in open soci- eties use these freedoms to ask questions, to criti- cize, to debate, to evaluate, to censure, to suggest, to praise. Open societies are created and maintained only through the guaranteed freedoms of expres- sion and inquiry—the right to speak out and the right to question and change what may already exist.

LACK OF SOCIETAL TOLERANCE In contrast to the United States—as well as to Europe, Israel, and many other societies—are na- tions where the tolerance of differences is nonexis- tent or severely limited. In such societies, citizens usually must support the same political party and follow the same faith. In Communist nations, peo- ple may profess no faith at all. In general, differences in thought, belief, and behavior of any kind are sup- pressed by the authorities. Individuals who dare to speak out against the government or the official

4

Terrorism

religion are often declared criminals, jailed, and executed. Today, Belarus, North Korea, Vietnam, and the People’s Republic of China deny their citizens the human rights that most Western societies take for granted. Their governments are described as totali- tarian. In elections, people may vote only for the Communist Party candidate. Religious beliefs are suppressed.

Iran Iran’s theocratic government requires citi- zens to believe in Islam. People who hold other be- liefs are sometimes arrested or forced to leave the country. Similarly, many nondemocratic nations in Southwest Asia and northern Africa do not tolerate dissent among their citizens. These nations often demand complete loyalty to the government, do not allow political discussion, and require all people to be followers of Islam.

Afghanistan Prior to 2001, a group known as the Taliban ruled Afghanistan. It mandated an extremely strict interpretation of the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam. Men were required to grow beards, and women were to be completely covered when out- side the home, as well as be accompanied by a male relative. Girls were forbidden to attend school. Western-style clothing and music were outlawed.

Liberal and Theocratic Societies In essence, two distinct and starkly different ideologies, or philos- ophies, are prevalent in the world today. One mod- ern ideology is primarily secular and liberal. These two qualities underlie American, European, and Israeli society. In a secular society, the government does not promote one religion over another, nor does it interfere in the free practice of any religion. In a liberal society, the government recognizes that individual rights are vital to a healthy, flourishing society and therefore need to be protected. The opposing ideology is narrow-minded. It may be based on a totalitarian philosophy such as Communism, which is officially atheistic. Or, it may be a theocracy that relies upon a fundamentalist

Terrorism

5

interpretation of a holy book, such as the Bible or Qur’an. All faithful Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the final revelation of Allah (God) to the world, given to the prophet Muhammad in the seventh century. Mil- lions of Muslims live in, embrace, enjoy, and help strengthen open societies like the United States and Europe while practicing their faith. They recognize and honor the choices of other citizens to live differently.

The Extreme Fundamentalist View Those who take

a fundamentalist view of the Qur’an, as do the Tal-

iban in Afghanistan and the international terrorist group al Qaeda, believe that they have an obligation to destroy secular governments and establish a global Islamic regime. Under such a government, called a caliphate, individual rights would be lim- ited to those outlined in the Qur’an. This ideology holds that what is written in the Qur’an is more im- portant than individual rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of dress, and so forth. These ideologies could not be more at odds with one another. One allows for and even encourages

change in society, while the other tries to fix society through scripture. Those Muslims who seek to establish theocratic societies see liberal societies, mainly those of Europe, Israel, and the United States, as sinful by nature and therefore deserving of destruction. In addition, they resent the intrusion of these societies into the Muslim world. Their different religious be- liefs have been combined with anger and resent- ment at the social and political policies, as well as the military and economic power, of liberal nations. For example, fundamentalists view Western media— such as television shows, movies, and music—as offensive to Muslims. Without government censor- ship, it would be difficult to keep such media out of

a society. Consequently, some states with a Muslim

majority have strong censorship laws that prohibit this media. Muslims living in these societies see

6

Terrorism

censorship as a necessary measure against the im- moral influence of liberal societies.

STATELESS TERRORISM In the late twentieth century, fundamentalist groups such as al Qaeda organized to attack liberal societies and to protect Islam from what they viewed as the immoral dangers of Western society. Al Qaeda and groups who support it view the governments of most Muslim countries as weak and too eager to ac- commodate Western, liberal society. For example, al Qaeda members believe it is sinful to have American troops stationed in Saudi Arabia or to allow West- ern-style dress in Egypt. Al Qaeda therefore has de- termined that it must use acts of terrorism to destroy Western society and to spread its interpretation of Islam throughout the world.

A New Type of War The devastating terrorist at- tacks that occurred in the United States on Septem- ber 11, 2001, suggest that the West has entered a new stage in history. Soon after the attacks, this suggestion was articulated by President George W. Bush (2001–2009) when he declared that Americans were at war. This was a new kind of war, however, one fought, not against another sovereign nation, but against the elusive interna- tional terrorist organization known as al Qaeda. It was a difficult kind of war, Bush pointed out, because the enemy did not fight according to inter- national treaties governing warfare, nor did they use conventional weapons.

Coercion or Conversion? There is one feature that underlies all terrorist acts: They are acts of coercion, attempts at forcing another person—or govern- ment—to behave in a certain way. Coercion is often accomplished through the use of violence. For ex- ample, when a suicide bomber blows himself up in a European market or train station, killing as many bystanders as possible, he is trying to force a change in that government’s policies. In open societies, however, collective or governmental action is carried out through conver- sation instead of coercion. In other words, open

Terrorism

7

debate between politicians, lawyers, analysts, and ordinary citizens allows individuals to influence each other’s views, perhaps changing their minds, converting their way of thinking, or enlisting them in a cause. This is an important way in which open societ- ies differ from totalitarian ones. Open societies do not sanction or tolerate coercion—forcing someone to behave a certain way—while totalitarian ones can- not exist without it. Because open societies are opposed to coercion, it follows that they are opposed to terrorism as well. Simply put, terrorism is the opposite of the tolerant, open processes that underlie societies such as those of the United States, Europe, and Israel. It is in this light that the West’s struggle against al Qaeda and other fundamentalist Islamic groups can accurately be seen as a war—a war of fundamental or basic ap- proaches to society, or a war of ideologies.

HOW SHOULD THE UNITED STATES RESPOND? As the United States tries to defend itself against ter- rorist organizations, many argue that the nation’s primary duty is to preserve the freedoms that allow America’s open society. Others, however, argue that some contraction of civil liberties is necessary to protect Americans from further terrorist attacks. Given the fundamental ideological opposition be- tween all forms of terrorism and an open society— coercion versus conversion—it is essential that the United States, as well as other liberal nations, remain true to secular and liberal values. If they do not, then the terrorists will have succeeded in their attempts to change the West.

FURTHERREADING

Hiber, Amanda. Should Governments Negotiate with Terror- ists? Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Mason, Paul. Israel and Palestine. Tarrytown, N.Y.: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark, 2008.

Terrorist Attacks Around the Globe
Terrorist Attacks Around
the Globe

Terrorism in the twenty-first century has affected countries across the globe. Many of the terrorist attacks are attributed to extremist groups such as al Qaeda; other attacks, such as those in Colombia, are mostly related to illegal drug dealing and that govern- ment’s attempt to crack down on drug smuggling.

Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,
Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,
Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,
Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,
Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,
Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,
Terrorism from A to Z A Afghanistan Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia,

Terrorism

from A to Z

A

Afghanistan

Landlocked and impoverished coun- try in south-central Asia, home to many ethnic groups, and one of the main fronts in the U.S.-led war on in- ternational terrorism. An extended conflict between the Afghans and oc- cupying forces of the Soviet Union in the 1980s devastated the nation, es- tablishing political, economic, and social conditions that led to the rise in the 1990s of the fundamentalist Taliban government and its support of the international terrorist organi- zation al Qaeda. Following the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the United States invaded Afghanistan in an attempt to capture the founder and leader of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, and other terrorist leaders believed to be hid- ing there. Although the power of the Taliban was largely destroyed as a re- sult, the U.S. invasion further desta- bilized conditions in Afghanistan and, toward the end of the first de- cade of the twenty-first century, re- sulted in a resurgence of terrorist activity there.

PEOPLES Afghanistan is a multiethnic country. The Pashtuns make up the largest

ethnicity, while the Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks, Aimaks, and Turkmen com- pose the remaining half of the popu- lation. Although there are significant differences in language and culture among Afghanistan’s peoples, the vast majority of the population is Muslim, or followers of Islam. An estimated three-fourths of the people are Sunnis, while the remaining one-

fourth is a mixture of Shias and Sufis.

A very small minority are either

Hindus or Sikhs.

MODERN HISTORY

A

In 1964, Afghanistan became a con-

stitutional monarchy, officially headed by a king but with democrati- cally elected officials. A new constitu- tion was written that established a bicameral, or two-house, legislature and open elections. Afghanistan’s politics became highly polarized as conservative religious parties, some heavily influenced by the militant Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, vied with secular and leftist parties that included the Marxist People’s Demo- cratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA). However, the transition to a constitu- tional state was never completed. In 1973, Mohammad Daoud Khan,

a former prime minister, seized power in a coup. He established the

9

10

Afghanistan

Republic of Afghanistan with a new constitution and attempted to intro- duce a number of socioeconomic re- forms. However, he was opposed by both religious parties and the PDPA, which, with Soviet support, seized power in 1978. The PDPA also at- tempted to introduce reforms, but they were even more radical and sparked widespread revolts within a year. On December 24, 1979, the So- viet Union invaded Afghanistan in order to support its Marxist regime.

The Mujahideen and Soviet With- drawal Although the Soviets secured a communist government in Kabul with the help of the pro-Marxist Af- ghan military, anticommunist forces began to grow throughout Afghani- stan, and much of the country re- mained primarily in the control of fundamentalist Muslims who were inspired by the Iranian Revolution of 1979, when the shah, or ruler, of Iran was overthrown and a theocracy was established in that nation. Muslim mujahideen (holy war- riors) came from around the world to help fight the Soviet occupation. Most fighting occurred on the Afghanistan- Pakistan border, where small groups would cross in order to carry out hit- and-run attacks. Many of these guer- rilla fighters came from the ranks of the several million Afghan refugees who had fled to Pakistan following the Soviet invasion. However, thousands more fight- ers came from foreign states. One of the most successful recruiters was Osama bin Laden, a Saudi Arabian fundamentalist and billionaire who, though he did not take part in much

direct fighting, used his financial re- sources to support the mujahideen and to initiate recruiting activities worldwide. Bin Laden later founded and led the international terrorist or- ganization al Qaeda. Other foreign mujahideen came from Iran, Pakistan, and countries of the Middle East. Thanks in great part to logistical and military aid given to the mujahi- deen by China, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the Soviet Union was forced to withdraw from Afghanistan in the late 1980s. A peace accord was signed in April 1988, and the last Soviet soldiers departed in February 1989.

Civil War and the Taliban The con- flict between militant Islamists and the Afghan government only grew more pronounced following the So- viet withdrawal. The main mujahi- deen resistance groups formed a co- alition government in Pakistan that formally took control of Afghanistan in April 1992. The Marxist govern- ment had continued to receive eco- nomic and military aid from the So- viet Union until then, but the breakup of that nation in 1991 cut off this im- portant source of support and trig- gered a political collapse. However, the power-sharing agreement the coalition government had created quickly broke down, and chaos spread throughout Afghanistan as the nation fragmented into zones controlled by local warlords. Afghani- stan effectively disappeared as a co- hesive nation during this time.

Taliban Rise to Power In late 1994, however, a new religious and politi- cal faction emerged that promised to

Afghanistan

11

restore order to the stricken country. Known as the Taliban (Persian for “student”), this group was led by for- mer mujahideen Mullah Mohammad Omar. Originating in the southern province of Kandahar, the Taliban quickly won widespread support among the Pashtun regions of Af- ghanistan. The group seized control of Herat in 1995, Kabul in 1996, and the important northern city of Mazar- e Sharif in 1998. By 2001, the Taliban controlled all of Afghanistan except for a small portion of the north, which remained in the hands of a coalition

of mujahideen militia known as the Northern Alliance. The Taliban were at first well re- garded by the international commu- nity for reestablishing order in Afghanistan and disarming the nu- merous mujahideen militia in the areas it controlled. However, this pos- itive perception was soon eroded by the Taliban’s radical religious views. They established a government based on sharia, or Islamic law, passing edicts outlawing music, television, chess, kite-flying, and a host of other activities considered blasphemous.

A

“The Graveyard of Empires” In the past three decades, Afghanistan has experienced two major invasions

“The Graveyard of Empires”

In the past three decades, Afghanistan has experienced two major invasions by for- eign powers. Although the political back- drops differed significantly, the invasions nevertheless shared some important characteristics. The 1979 Soviet invasion was meant to support the pro-Marxist regime that had seized power several years earlier. The So- viets intended to transform Afghanistan into a friendly buffer state. The 2001 American-led invasion did not grow out of an intent to spread any particular ideol- ogy, as did the Soviet invasion, but was rather a response to the September 11, 2001, attacks. The goal was to eliminate al Qaeda’s headquarters and training camps, as well as depose the Taliban. Ironically, however, these archrivals, or longtime enemies, shared a common goal in their respective invasions: to support a modern, secular government in the face of Islamic theocracy. Both the Soviet Union

and the United States regarded secular so- ciety as a stabilizing and positive force. Nonetheless, the Soviet Union engaged in forms of oppression just as objectionable as theocratic ones, but in the name of Marxist ideology instead of religion. The Soviet Union, like all theocracies, had a to- talitarian form of government. The two invasions shared other quali- ties: duration, cost, and outcome. The U.S. invasion entered its eighth year in October 2008, yet the Taliban maintained and even expanded its resistance. The So- viets withdrew after 10 years of occupa- tion, leaving behind nearly 15,000 dead soldiers and approximately one million dead Afghans. While U.S. casualties have not climbed as high, it is possible that American forces will have to withdraw, much as the Soviets did. This parallel be- tween these invasions recalls a common nickname for Afghanistan: “Graveyard of Empires.”

12

Afghanistan

Women were forbidden from attend- ing school or working, and could not go out in public unless they were fully covered in a garment called a burka and accompanied by a male relative. Any one who broke these laws was dealt with harshly by a reli- gious police force who often beat, maimed, or killed offenders.

Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and the 2001 U.S. Invasion During the cha- otic 1990s, Osama bin Laden and other militant Islamist leaders such as Ayman al-Zawahiri were able to es- tablish terrorist training camps in Af- ghanistan, mostly in the mountainous eastern regions. Bin Laden’s recruit- ing network came to be known as al Qaeda, Arabic for “the base.” Having helped establish an Islamic govern- ment in Afghanistan, these fighters turned their attention to what they perceived as the excesses and insults of foreign powers, especially the United States. Al Qaeda members car- ried out bomb attacks at the World Trade Center in New York City in 1993, killing six and injuring more

than 1,000, as well as in the East Afri- can nations of Kenya and Tanzania in

1998.

Bin Laden, who had departed for Sudan after the Soviet withdrawal, re- turned to Afghanistan in 1996, allied with the Taliban, and began to finance their operations. This support made them less dependent on foreign aid and allowed them to make some of their more radical and controversial governmental changes. After the 1998 bombings in East Africa, the United States demanded that the Taliban turn over bin Laden, but they refused.

Toppling the Taliban By 2001, bin Laden and al Qaeda were well known among intelligence agencies as perpetrators of terrorism. Shortly after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the United States de- manded again that the Taliban turn over bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders, to no avail. Within a few weeks, the United States and the United Kingdom began bombing Tal- iban strongholds in retaliation. They also provided military support to the Northern Alliance as part of a coordi- nated ground invasion. By December, the Taliban had effectively surren- dered control of the country, and its remaining leaders had gone underground. Osama bin Laden and many other key al Qaeda leaders fled into the mountains on the Afghanistan- Pakistan border. Despite years of con- certed effort to capture them, they remained at large at the beginning of 2010. It was believed that they es- caped across the border to the moun- tainous, Pashtun region of Pakistan.

Post-Taliban Era The years follow- ing the fall of the Taliban were cha- otic, though not nearly as devastating as the decades of strife that had previ- ously befallen Afghanistan. A new, democratically elected government was established by October 2004, when Hamid Karzai was first elected president. A year later, legislative elections were successfully held, de- spite threats of disruption made by Taliban and al Qaeda remnants. However, fighting among Afghan, American, and North Atlantic Treaty

Al Jazeera 13

Organization (NATO) forces and those of the Taliban never wholly ceased during this time. By the end of 2005, the fighting also had increased significantly. In addition, these years saw the rampant rise of opium grow- ing throughout the country. Toward the end of the decade, it was esti- mated that nine-tenths of the world’s opium production took place in Af- ghanistan. Profits from this illegal crop helped fund the Taliban’s ongo- ing insurgency. Many leaders worldwide believe that the threat of a resurgent, or revived, Taliban, which would sup- port al Qaeda’s terrorist activities, makes the establishment of a strong secular government in Afghanistan a necessity. This is not possible with- out rebuilding Afghanistan’s infra- structure and economy, a prospect that is enormously complicated by the Taliban insurgency, or movement to overthrow the Afghan govern- ment, and the production of opium.

See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Iran; Islamic Fundamentalism; Muja- hideen; Pakistan; September 11, 2001; Taliban; Terrorist Organizations; Al-Zawahiri, Ayman.

FURTHERREADING

Gritzner, Jeffrey A. Afghanistan: Modern World Nations. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 2002.

Rashid, Ahmed. Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil, and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2000. Wahab, Shaista, and Barry Youngerman. A Brief History of Afghanistan. New York:

Facts On File, 2007.

Woodward,

John.

Afghanistan.

Greenhaven Press, 2006.

Detroit:

Al Jazeera

The most popular news network in the Arabic-speaking world. Founded in 1996, Al Jazeera broadcasts via sat- ellite and has been praised for pro- viding coverage that, unlike many other media sources in the Arab world, is free of governmental con- trol. Al Jazeera is very controversial in Western countries, however, where its critics assert that it provides a forum for terrorist organizations. Al Jazeera English is the world’s first English-language news channel to broadcast from the Middle East. It is best known for its broadcasts of video statements by Osama bin Laden (founder and leader of the in- ternational terrorist organization al Qaeda) as well as other al Qaeda leaders.

A

EARLY YEARS In 1996, Qatar’s ruler, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, founded Al Jazeera (which means “The Island,” a reference to the station’s uniquely in- dependent status among news orga- nizations in the area). Many former staff members of the BBC World Service’s Arabic-language station, which had been shut down by the Saudi Arabian government, joined Al Jazeera upon its founding. Al Jazeera’s entrance on the stage of Arabic media was nothing short of groundbreaking. Because it broad- cast by satellite, it was available to people in the Middle East and across the world who previously had access only to state-controlled stations whose content was often heavily cen- sored. Al Jazeera thus provided one

14

Al Jazeera

14 ✪ Al Jazeera The English-language newsroom of Al Jazeera, the only independent news agency in

The English-language newsroom of Al Jazeera, the only independent news agency in the Middle East, prepares for a television broadcast. Al Jazeera claims to offer a balanced perspective of the news, but its viewpoints have been strongly criticized by both Western and Arab nations.

of the few sources of free speech in the region and was able to present sensitive material that had never be- fore been available through the Mid- dle East’s mass media. Al Jazeera rapidly gained an enor- mous worldwide following and gar- nered dozens of international prizes for its coverage of social and political issues. Many topics, such as govern- ment censorship or women’s rights, had never before been addressed ob- jectively because of religious and cul- tural taboos. In 1999, Al Jazeera began broadcasting continuously, of- fering a full slate of educational

programs, news, and talk shows. By 2000, it claimed 35 million to 45 mil- lion viewers in 20 countries and was widely regarded as the leading Arab news network.

CRITICISM AND CONTROVERSIES Although Al Jazeera’s editorial free- dom was unprecedented in the Mid- dle East, the station soon began to draw criticism from two sources. One was from the Islamic world, where Al Jazeera’s critics included state gov- ernments and fundamentalist reli- gious leaders who criticized the openness with which the station

Al Qaeda

15

discussed current events. Al Jazeera’s broadcasts were blocked in some Arab countries as a result of this criti- cism. There was harsh reaction in Arab countries to Al Jazeera’s inde- pendent reporting of the 2000 inti- fada, or uprising, of Palestinian Arabs against Israel. State-run Arab news or- ganizations clearly supported the in- tifada’s violent tactics. Al Jazeera, however, adopted a more balanced view and was criticized for it. After this controversy, the station’s tone grew more inflammatory when re- porting about the United States and Israel. Criticism from Arab sources has led to numerous closings of Al Jazeera offices in Arab countries. The second source of criticism came from Western nations, where Al Jazeera was soon seen as an outlet for radicals to broadcast their threat- ening messages to the world. This shift in opinion began with the 2000 intifada, the violent Palestinian upris- ing in the West Bank in which both Israeli citizens and soldiers were killed. The change in tone further in- tensified after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. After Al Jazeera broadcast in- terviews with Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders, as well as tapes from radical organizations with ex- plicitly violent material, Western gov- ernments denounced the station as a mouthpiece for terrorists. Moreover, Al Jazeera regularly broadcasts shows featuring Islamic clerics with anti- Western viewpoints. As a result, al- though Al Jazeera is considered by some to be a well-respected news or- ganization that operates in an inde- pendent way unique among Arab

news networks, it is also persistently controversial.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Iraqi War; Islamic Fundamentalism; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

El-Nawawy, Mohammed, and Adel Iskander. Al-Jazeera: How the Free Arab News Net-

work Scooped the World and Changed the Middle East. Cambridge, Mass.: Westview,

2002.

Miles, Hugh. Al-Jazeera: The Inside Story of the Arab News Channel That Is Challeng- ing the West. New York: Grove Press,

2005.

A

Rushing, Josh, and Sean Elder. Mission Al- Jazeera: Build a Bridge, Seek the Truth, Change the World. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

Al Qaeda

Militant Islamic organization founded and financed by Osama bin Laden, a Saudi billionaire, revolutionary, and perpetrator of numerous terrorist at- tacks throughout the world, includ- ing the attacks of September 11, 2001. Its name means “the base” in Arabic, reflecting its fundamentalist orien- tation, as well as its stated aims of supporting Muslims worldwide in re- sisting any perceived oppression and of establishing Islamic regimes in numerous countries. Since its formation in the late 1980s, the militant group has be- come one of the world’s best-known perpetrators of terrorism. Most of the international community considers it a terrorist group, as it is so designated by the United Nations (UN). Within the Muslim world, however, al Qaeda

16

Al Qaeda

occupies an ambiguous position. Many fundamentalists support its campaign against the Western influ- ences they see as responsible for the decline of Muslim societies. Al Qae- da’s most notorious attacks, carried out against the United States on Sep- tember 11, 2001, ushered in a new era of global conflict between Islamic fundamentalist groups and the secu- lar governments and societies they oppose.

IDEOLOGY AND ORGANIZATION Members of al Qaeda seek nothing less than the overthrow of the mod- ern world order, replacing all secular states—and what they see as corrupt Islamic states—with a unified, funda- mentalist Islamic government. The organization differs from other fun- damentalist movements in that it em- braces violence as a way of achieving this ultimate goal. As fundamentalists, they view this goal as a holy mission decreed by Allah (God), and they be- lieve there is no higher honor than dying for the cause. Consequently, al Qaeda often em- ploys suicide bombers as a way to deliver attacks. These bombers are widely regarded as martyrs in the world of fundamentalist Islam, since they are dying for their beliefs.

Appeal of Fundamentalism This ideology, or organized system of be- liefs, is very attractive to a broad range of Muslims for several reasons. For one, it recalls the Islamic Golden Age, lasting from the eighth to the fif- teenth centuries, when the Islamic world saw unparalleled achievements in science, art, architecture, law, and virtually every other human endeavor.

In effect, al Qaeda seeks to reinstate this period of power and influence for Islamic societies. Another reason for al Qaeda’s popularity is its fierce opposition to Western cultures, particularly the United States. Many Muslims around the world live in countries that are former European colonies, and the multigenerational resentment of the abuse they and their ancestors expe- rienced under foreign rule continues to shape their reactions to the West- ern world. Moreover, the United States, al- though never a colonial power in the Middle East, is by far the most visible and influential Western nation cultur- ally and economically. American products, media, and ideas, many of which are offensive to fundamental- ist Muslims, can be found every- where. In addition, many Muslims resent American support of Israel, as well as its stationing of troops in Saudi Arabia, Islam’s holy country, since the Persian Gulf War (1990– 1991). For these reasons, al Qaeda primarily targets the United States in its rhetoric and attacks.

High Level of Organization Al Qaeda has a highly effective organization that has allowed it to carry out a num- ber of successful terrorist attacks. Its senior leadership remains hidden and inaccessible, providing broad planning and funding to a number of smaller terror cells scattered across an estimated 60 countries. These cells are composed of a few highly dedi- cated agents who plan the details of attacks and carry them out. This orga- nization makes al Qaeda a difficult

Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab (1966–2006)

17

foe to fight, since the cells can remain undetected for months or years, while the senior leadership has re- mained elusive.

HISTORY Many of al Qaeda’s founding mem- bers were mujahideen, or holy war- riors, who fought the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan from 1979 to 1988. The conflict attracted the support of militant and fundamentalist Muslims worldwide, who saw it as essentially an assault on Islam by a secular for- eign power. The organization was not called al Qaeda when it was founded by Osama bin Laden in the 1980s, nor did it engage in what are today considered terrorist acts. In- stead, it was a well-run (and very well- funded) recruiting network that brought thousands of fresh volun- teers to Afghanistan, then trained and equipped them for the ongoing guer- rilla war against the Soviet occupy- ing forces and their Afghan army allies. In these endeavors, al Qaeda was assisted by other foreign powers (most notably the United States) both materially and logistically. The United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in particular helped fund and train the mujahideen, because it was in the best interest of the United States to ensure that the So- viet Union (its archrival at the time) lost money and manpower in the conflict. After the Soviets withdrew their last forces in 1989, bin Laden and a few others, including the Islamic scholar and doctor Ayman al- Zawahiri, renamed the organization

al Qaeda. Instead of disbanding, mem- bers refocused efforts on carrying out a global jihad, or holy war, against any power they perceived as op- pressing or hindering the kind of fundamentalist Islam in which they believed. It is believed that from 1991 to 1996, al Qaeda was headquartered in Sudan. When the Taliban, an Islamic fundamentalist organization, finished seizing power in Afghanistan in 1996, bin Laden and others were invited back to establish training camps and other facilities. During this time, al Qaeda slowly grew in power and in- fluence, finding support from similar organizations around the world, in- cluding Hizbollah in Lebanon and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

A

See also: Afghanistan; Bin Laden, Osama; Jihad; Mujahideen; Septem- ber 11, 2001; Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Isaacs, April. Critical Perspectives on Al- Qaeda. New York: Rosen Publishing Group,

2006.

Margulies, Phillip. Al-Qaeda: Osama Bin Lad- en’s Army of Terrorists. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2003. Perliger, Arie. Middle Eastern Terrorism. New York: Chelsea House, 2006.

Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab

(1966–2006)

Jordanian-born militant behind ter- rorist attacks in Jordan and Iraq in southwestern Asia and the most wanted insurgent leader in Iraq after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Before he

18

Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab (1966–2006)

was killed in 2006, al-Zarqawi led the terrorist organization known as al Qaeda in Iraq, which was respon- sible for many gruesome and lethal attacks.

EARLY LIFE Al-Zarqawi was born on October 30, 1966, in Zarqa, Jordan, an industrial city to the northeast of Amman, the capital. He abandoned his original name, Ahmed Fadhil Nazar al- Khalaylah, some time after 2000. Zar- qawi grew up in poor conditions and was a troubled youth, dropping out of school and getting into brawls. He adopted fundamentalist Islamic be- liefs that led him to Afghanistan in the late 1980s, where he became a reporter for an Afghani newspaper. During this time, he was influenced by Osama bin Laden, founder and leader of the international terrorist organization al Qaeda, though he did not join al Qaeda outright.

TERRORIST PLOTS His plan to bomb the Radisson Hotel in Amman, Jordan’s capital, along with several other tourist sites, was discovered before he could carry it out. Zarqawi fled to Pakistan, then to Afghanistan, where, with support from al Qaeda, he established a mili- tant training camp near the town of Herat. Though he was forced to flee the country after the U.S. invasion in late 2001, Zarqawi increased his militant activities. His movements became very difficult to track, but U.S. intelli- gence experts generally believe he traveled to Iran, Syria, Jordan, and

Iraq, establishing a wide-ranging net- work of terrorist contacts. Zarqawi was linked to the Octo- ber 2002 assassination of Laurence M. Foley, a U.S. diplomat working in Amman. By that time, Zarqawi had es- tablished a firm headquarters in northern Iraq, where he carried out attacks against the Kurds, an ethnic group who lives in the area. In August 2003, Zarqawi claimed responsibility for an attack on a Shia (one of the major sects of Islam) shrine in An Najaf, an attack that some see as the start of the Iraqi in- surgency. Over the following years, he was either linked to or claimed re- sponsibility for dozens of violent at- tacks that resulted in hundreds, if not thousands, of casualties. These attacks included the videotaped be- heading of a British engineer, as well as a bombing that killed 125 people in the city of Al Hillah in February 2004 and was the most deadly of the insurgency. By July 2004, Zarqawi was the most wanted militant in Iraq, but he was difficult to locate and capture, despite a $25 million reward offered by the United States. Zarqawi was finally killed in a U.S. bombing raid in Ba’qubah, Iraq, on June 7, 2006. His death was considered a major set- back to the Iraqi insurgency.

See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Iraq War.

FURTHERREADING

Brisard, Jean-Charles, and Damien Martinez. Zarqawi: The New Face of Al-Qaeda. New York: Other Press, 2005.

Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )

19

Calvert, John. Islamism: A Documentary and Reference Guide. Westport, Conn.: Green- wood Press, 2008. Napoleoni, Loretta. Insurgent Iraq: Al Zar- qawi and the New Generation. New York:

Seven Stories Press, 2005.

Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )

Egyptian physician who is thought to be the doctor of and closest adviser to Osama bin Laden, founder and leader of the international terrorist organization al Qaeda. He is one of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) most wanted terrorists, having founded the radical Egyptian Islamic Jihad (which later merged with al Qaeda). Al-Zawahiri is viewed as a likely successor to bin Laden. He is also suspected of being a major player in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, and of providing the organizational and in- tellectual leadership that turned al Qaeda into a global threat.

INFLUENCES AND PLANS Al-Zawahiri was born in Cairo, Egypt, on June 19, 1951, to an Egyptian fam- ily prominent in medicine, religion, and academia. From an early age, he was deeply influenced by funda- mentalist Islamic thought, especially the writings of the Egyptian militant Sayyid Qutb. As a teenager, Zawahiri became involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, a militant group banned in Egypt for its stated aims of over- throwing the secular government and establishing an Islamic theoc- racy. During the 1970s, he helped found Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a group

whose aims were similar to those of the Muslim Brotherhood. Shortly thereafter, his militant plans began to bear fruit. Anwar El Sadat, the Egyptian president, was as- sassinated in 1981 by Zawahiri’s orga- nization in retaliation for Sadat’s crackdown on Islamic militants. Za- wahiri admitted to planning the event and spent several years in jail for ille- gal possession of firearms. In 1986, he left for Pakistan, where he treated soldiers wounded in Afghanistan. There, he met bin Laden and, accord- ing to sources close to both men, rev- olutionized his thinking. Zawahiri combined a deep understanding of Islamic thought with a political savvy that bin Laden lacked. When Zawahiri merged Islamic Jihad with al Qaeda in 2001, the latter organiza- tion became more explicitly anti- American, and its political ambitions grew more aggressive. From the mid-1990s on, Zawahiri directed Islamic Jihad in numerous terrorist attacks, including assassina- tion attempts and embassy bombings, most of which targeted the Egyptian government. However, Zawahiri was also indicted by the United States for his role in planning the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in East Africa.

A

AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 It was only after the September 11, 2001, attacks that Zawahiri became a well-known figure outside the Mus- lim world, however. He appeared in a video with bin Laden released con- currently with the initial U.S. attacks in Afghanistan in October 2001. In

20

Al-Zawahiri, Ayman (1951– )

the video, Zawahiri spoke passion- ately about the holy war undertaken by al Qaeda. His appearance in the video as well as his speech marked him as a highly influential leader within the organization. Since then, Zawahiri has appeared

in several more videos. He has contin- ued to criticize the United States and its allies and to call on Islamic mili- tants to continue fighting them. He is a top target of numerous national in- telligence services, but his where- abouts remained unknown as of

2010.

See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Paki- stan; September 11, 2001; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Ibrahim, Raymond, Ayman Zawahiri, and Osama Bin Laden. The Al-Qaeda Reader. New York: Doubleday, 2007. Zayyat, Muntasir. The Road to Al-Qaeda:

The Story of Bin Laden’s Right-Hand Man. London: Pluto Press, 2004.

American Taliban

Refers to John Walker Lindh, a young American who joined the Taliban, Afghanistan’s rogue regime, in fight- ing the U.S. forces that invaded that country after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. Lindh was born in Washington, D.C., on February 9, 1981. Although he was raised Roman Catholic, he converted to Islam in 1997, inspired by the autobiography of Malcolm X, himself a convert to the religion. A

year later, he traveled extensively in Yemen and learned Arabic to be able to read the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book. In 2000, he traveled to Pakistan to study in a madrassa, or Islamic reli- gious school. During this time, it seems that Lindh became increasingly militant in his beliefs. He eventually attended a militant training camp in Afghani- stan, where he met Osama bin Laden (the source of the camp’s funding). Soon after, Lindh joined the Taliban in fighting the Northern Alliance and the U.S. invasion of late 2001. Along with other Taliban foot soldiers, he saw himself as a defender of Afghan Muslims who had suffered at the hands of native warlords and foreign aggressors for decades. In November 2001, he was cap- tured by U.S. and Northern Alliance forces. After he was identified, he was sent back to the United States to face 11 charges of terrorism. In July 2002, Lindh reached a plea bargain with federal prosecutors, pleading guilty to one of the charges in ex- change for a reduced sentence of 20 years.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamental- ism; Jihad; September 11, 2001; Tal- iban; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Kukis, Mark. “My Heart Became Attached”:

The Strange Journey of John Walker Lindh. Washington, D.C.: Brassey’s, 2003. Mahoney, Richard D. Getting Away with Murder: The Real Story Behind American Taliban John Walker Lindh and What the U.S. Government Had to Hide. New York:

Arcade Pub, 2004.

Baghdad

21

B–C

Baghdad

Capital of Iraq as well as its largest city, with an estimated population of 6–7 million. The cultural center of Is- lamic civilization for centuries, Bagh- dad experienced a period of decline from the thirteenth through the early twentieth centuries. However, the city once again claimed an important role when it became the capital of the newly founded Iraq in 1920. At the start of the Iraqi War in March 2003, it was a site of critical struggle be- tween insurgents and foreign forces led by the United States. In recent years, much of Baghdad has become less dangerous as the American-led forces have restored order to the ravaged city. However, it remains a place of violence.

AFTERMATH OF THE IRAQI WAR Baghdad was particularly hard-hit by the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It was heav- ily bombed and American forces moved quickly to take it over after the war began in March 2003. Orga- nized resistance in Baghdad quickly crumbled because Iraqi forces were outgunned and outmaneuvered by the better-equipped American troops. By mid-April, Baghdad was caught up in widespread looting that American forces were unable to control. Al- though planners in the Bush adminis- tration had predicted that American troops would be welcomed as libera- tors, and that the Iraqi people would cooperate to help maintain order,

these expectations quickly proved misguided and unfounded. More ominously, Baghdad soon became one of the primary centers of a fast emerging guerrilla war against the occupying forces. Former Ba’athists (members of the Arab na- tionalist Ba’ath political party that had ruled Iraq since 1963), who had gone underground during the inva- sion, began to organize an insur- gency. This group targeted foreign troops in Baghdad and elsewhere, usually inflicting casualties through the use of suicide bombers and im- provised explosive devices (IEDs). These attacks also targeted Iraqi sol- diers and police officers employed by the Coalition Provisional Author- ity, the transitional Iraqi government established by the United States. Under the leadership of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Baghdad also became the focus of al Qaeda activity in Iraq.

THE GREEN ZONE AND THE CIVIL WAR After the 2003 invasion, American forces established two large security zones within Baghdad: an area sur-

rounding the international airport on the western side of the city and an area called the Green Zone in the northeast, where former president Saddam Hussein and his most impor- tant supporters maintained lavish residences. Outside these two rela- tively secure areas, Baghdad became a very dangerous place after May

2003.

B–

C

22 Baghdad

What amounted to a civil war be- tween the minority Sunni Muslims and the majority Shia population (Sunni and Shia being the two branches of Islam) erupted later in the year. Hussein and the Ba’ath Party, who were Sunni, had inflicted de- cades of suffering and terror on the Shia of Iraq, who saw an opportunity for justice in the Iraqi War. The civil war, fought as a guerrilla war, took place primarily in Baghdad and other large cities. Mosques, stores, and other buildings were blown up by ex- tremists on both sides, usually led by Zarqawi and al Qaeda on the Sunni side and by Muqtada al-Sadr, a theolo- gian and leader of a militia known as the Mahdi Army, on the Shia side. The U.S. government termed the fighting sectarian violence. The citizens of Baghdad experienced the worst of the attacks.

PEAK AND DECLINE IN VIOLENCE The number and deadliness of attacks in Baghdad greatly increased be- tween 2005 and 2006, but by 2007, the fledgling Iraqi government, in conjunction with an increased Amer- ican troop presence, had managed to quell most of the violence in Bagh- dad. The focus of the insurgency

shifted to other cities such as Fallu- jah, and the long process of rebuild- ing Baghdad’s infrastructure (roads, bridges, and other basic elements usually required for business and in- dustry to function) began in earnest in late 2007. While attacks still plagued the city in 2010, their fre- quency had fallen significantly com- pared with the peak of violence in

2006.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamental- ism; Jihad; September 11, 2001; Tal- iban; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Cockburn, Patrick. Muqtada: Muqtada Al- Sadr, the Shia Revival, and the Struggle for Iraq. New York: Scribner, 2008. Fallows, James M. Blind into Baghdad: Amer- ica’s War in Iraq. New York: Vintage Books,

2006.

Ferguson, Charles H. No End in Sight: Iraq’s Descent into Chaos. New York: Public Affairs, 2008.

Bali Attacks (2002)

Terrorist attacks that occurred on Oc- tober 12, 2002, at a popular tourist bar and outside the U.S. consulate on the Indonesian island of Bali. Two bombs exploded within seconds of each other, one inside Paddy’s Pub by a suicide bomber with a backpack and the other just outside the Sari Club by another suicide bomber in a white van. These bombs killed 202 people and injured 209 more. The consulate attack did not physically harm anyone. In the subsequent investigation, it became clear that the group behind these attacks, Jemaah Islamiyah, was linked to al Qaeda, the international terrorist organization funded and led by Osama bin Laden.

BACKGROUND Nearly 90 percent of Indonesia’s total population (about 222 million peo- ple) is Muslim, making the country the world’s most populous Muslim- majority nation. In its history as a na- tion, beginning in 1945, numerous

Bali Attacks (2002)

23

Muslim groups have attempted to es- tablish an Islamic government, but Indonesia remains a democratically elected republic because its Muslim population remains split between traditional practitioners and those who have adopted more modern practices. Sunnis, followers of one branch of Islam, make up all but a mi- nuscule percentage of the country’s Muslim population.

CONSEQUENCES AND AFTERMATH The majority of those killed in the Bali attacks were foreigners, primar- ily Australian (80 people) and British (26 people). Another 35 were Indo- nesians. The locations were targeted because of their popularity among foreign tourists. The reasons given for the attacks, after arrests had been made, included defending Islam from those considered infidels, or unbe- lievers of a particular religion (in this case Christians and Jews). A week after the attacks, the Arab news net- work Al Jazeera aired a recorded mes- sage, purportedly from bin Laden, claiming that the attacks had been in retaliation for foreign support of the U.S. war on terror as well as for Aus- tralian support of the liberation of East Timor, which from 1975 to 1999 had been occupied by Indonesia. Jemaah Islamiyah, the group that was eventually identified as the per- petrator of the attacks, was founded in the late 1960s in order to spread fundamentalist Islamic beliefs throughout the area. Only in the 1990s did it develop into an outright terrorist organization, after it estab- lished ties with al Qaeda and began

to receive funding from bin Laden’s network. Two leaders of Jemaah Islamiyah, the cleric Abu Bakar Ba’asyir and Imam Samudra, were arrested within months of the attacks, along with more than 30 other people. Samudra confessed to planning the attacks and was sentenced to death. He was exe- cuted on November 9, 2008, along with two other convicted perpetra- tors. Ba’asyir served a brief prison sentence.

SIGNIFICANCE The bombings were the worst terror- ist attack in the history of Indonesia. For years afterward, Bali’s economy struggled with a steep drop in tourist revenue. Another series of suicide bombings in 2005, seemingly carried out by Jemaah Islamiyah as well, fur- ther cut into the tourist trade and in- tensified the rising tensions between traditionalist and modern Indonesian Muslims. Together, these two sets of bombings brought Jemaah Islamiyah onto the world stage. The Indonesian government continues to battle the terrorist organization.

B–

C

See also: Al Qaeda; Islamic Funda- mentalism; Bin Laden, Osama; Terror- ist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Anggraeni, Dewi. Who Did This to Our Bali? Victoria, Australia: Indra Pub, 2003. Schreyer, Karmel. An Ordinary Courage:

Naomi in Indonesia. Winnipeg: Great Plains Publications, 2006.

Bhutto, Benazir

See Pakistan.

24

Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

24 ✪ Bin Laden, Osama (1957– ) Indonesian police examine bodies at the site of one

Indonesian police examine bodies at the site of one of the Bali attacks, in which more than 200 innocent civilians, mostly tourists, were killed. The attacks were carried out by an Islamic terrorist group in retaliation for foreign support of the U.S. war on terror.

Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

Founder, financier, and leader of the international Islamic fundamental- ist terrorist organization al Qaeda. Bin Laden is the mastermind behind the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which targeted locations in Washington, D.C., and New York City. Since these attacks, bin Laden’s name and face have become synonymous with terrorism and militant Islam. Bin Laden is one of the most wanted men on the planet, but he has

successfully eluded capture for years despite a widespread international effort to detain him. As of 2010, it was believed that he was hiding in the mountainous region along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

EARLY LIFE Bin Laden was born on March 10, 1957, in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. He was the 17th son of a total of 51 children born to a billionaire businessman, Mohammad bin Laden. Bin Laden’s father had founded a very

Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

25

lucrative construction company in Saudi Arabia, and upon his death in 1968, his children inherited his vast wealth. Bin Laden grew up a devout Sunni Muslim, studying in Mecca and Jidda. He married his first of four wives at the age of 17 (four is the maximum allowed to Muslims by the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book). He was reportedly heavily influenced by radical Muslim thinkers while studying public man- agement at King Abd al-Aziz Univer- sity in Jidda.

AFGHANISTAN AND THE START OF AL QAEDA In 1979, bin Laden departed for Af- ghanistan to help fight the Soviet in- vasion; he was joined by thousands of other mujahideen, or holy warriors. He used his inheritance to build a re- cruiting network to bring more muja- hideen from around the globe, as well as to build training camps and roads and to buy weapons and medicine. These fighters also received money and training from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), al- though bin Laden would not associ- ate with the Americans. After the Soviets withdrew in 1989, bin Laden and his colleague Ayman al-Zawahiri used the records they kept of the mujahideen to start a new organization that would combat secular governments and Islamic re- gimes that they considered heretical. Bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia and became an outspoken critic of the Saudi royal family. When Ameri- can forces were stationed there in 1991 in preparation for the Persian Gulf War, bin Laden increased the

intensity of his criticism, believing that non-Muslims should not be al- lowed in Saudi Arabia, Islam’s holy country. The same year, he left for Sudan, where an Islamic government had recently been established.

BIN LADEN AS A TERRORIST LEADER With bin Laden’s financial and politi- cal help, al Qaeda continued to grow throughout the world. He was linked with several terrorist attacks in the 1990s, some of which killed Ameri- cans in Riyadh. The United States pressured Sudan to hand bin Laden over, and he fled to Afghanistan, where the Taliban, another funda- mentalist Islamic regime, welcomed him. In 1996, bin Laden, who had be- come a highly influential leader among militant Islamists, declared a jihad, or holy war, against Americans and Jews. This inspired his followers to further acts of terrorism in Saudi Arabia. Two years later, he also issued a fatwa, or religious decree, for the death of all Americans. However, be- cause bin Laden is not a religious scholar, nor a cleric with the religious qualifications necessary to be able to declare jihads or fatwas, he was widely criticized among Muslims who did not support him. That same year, 1998, bin Laden was linked to the deadly bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in East Africa. The U.S. search for him began, and it was not long before it became clear that he was a guest of the Taliban. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the American government

B–

C

26

Bin Laden, Osama (1957– )

Osama bin Laden After the 9/11 Attacks A fter the attacks of September 11, 2001,

Osama bin Laden After the 9/11 Attacks

A fter the attacks of September 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden made a statement that was broadcast on Al

Jazeera, the Arabic news channel, claiming that he was not responsible for the attacks. However, he did claim responsibility for them in a videotaped statement released in 2004. On October 7, 2001, he spoke in glowing terms about the attacks in the following remarks, also broadcast on Al Jazeera.

What America is tasting now is something insignifi- cant compared to what we have tasted for scores of years. Our nation has been tasting this humiliation and this degradation for more than 80 years. Its sons are killed, its blood is shed, its sanctuaries are attacked, and no one hears and no one heeds. When God blessed one of the groups of Islam, vanguards of Islam, they destroyed America. I pray to God to elevate their status and bless them. Millions of innocent children are being killed as I speak. They are being killed in Iraq without committing any sins, and we don’t hear condemna- tion or a fatwa from the rul- ers. In these days, Israeli tanks infest Palestine—in Jenin, Ra- mallah, Rafah, Beit Jalla, and other places in the land of Islam, and we don’t hear

anyone raising his voice or moving a limb. When the sword comes down, after 80 years, hypoc- risy rears its ugly head. They deplore and they lament for those killers, who have abused the blood, honor and sanctuaries of Muslims. The least that can be said about those people is that they are debauched. They have followed injustice. They supported the butcher over the victim, the oppressor over the innocent child. May God show them His wrath and give them what they deserve. I say that the situation is clear and obvious. After this event, after the senior offi- cials have spoken in America, starting with the head of infi- dels worldwide, Bush, and those with him. They have come out in force with their men and have turned even the countries that belong to

Bush, George W. (1946– )

27

Islam to this treachery, and they want to wag their tail at God, to fight Islam, to sup- press people in the name of

These events have divided the whole world into two sides. The side of believers and the side of infidels, may

God keep you away from them. Every Muslim has to rush to make his religion vic- torious. The winds of faith have come. The winds of change have come to eradi- cate oppression from the is- land of Muhammad, peace be upon him.

demanded bin Laden from the Tal- iban, but they refused to hand him over. This sparked the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001.

ESCAPE AND PROCLAMATIONS Bin Laden escaped with many of his associates into the mountains of east- ern Afghanistan. Since then, he has appeared on several video and radio broadcasts, aired on the Arab- language network Al Jazeera. He has praised further terrorist attacks and encouraged his supporters to con- tinue the fight against America, Israel, and all Muslims who do not share his fundamentalist views. Bin Laden sees himself as carrying out a necessary religious war against foreign powers, perversions of Islam, and those who have suppressed or insulted the true Islam. His violent approach has polarized the Muslim world and made him one of the most despised persons of modern times.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Jazeera; Al Qaeda; Fatwa; Islamic Fundamen- talism; Jihad; Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998); Mujahideen; Paki- stan; September 11, 2001; Taliban; Terrorist Organizations; Al-Zawahiri, Ayman.

FURTHERREADING

Greene, Meg. The Hunt for Osama Bin Laden. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2005. Landau, Elaine. Osama Bin Laden: A War Against the West. Brookfield, Conn.:

Twenty-first Century Books, 2002. Louis, Nancy. Osama Bin Laden. Edina, Minn.:

ABDO Pub. Co, 2002.

B–

C

Blair, Tony

See London Bombings (2005).

Bush, George W. (1946– )

Forty-third president of the United States (2001–2009), who declared that the United States was embarking on a “War on Terror” in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist at- tacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (“9/11”). A polarizing figure, Bush left office with one of the highest disapproval ratings in American polling history. This was due to numerous scandals, the Iraqi War (ongoing since 2003), an un- precedented national debt (more than $10 trillion), and the administra- tion’s slow reaction to domestic cri- ses such as the devastation of New Orleans, Louisiana, by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

28

Bush, George W. (1946– )

A wartime president, he put forth what has become known as the Bush Doctrine. According to this foreign policy principle, the United States has the right to preemptively attack the source of any perceived threat. For good or ill, Bush was one of the central figures that defined the first decade of the twenty-first century.

EARLY LIFE Born on July 6, 1946, in New Haven, Connecticut, Bush was the oldest of six children of George Herbert Walker Bush, who would serve as vice president under Ronald Reagan (1981–1989) and president of the United States (1989–1993).

FIRST PRESIDENTIAL TERM In a bitterly contested presidential election, Bush narrowly defeated in- cumbent Vice President Al Gore in 2000. His choice for vice president, Dick Cheney, was a former represen- tative and secretary of defense. Bush began his first term with a number of controversies. He ap- pointed Cheney to head a task force to determine the nation’s energy policy, but this group met secretly with com- panies it did not identify. This secrecy would characterize both of Bush’s terms in office. After 9/11, Bush scored some of the highest approval ratings in American history for his response to the attacks on the World Trade Cen- ter and the Pentagon. He ordered the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, declaring that the United States was engaged in a new, global “War on Terror.” In a famous speech, he de- scribed Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as forming an “Axis of Evil” that the United States had to confront.

The rest of Bush’s first term, how- ever, was marred by controversy. For example, many questioned the harsh treatment of prisoners captured in the Afghanistan invasion and held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, but Bush in- sisted that the United States did not practice torture. Perhaps most controversial was Bush’s argument that Iraq posed an immediate threat to the United States, necessitating an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein, its dictator. The Bush administration presented evi- dence, gathered from both American intelligence and foreign sources, that Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction, such as biological and chemical weapons. However, after the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, it was revealed that the evidence was based on false information. No weapons of mass destruction were ever found in Iraq, but Bush vigorously defended his decision to go to war.

SECOND PRESIDENTIAL TERM AND LEGACY Running on a national security plat- form, Bush defeated Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts in the 2004 presidential election. Public percep- tion of his second-term performance continued to plummet, however, after another series of scandals and in the face of an increasingly troubled economy. Although the U.S. military campaigns had deposed the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein in Iraq, fighting continued in both countries, which threatened the fragile govern- ments the United States had helped establish. Moreover, Bush’s tax cuts and spending policies had plunged

Cyberterrorism

29

the country into the greatest debt up to that point. Although Bush declared a war on terror, terrorist attacks worldwide (though not in the United States) climbed after he entered office. His administration failed to capture Osama bin Laden, founder of al Qaeda, and the Iraqi War became a major recruiting point for terrorist organizations that opposed Western influence on Muslim societies.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; Iran; Iraqi War; Patriot Act; September 11, 2001; Taliban; Terror- ist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Engdahl, Sylvia. Domestic Wiretapping. De- troit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Jones, Veda Boyd. George W. Bush. New York: Chelsea House, 2007. Venezia, Mike. George W. Bush: Forty-Third President, 2001-Present. New York: Chil- dren’s Press/Scholastic, 2008.

Cheney, Richard B.

See Bush, George W.

Cyberterrorism

Terrorist attacks carried out through or targeting computer and communi- cations networks. In order to consti- tute an act of cyberterrorism, and not mere computer hacking, such an at- tack must result in real-world harm. For example, an act of cyberterror- ism, also known as information war- fare, might disable government computer systems so that social services are temporarily disrupted,

potentially denying resources to peo- ple in acute need. The most common kind of attack is called a “denial of service” attack. Hackers flood targeted computers with a vast number of requests for in- formation, blocking legitimate re- quests for access until the computers are disconnected from the Internet or until the attack ends. Not all such attacks are classified as cyberterror- ism; most, although malicious as- saults, are executed by people who do not have terrorist aims in mind. One example of a true cyberter- rorist attack, however, occurred in Queensland, Australia, in April 2000. An employee of a company that had installed a computerized sewage con- trol system in the area launched the attack after his application for a new job had been turned down. Gaining access to the computer network, he caused millions of liters of raw sew- age to spill into local parks and rivers. He was arrested and imprisoned in October 2001. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, many national governments, including that of the United States, have been increasingly wary of cyberterrorism. If terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda were to acquire the skills necessary to gain control of utility networks that gov- ern power grids, gas lines, or other parts of the national infrastructure, they could potentially cause wide- spread harm. To date, however, no such terrorists have succeeded in employing cyberterrorism to harm America. Cyberterrorism is an area of grow- ing concern to security experts. As

B–

C

30

Cyberterrorism

the world becomes increasingly con- nected through the Internet and other communications networks, it is becoming easier and easier to obtain the skills necessary to attempt cyber- terrorism. Also, as military equipment relies more and more on computer technology, the potential opportuni- ties for cyberterrorism increase.

See also: Al Qaeda; September 11, 2001; Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Brown, Lawrence V. Cyberterrorism and Com- puter Attacks. New York: Novinka Books,

2006.

DeAngelis, Gina, and Austin Sarat. Cyber Crimes: Crime, Justice, and Punishment. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers,

2000.

Menhard, Francha Roffe. Cyberwar: Point, Click, Destroy. Berkeley Heights, N.J.:

Enslow Publishers, 2003.

Townsend, John. Cyber Crime. Chicago: Rain- tree, 2005.

D–F

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Created in 2003, cabinet department charged with preventing terrorist at- tacks on U.S. soil. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was cre- ated to coordinate various security functions that were previously handled by several different depart- ments and agencies of the federal government. Proposed by President George W. Bush (2001–2009) in June 2002, the DHS set up all security resources under a single line of authority. The department’s creation was a direct result of the devastating September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the na- tion. Congress approved the new cabinet in late 2002, and it began op- eration in January 2003 as the 15th cabinet department of the federal government. The DHS brought to- gether the Secret Service, Customs Service, Immigration and Naturaliza- tion Service, and the Coast Guard,

among other agencies. The new de- partment has more that 180,000 em- ployees, making it one of the largest cabinet departments.

FUNCTIONS AND OPERATIONS The DHS has three main functions. The first is to work to prevent terror- ist attacks within the United States. The second function is to reduce the nation’s vulnerability to terrorism. Fi- nally, the DHS is charged with mini- mizing the damage from any attacks that might occur. In the event of a cri- sis, the DHS is expected to ensure the continued operation of the govern- ment and the country’s essential ser- vices, such as law enforcement. To achieve its goals, the DHS partners with state and local governments as well as with private companies to share information and strengthen the nation’s ability to respond to emer- gency situations. Another key responsibility of the DHS is coordinating information about potential terrorist threats. The

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 31

department also reviews the vulnera- bility of the nation’s infrastructure— roads, bridges, airports, buildings—to possible attack. Furthermore, the DHS is responsible for enforcing trade and immigration laws, protect- ing against financial and electronic crimes, and preventing counterfeit- ing of the nation’s money. Because the new department includes the

Secret Service, it is responsible for the protection of the president, vice president, their families, and visiting world leaders.

Early Successes Since it began func- tioning, the department has been credited with improving border safety without limiting the flow of people and goods across the nation’s

Abraham Lincoln and the Secret Service The U.S. Secret Service, now a part of the

Abraham Lincoln and the Secret Service

The U.S. Secret Service, now a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was established by President Abraham Lincoln (1861–1865) on April 14, 1865, the day he was shot. Before Lincoln’s time, the president and his family had no formal bodyguards or other protections. At first, the main duty of the Secret Ser- vice was to prevent counterfeiting of money. In the 1800s, America’s money sys- tem was unsystematic as individual banks issued their own paper currency, which was relatively easy to counterfeit. During the Lincoln administration, about one- third of the nation’s money was counter- feit, or fake. On the advice of Secretary of the Treasury Hugh McCulloch, President Lincoln established a commission to review the problem. On April 14, 1865, the presi- dent created the Secret Service, carrying out the commission’s recommendations. On the evening of April 14, 1865, the president and Mrs. Lincoln attended a play at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C. Dur- ing the performance, John Wilkes Booth crept into the president’s balcony and, fir- ing a pistol at close range, assassinated the

president. Lincoln died early the next morning. It was the first time in the na- tion’s history that a president had been as- sassinated. Citizens mourned and called upon Congress to do more to guard the president by providing some sort of official police or military protection. However, Congress was slow to act. Thirty-six years later—after the assassination of two more presidents—James A. Garfield (1881) and William McKinley (1897–1901)—Congress finally added protection of the president to the list of duties performed by the Secret Service. Beginning in 1901, every president from Theodore Roosevelt (1901–1909) on has been protected by the Secret Service. In 1917, making threats against the president became a felony, and Secret Service pro- tection was expanded to include the entire First Family. In 1951, protection of the vice president and the president-elect was added. After the 1968 assassination of presidential candidate Robert Kennedy, President Lyndon B. Johnson (1963–1969) ordered the Secret Service to protect all presidential candidates.

D–

F

32

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

borders. The DHS has also created comprehensive strategies intended to prevent and respond to terrorist threats.

Criticisms The DHS has been criti- cized for a variety of reasons. Some critics believe that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) should have been moved into the DHS, espe- cially because these two intelligence services failed to share information about some of the September 11 ter- rorists with each other and other gov- ernment agencies. Some of the poli- cies adopted by the DHS also have been criticized. For example, other nations have resented the require- ment that foreign visitors be photo- graphed and electronically finger- printed when arriving in the United States. The most controversial DHS program was the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, which was established in 2002. This pro- gram required male citizens from

Muslim countries to immediately reg- ister with the DHS. Many people con- demned the system as discriminatory against Arabs and Muslims. The sys- tem proved ineffective and was ended in late 2003. Many civil liberty groups con- tinue to warn that the DHS intrudes on people’s personal rights and liber- ties. In particular, these groups point out that various government agencies share private information about the nation’s citizens. Although the DHS has made progress in making the nation more secure, the long-term effects of its policies on civil liberties remain to be seen.

COLOR-CODED ALERTS A nationwide system of color-coded security alerts was adopted in early 2002. This system was designed to in- form the American public of the risk of a terrorist attack. The following colors indicate the nation’s risk and what the DHS recommends people do at each level:

Security Color

Indication

DHS Recommendation

Red

severe risk

• Listen to radio or watch television for updated information and instructions; be prepared to evacuate to a safe place.

Orange

high risk

• Use caution when traveling, pay attention to travel advisories, and expect delays.

Yellow

elevated risk

• Develop alternative routes to school or work.

Blue

guarded risk

• Be alert and report suspicious activity.

Green

low risk

 

Ecoterrorism 33

 

At first, the DHS set the same risk

 

level for

the entire nation. Respond-

ing to criticism, however, the made the color-coded alerts

DHS

geo-

 

graphically specific. For example, in

January

2004, the DHS lowered the

overall threat level from orange to yellow but maintained an orange

alert for

the cities of New York, Los Las Vegas, and Washington,

Angeles,

D.C. Later, the department made the alerts even more specific, announc-

 

ing evidence of threats in the finan- cial districts of New York, northern New Jersey, and Washington, D.C. The DHS has advised citizens to

develop

and practice a family emer-

gency plan and to store extra food, water, and other supplies. In the twenty-first century, the relationship between individual citizens and gov- ernment is being tested. Most citizens realize the need for increased secu- rity in light of the 9/11 attacks and other threats, but many people are concerned that the DHS is restricting individual civil liberties.

See also: September 11, 2001; Ter- rorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Aleinikoff, T., et al. The Department of Home- land Security’s First Year: A Report Card. New York: Century Foundation Press,

2004.

Grack-Koestler, Rachel A. The Department of Homeland Security. New York: Chelsea House, 2007. Kettl, Don. System Under Stress: Homeland Security and American Politics. Washing- ton, D.C.: CQ Press, 2007. Samuels, Richard J., ed. Encyclopedia of United States National Security. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications, 2006.

 

Detention Camps

 
 

See Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

 
 

Ecoterrorism

 
 

Acts of terrorism committed by

 

groups or individuals in order to sup- port environmental causes. These assaults usually involve the destruc- tion of property rather than direct attacks on human targets. Supporters of environmental

causes

have also used the term ecoter-

rorism to describe acts usually under-

taken

by

corporate

entities that

allegedly harm the natural world. Often, in response to the actions taken by corporations or other business groups, environmental sup- porters will sabotage equipment that, in the eyes of the saboteur, will be used to harm animals or the environment. This form of ecoterror- ism is sometimes called monkey- wrenching. Ecoterrorists differ from other kinds of terrorists in that their pur- pose is not to instigate a widespread political, social, or religious change but to resolve or draw attention to a specific, limited issue that is related to animal rights or the preservation of the natural world.

ECOTERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS Organizations accused of committing ecoterrorism include the Animal Lib- eration Front (ALF), whose activist members attempt to free animals from laboratories and sabotage ani- mal testing facilities; the Earth Libera- tion Front (ELF), a loose association

D–

F

34

Ecoterrorism

that focuses on monkeywrenching; the Sea Shepherd Conservation Soci- ety, which split from the environ- mental organization Greenpeace in 1977 in order to actively disrupt whaling activities around the world; and Earth First!, a radical group that refuses to compromise on ecological issues. Among these groups, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has identified ALF and ELF as serious terrorist threats within the United States. They are accused of hundreds of terrorist acts, mainly of animal liberations and arson. Although none of these have injured humans so far, they have caused an estimated $200 million of damage collectively. Many alleged ecoterrorists engage in what is called “direct action,” which can include acts of civil dis- obedience as well as sabotage. A fa- mous example of the former is a “tree sit,” in which demonstrators form rings around or occupy old-growth trees that are in danger of being cut down. This mixture of activities, all of which are aimed at preventing some type of harm to the environment, often makes it difficult to draw the line between an ecoterrorist and a protester or activist. This highlights the inherent ambivalence of the term itself.

See

Unabomber.

FURTHERREADING

Liddick, Don. Eco-Terrorism: Radical Environ- mental and Animal Liberation Movements. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2006. Long, Douglas. Ecoterrorism. New York: Facts On File, 2004.

Organizations;

also: Terrorist

Mcfall, Kathleen. Ecoterrorism: The Next American Revolution? Concord, Mass.:

Paul And Company, 2004.

Enemy Combatants

See Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Fatwa

A formal legal opinion given by an Is-

lamic legal authority or one who has undergone a rigorous course of for- mal education in religious law, in- cluding detailed study of the Qur’an (Islam’s holy scripture) and Hadith (stories about the prophet Muham- mad) as well as legal precedents. A fatwa can be given on any subject, though most address complicated legal questions.

OFFICIAL OPINIONS Only a few people have the official capacity to issue fatawa (plural of fatwa). Within the religion of Islam, there are three major divisions (Sunni, Shia, and Sufi), and each of these in turn has a number of differ- ing legal codes. Accordingly, fatawa

may only be issued by scholars who have attained a sufficient level of legal authority within a given code. Usu- ally, one must attend a madrassa, or religious school, for many years, com- pleting requirements that grant reli- gious degrees roughly equivalent to a Western master’s degree or doctoral degree. Furthermore, Islamic jurispru- dence (called fiqh), establishes four criteria that a fatwa must meet. First,

it must be in accord with past legal

proofs, all of which are based on the

Fatwa

35

Qur’an and Hadith. Second, it must be issued by a person of sufficient education and virtue. Third, it must not be self-serving, nor issued for political reasons. Last, it must meet the needs of the contemporary world. Fatawa are not necessarily bind- ing. Some schools of Islamic law hold that fatawa are only binding on those who issue them, while others hold that they are binding on all Muslims, except in the case of extenuating cir- cumstances that prevent the faithful from following them.

WESTERN MISUNDERSTANDING Fatawa have often been misunder- stood in Western nations as, essen- tially, religious death threats. Perhaps the most infamous example is the fatwa issued in 1989 by Iran’s Ayatol- lah Ruhollah Khomeini. (An ayatollah is a high-ranking Shia cleric capable of issuing fatawa.) The fatwa pro- nounced a death sentence on Indian author Salman Rushdie for writing The Satanic Verses, a novel consid- ered heretical by many Muslims. As a result of this fatwa, Rushdie had to seek protection from militant Mus- lims who tried to kill him. Other such fatawa have included two issued jointly by Osama bin Laden, founder and leader of the in- ternational terrorist organization al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri (bin Lad- en’s closest adviser), and others, in 1996 and 1998. These documents ex- plicitly declared war on the United States for basing its troops in Saudi Arabia, the holy land of Islam. How- ever, bin Laden lacks the formal train- ing required to issue fatawa and has

consequently been criticized by Is- lamic scholars for issuing these. Many fatawa in recent years have addressed questions about the proper response to non-Muslim powers. Some have called for boycotts of American and Israeli products, while others have supported interfaith dia- logue with Christian and Jewish reli- gious leaders. Others have condemned or explicitly forbidden violent acts such as those committed by members of terrorist organizations. Many of these fatawa are only observed by followers of those who issue them, however, because there is no inter- national body governing Islamic religious law.

D–

F

See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Iran; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Terrorist Organizations, Al-Zawahiri, Ayman.

FURTHERREADING

Bar, Shmuel. Warrant for Terror: Fatwas of Radical Islam and the Duty of Jihad. Lan- ham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006.

Gleave, R., and E. Kermeli. Islamic Law: The- ory and Practice. London: I.B. Tauris,

1997.

Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck, and Barbara Freyer Stowasser. Islamic Law and the Challenges of Modernity. Walnut Creek, Calif.: Al- taMira Press, 2004. Williams, Julie. Islam: Understanding the His- tory, Beliefs, and Culture. Berkeley Heights, N.J.: Enslow, 2008.

Freedom Tower

See World Trade Center, One.

Fundamentalism

See Islamic Fundamentalism.

36

Gaza Strip and the West Bank

G–H

Gaza Strip and the West Bank

Territories held and administered by Israel and that are home to millions of Palestinian Arabs as well as Israeli citizens who have built settlements there. Gaza has been the site of vio- lent conflict between Palestinians and Israelis and the base of numerous terrorist groups that seek the destruc- tion of the state of Israel. These territories, and the way Is- rael has treated their inhabitants, have been a primary element of the Arab- Israeli conflict that continues to fun- damentally shape the Middle East and world politics. Numerous groups dedicated to the establishment of a Palestinian state, and some to the total destruction of Israel, operate within these territories, committing what many consider to be terrorist acts. Currently, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, which are sometimes re- ferred to as the Israeli-occupied terri- tories, are officially administered by the Palestinian Authority (PA), the first Palestinian government of mod- ern times. The PA was formed in 1994 as a result of the Oslo Accords be- tween representatives of Israel and the Palestinian people. However, ever since a conflict known as the Battle of Gaza in 2007, the PA no longer wields effective control over the Gaza Strip.

GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY The Gaza Strip is a 25-mile-long (40- km-long) strip of land bordered by

the Mediterranean Sea on its north- west side, Egypt on the southwest, and Israel on all other sides. It varies in width and covers a total of approx- imately 140 square miles (104 km 2 ). Its largest city is Gaza, and the terri- tory is home to about 1.4 million peo- ple, making it one of the most densely settled areas on the planet. The West Bank, named for its po- sition along the Jordan River and the Dead Sea, is a much larger region than Gaza, covering about 2,270 square miles (5,900 km 2 ) and includ- ing among its cities Hebron, Nablus, Bethlehem, and Jericho. Approxi- mately 2.7 million people, mostly Is- raelis and Palestinian Arabs, live in the West Bank, which is bordered on the east by Jordan and on the south- east by the Dead Sea. It is bordered by Israel on all other sides.

Israeli Control Both of these territo- ries were captured by Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War, in which Israel defeated Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. Until 1994, these territories had no legal status, being occupied by Israeli military forces. In the intervening de- cades, Israelis built numerous settle- ments in the West Bank and improved the area’s infrastructure. However, Israeli settlement grew, allowing set- tlers to take over towns and villages formerly inhabited by Palestinians who had fled the region during the war. The West Bank was originally part of Jordan, which ceded its claim to the territory to the Palestine Liber- ation Organization (PLO) in 1988.

Gaza Strip and the West Bank

37

The PLO is recognized by other na- tions as the official representative of the Palestinian people.

Violent Uprisings During the de- cades these territories were under Is- raeli control, organizations such as Fatah, the Popular Front for the Lib- eration of Palestine, and the Abu Nidal Organization (most of which were constituent members or splin- ter groups of the PLO) committed many acts of terrorism, including suicide bombings, gunfights, car

bombs, firing rockets into Israeli ci- vilian areas, and attempted assassina- tions. All of these acts were directed against Israelis as a means of advanc- ing the Palestinian cause, which is to establish an independent Palestinian nation. This state would most likely occupy the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. These violent acts reached a peak during three periods: 1987–1993 (the first intifada, Arabic for “upris- ing”), 2000–2003 (the second inti- fada), and in 2007 (the Battle of

(the second inti- fada), and in 2007 (the Battle of Mahmoud Abbas (1935– ) Along with

Mahmoud Abbas (1935– )

Along with his longtime associate Yasir Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas helped found the influential Palestinian po- litical party Fatah. He is also the first chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to follow Arafat’s decades of leadership in the same role. He served as prime minister of the Pal- estinian Authority from 2003 to 2005, when he was elected president of the PA after the death of Arafat. In the late 1970s, Abbas served as head of the PLO’s international de- partment, negotiating with Israeli groups to advance the Palestinian cause. He was a chief negotiator in crucial peace conferences between Palestinian and Israeli leaders in 1991 as well as at Oslo, Norway, in 1993. Abbas is seen as a moderating fig- ure because of his opposition to the violence of the two intifadas and his insistence on continuing the peace

process with Israel. In the face of the second intifada, Israel, the United States, and other nations pressured Arafat to appoint Abbas as prime minister of the PA because they felt they could no longer trust Arafat. Abbas, on the other hand, has a well- established history of negotiating in good faith. It was no surprise that when Hamas won a surprise victory in the 2006 PA parliamentary elections, these same nations stood behind Ab- bas’s decision to suspend the newly elected government. Neither he nor the leaders of these nations trusted Hamas to stop using violence as a means to achieve its aims. As a result, the PA effectively split. As of 2010, Abbas leads what many recognize as the legitimate PA gov- ernment in the West Bank, where he continues to advocate for a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

G–

H

38

Gaza Strip and the West Bank

Gaza). These periods of heightened violence were met with Israeli mili- tary incursions into the territories.

THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY As part of the Oslo Accords (a set of peace agreements between Palestin- ian and Israeli leaders reached in 1993), the Palestinian Authority was given partial control of the West Bank and full control of the Gaza Strip in 1994. A gradual drawdown of Israeli military forces in the West Bank was also planned. Israeli settlements in both territories were to be slowly re- moved, although some settlers pro- tested or engaged in violent acts against the Palestinians. The transfer of power to the PA was impeded by the second intifada, though the resolution of this second uprising resulted in agreements that further reduced Israeli influence in the Gaza Strip. Then, parliamentary elections in 2006 resulted in a surprise victory for Hamas, a radical Palestinian terrorist organization that was responsible for many violent acts, over Fatah, a more moderate political party founded by Yasir Arafat (1929–2004), longtime chairman of the PLO and first presi- dent of the PA. Hamas’s victory spurred many sanctions and boycotts from Israel, the United States, and other countries that viewed the party as a terrorist organization. In the face of increasing violence in the Gaza Strip, PA president Mahmoud Abbas dissolved the Hamas-led government there. This resulted in the Battle of Gaza, lasting from June to July 2007, in which Hamas and Fatah forces fought each other in both territories.

Fatah retained control of the West Bank, while Hamas took over the Gaza Strip. Most foreign powers rec- ognized Abbas’s government as the legitimate one. Israeli forces besieged Gaza, ef- fectively cutting off all outside aid, until desperate Gazans broke through a barrier on the Egyptian border in search of food and fuel in January 2008. The siege resulted in a humani- tarian crisis, and Israel relented under international pressure. However, violence continued in November 2008, when groups associ- ated with Hamas started to fire rock- ets into Israel after promising a six-month cease-fire. Israel responded with airstrikes against Hamas’s secu- rity installations in late December, killing hundreds and wounding hun- dreds more. In early 2009, Israeli forces invaded Gaza in an attempt to stop Hamas’s rocket attacks.

See also: Hamas; Islamic Fundamen- talism; Palestine Liberation Organiza- tion (PLO); Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Pendergast, Tom, Sara Pendergast, and Ralph Zerbonia. Middle East Conflict. Biogra- phies. Detroit: UXL/Thomson Gale, 2006. Sharp, Anne Wallace. The Palestinians. De- troit: Lucent Books Thomson/Gale, 2005. Stefoff, Rebecca. West Bank/Gaza Strip. New York: Chelsea House, 1988.

Guantánamo Bay, Cuba

Well-sheltered bay on an inlet of the Caribbean Sea in the island nation of Cuba. The name of this bay is often used to refer to the U.S. naval base lo- cated there and, more particularly, to

Guantánamo Bay, Cuba 39

the high-security military prisons, or “detention camps,” that house many people accused of being, or support- ing, Muslim militants. Because of accusations that these prisoners have been tortured or otherwise mis- treated, as well as objections that most of them have been held for years with- out being charged with any crimes, Guantánamo Bay has become a focal point for worldwide controversy. Critics of the camps argue that the prisoners are not being treated according to the laws governing pris- oners of war (POWs) laid down in

the Geneva Conventions, a set of in- ternational laws recognized by nearly all countries in the world. Supporters of the camps argue that the United States has gathered intelligence vital to the war on international terrorism from the detainees and that President George W. Bush (2001–2009) had the right to identify enemy combat- ants and hold them indefinitely if necessary. In 2006, however, Bush bowed to widespread political pres- sure and agreed that the prisoners should be protected under the Ge- neva Conventions.

should be protected under the Ge- neva Conventions. Military police escort a prisoner to his cell

Military police escort a prisoner to his cell at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The prison there has been controversial since it opened in 2002. While supporters believe it provides a secure place to house dangerous terrorists, opponents claim prisoners are held unfairly.

40

Guantánamo Bay, Cuba

HISTORY Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, also known as “Gitmo” (from its airport code, GTMO), is the oldest overseas naval base of the United States. Occu- pying an area of 45 square miles (116 km 2 ) and currently home to more than 9,500 U.S. sailors and Marines, Guantánamo was first established in 1898 as a naval station during the Spanish-American War (1898). In 1903, after successfully driving the Spanish out of Cuba, the United States signed a lease for this land. This lease was reaffirmed in 1934 by treaty.

DETENTION CAMPS Until 2002, Guantánamo was not well known outside of the U.S. military and Cuba. In January of that year, hundreds of people designated as enemy combatants were brought to the detention camps at Guantánamo from the battlefields of Afghanistan following the October 2001 U.S. invasion.

Enemy Combatants Because it lies outside the United States, Guantá- namo does not fall under any U.S. legal jurisdiction. The laws there are entirely military in nature, and it is the legal right of U.S. military com- manders to designate captured pris- oners as “enemy combatants.” This designation is key to U.S. policy re- garding the holding and treatment of these detainees. Furthermore, the Bush administration asserted that such prisoners could legally be held in secret locations for an indefinite period of time. This is the fate of an unknown number of people at this time. In

2006, Bush admitted that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) op- erates a number of secret detention centers scattered around the globe.

Allegations of Torture More impor- tantly, observers, some former mili- tary service members, and detainees themselves claim that the prisoners at Guantánamo have been subjected to various controversial techniques, including sleep deprivation, being chained in a fetal position for up to a day at a time, and being subjected to practices that the Qur’an (Islam’s holy book) forbids as unclean. The most notorious technique allegedly used at Guantánamo is waterboard- ing, in which a detainee is made to believe he is drowning. These tech- niques are used to force detainees into providing information about terrorist organizations and their plans. The allegations of torture in- creased between 2002 and 2006. Ironically, the use of these methods to extract information from detain- ees has resulted in increased support for terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda in some Muslim communities. It has also contributed to a sharp decrease in support for the United States worldwide. Many have argued that the United States’ image as a nation committed to doing good in the world has suffered because of what allegedly has transpired at Guantánamo Bay. In June 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Guantánamo detain- ees were entitled to the protections of the U.S. Constitution. However, at the beginning of 2009, detainees still

Hamas

41

had not received this protection. After taking office in January 2009, President Barack Obama (2009– ) called for the closing of the Guantá- namo detention camps. However, be- cause of many legal and security concerns, the process will likely take some time.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; American Taliban; Bush, George W.; Patriot Act; September 11, 2001; Ter- rorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Haugen, David M., and Susan Musser. Can the War on Terrorism Be Won? Detroit:

Greenhaven Press, 2007. Rose, David. Guantánamo: The War on Human Rights. New York: New Press,

2004.

Scheppler, Bill. Guantánamo Bay and Military Tribunals: The Detention and Trial of Suspected Terrorists. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2005.

Giuliani, Rudolph

See September 11, 2001.

Hamas

Militant Islamic organization cen- tered in the West Bank (region along the west bank of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea) and the Gaza Strip, a coastal land that borders Egypt and Israel. Founded in 1987 by members of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Hamas is regarded by the United Nations (UN) as a terrorist or- ganization, notorious for its suicide bombings against Israelis. However, many Palestinians support the group

because of its dedication to creating a Palestinian state.

FOUNDING HAMAS The Muslim Brotherhood, an organi- zation founded in the late 1920s that is dedicated to establishing Islamic governments, set up a series of clin- ics and schools throughout Gaza and the West Bank in the late 1970s. While these areas are home to numer- ous Palestinian Arabs, they have been under the control of Israel since 1967. Though many of the Brother- hood’s activities have been nonvio- lent, some connected groups in these occupied territories began to call for jihad, or a holy war, against Israel. Along with the Palestine Libera- tion Organization, these groups even- tually founded Hamas in 1987, at the start of the first intifada—a violent Palestinian uprising against Israelis. Hamas, which is an acronym for Hara- kat al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyyah (“Is- lamic Resistance Movement”) and also an Arabic word meaning “zeal,” declared that Palestine was a Muslim state that should never be surren- dered to non-Muslims. The group called explicitly for the destruction of Israel and began a campaign of ter- rorist attacks against Israelis, mostly consisting of suicide bombers and armed assaults. Although the PLO later denounced these attacks, having recognized Israel in 1988, there were many political and financial ties link- ing the two organizations. This made the actions and words of PLO chair- man Yasir Arafat, when denouncing or attempting to limit Hamas, seem insincere to many critics.

G–

H

42

Hamas

TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY ACTIONS Hamas continued to wage its cam- paign through the first decade of the twenty-first century. The scope and brutality of the violence it and other groups committed greatly increased after a second intifada began in 2000. However, Hamas participated in a 2005 cease-fire as negotiations pro- gressed for the establishment of a Palestinian government. Surprisingly, the group won a political victory over a less radical rival party, Fatah, in 2006 elections. Clashes between these two parties forced Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA)—Palestine’s first inde- pendent government—to dissolve the government in June 2007. Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip, while Fatah dominated the West Bank. Because Hamas did not relent in its attacks on Israelis and Is- raeli targets, Israel instituted severe sanctions on Gaza later in 2007. These sanctions have led to what some ob- servers describe as a humanitarian crisis, as Gaza’s nearly 1.4 million resi- dents have run short on medical sup- plies, fuel, food, and clean water. Though Hamas remained committed to its ultimate aim of destroying Is- rael, it agreed to another cease-fire in June 2008. This peace was short-lived, however, as both Israel and Hamas accused the other of violating the truce. As of 2010, the sanctions re- mained in place on Gaza, and Hamas continued its campaign of bloody violence.

See also: Gaza Strip and the West Bank; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad;

Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO); Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Hiber, Amanda. Should Governments Negoti- ate with Terrorists? Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008.

Mason, Paul. Israel and Palestine. Tarrytown, N.Y.: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark,

2008.

Rosaler, Maxine. Hamas: Palestinian Terror- ists. New York: Rosen Publishing Group,

2003.

Tamimi, Azzam. Hamas: A History from Within. Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, 2007.

Hizbollah

Established in Lebanon in 1982, mili- tia and political party whose name means “Party of God.” Hizbollah is a militant Shiite organization regarded as a terrorist group by the United Na- tions (UN) for its attacks on Israel as well as on rival militant groups in Lebanon. Its initial goals included establishing an Islamic regime in Lebanon as well as destroying Israel. Although popular in Muslim coun- tries as a resistance movement, Hiz- bollah does not officially represent any nation or state.

FOUNDING HIZBOLLAH Shiite clerics in Lebanon founded Hizbollah in response to the 1982 Is- raeli invasion. The organization drew material support from overwhelm- ingly Shiite Iran, which had estab- lished an Islamic government in 1979. The group also received fund- ing from disaffected Lebanese youths. Lebanon had suffered from a civil

Hizbollah

43

war since 1975, in which another powerful militia and political party, Amal, had risen to prominence with support from neighboring Syria. However, Hizbollah’s more radical views attracted great support from southern Lebanon (occupied first by the Palestine Liberation Organization and later by Israel), and the new par- ty’s challenge to Amal intensified the civil war. The war was brought to an end in 1990 only by Syrian armed interven- tion. Over the course of the war, Hizbollah had killed hundreds if not thousands of fellow Lebanese, Palestinians, and Israelis, as well as Westerners. Because Hizbollah had grown so strong by the war’s end,

Syria was unable to force it to disarm. The group was thus able to continue a guerrilla war against Israel’s forces

in southern Lebanon until they with-

drew in 2000.

TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY ACTIONS Since then, Hizbollah has continued

to grow in power and influence. On July 12, 2006, the group launched an attack on Israel as a means of pressur- ing the Jewish state into releasing several prisoners of war. Israel re- sponded with a massive bombing campaign in southern Lebanon com- bined with a ground invasion that claimed the lives of more than 1,000 Lebanese. Nearly one million more were displaced. However, Hizbollah managed to fight the Israeli forces to

a standstill. They withdrew again

soon afterward, and Hizbollah en-

joyed a broad popularity not only among previously hostile groups within Lebanon but also elsewhere in the Muslim world. Hizbollah used this new support to mount an opposition campaign against the Western-backed Lebanese government. It failed to topple the government, but it did demand the formation of a new one that recog- nized its newfound strength. Further clashes in May 2008 led to negotia- tions that gave Hizbollah the veto power it had demanded, as one of the most powerful political parties in the country, since 2006. Later that year, Hizbollah also reached an agreement with Israel to exchange prisoners, the original purpose of the 2006 war. Hizbollah continues to hold a commanding position in Lebanese politics, which has alarmed its critics. In some of their eyes, its terrorist tactics as well as its close and long- standing ties with Iran have made it seem little more than an arm of the militant Shia who took control of Iran in 1979.

G–

H

See also: Gaza Strip and the West Bank; Hamas; Iran; Islamic Funda- mentalism; Jihad; Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO); Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Byers, Ann. Lebanon’s Hezbollah. New York:

Rosen, 2003. Harik, Judith P. Hezbollah: The Changing Face of Terrorism. London: I.B. Tauris,

2004.

44

Iran

I–K

Iran

Officially the Islamic Republic of Iran, a populous, multiethnic country in Southwest Asia that is run by a fun- damentalist Islamic government. Since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, when an Islamic theocracy was es- tablished, Iran has provided a great deal of political, financial, and mate- rial support to Islamic terrorist orga- nizations as well as to political parties such as Hizbollah in Lebanon. Be- cause of Iran’s controversial history with Western nations, much of this support is directed toward groups that oppose Western influences on Muslim societies. Since the start of the Iraqi War (ongoing since 2003), Iran has be- come a base for terrorists working to destabilize Iraq’s new democratic government. Also, the rhetoric, or grandiose language, of Iranian lead- ers often includes calls for the violent attack or destruction of Israel, the United States, the United Kingdom, and other nations.

HISTORY Before the twentieth century, Iran was home to numerous Islamic states, ruled mostly by emirs, over the past millennium. For most of the twenti- eth century, Iran experienced a series of governmental crises. By the 1970s, many groups in Iran, including leftist organizations and Islamic religious groups, were opposed to the government of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Pahlavi had partially

modernized Iran, but his regime en- gaged in many totalitarian activities such as imprisoning and torturing political opponents, censoring the media, and limiting which parties could participate in elections. Political opposition to the Pahlavi government culminated in wide- spread strikes and riots. A coalition of opposition groups became domi- nated by a fundamentalist Islamic fac- tion, led by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, a popular Shia cleric who had been exiled from Iran since the mid-1960s. Khomeini was notably anti-American and supported violent, militant tactics to achieve political ends. In the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Khomeini and his supporters suc- ceeded in establishing an Islamic the- ocracy. Under this government, the Supreme Leader, an Islamic cleric, holds ultimate authority, and all deci- sions of the democratically elected president and parliament have to be approved by one of several councils composed of mullahs (Islamic reli- gious scholars). Under Khomeini, Iran’s first Supreme Leader, Iran’s government continued many of the oppressive totalitarian policies of the Pahlavi government, though the justi- fication for these policies was now religious and not secular. Since the transition to an Islamic government, Iran has been widely criticized for its numerous human rights abuses. These include the executions of po- litical prisoners, the imprisonment and beating of political dissidents,

Iraqi War

45

and the oppression of women, non- Muslims, and homosexuals.

IRAN AND TERRORISM In the decade leading up to the Ira- nian Revolution, numerous opposi- tion groups committed acts of political violence considered terror- ist acts, such as suicide bombings and kidnappings. However, after the Islamic Republic of Iran was estab- lished on April 1, 1979, Iranian ter- rorism was directed toward to other nations.

Iranian Revolution In November 1979, student militants seized control of the American embassy in Tehran, Iran’s capital. They were enraged by the decision of the American govern- ment to admit Pahlavi to the United States for medical treatment. Sixty-six Americans were taken hostage, blind- folded, and intimidated by armed guards on a daily basis. After 13 were released, months of threats, sanc- tions, and negotiations failed to con- vince Khomeini to liberate the others. A secret rescue mission in April 1980 also failed. The two na- tions continued negotiating until Jan- uary 1981, when the remaining hos- tages were released. This incident, known as the Iranian Hostage Crisis, emboldened other militant groups because it demonstrated that the United States could be forced to ne- gotiate with terrorists, despite its of- ficial stance against doing so.

Spreading Revolution Until his death in 1989, Khomeini declared that Iran would export its revolution to the whole world. The Iranian government did this by supporting

militant Shia Muslims worldwide. In particular, Iran financed and sent troops to support Hizbollah, a radical political party and terrorist group in Lebanon, as well as Hamas, in the Palestinian territories held by Israel. It is also believed that Iran has taken an active role in supporting Shia militias in Iraq since the U.S. invasion in 2003. This practice is in line with the country’s revolutionary Islamic stance. More significantly, Iran has been accused of trying to develop a nuclear weapons program. This is a highly controversial, ongoing issue, because Iran claims that it is building nuclear reactors to meet its energy needs. However, the ongoing violent, anti-Israel, and anti-American rhetoric of Iran’s government makes the pros- pect of it acquiring nuclear weapons a disturbing one for Western nations.

See also: Fatwa; Gaza Strip and the West Bank; Hamas; Hizbollah; Iraqi War; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Terrorist Organizations; Weapons of Mass Destruction.

I–

K

FURTHERREADING

Axworthy, Michael. A History of Iran: Empire of the Mind. New York: Basic Books,

2008.

Gerdes, Louise I. Rogue Nations. Detroit:

Greenhaven Press, 2006. Gray, Leon, Edmund Herzig, and Dorreh Mirheydar. Iran. Washington, D.C.: Na- tional Geographic, 2008. Murphy, John. Ali Khamenei. New York:

Chelsea House Publishers, 2007.

Iraqi War

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 and the occupation that fol- lowed. For months before the war,

46

Iraqi War

President George W. Bush (2001– 2009) and his administration made a sustained argument that Iraq’s dicta- tor, Saddam Hussein, posed a serious threat to the United States and other nations. This argument rested largely on the misguided assertion that Hus- sein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). However, fol- lowing a swift and decisive ground

invasion, no trace of these WMDs was ever found. The foreign troops occupying Iraq, mainly from the United States and the United Kingdom, then faced a much more difficult, complex, and lethal situation: a guerrilla war fought by Hussein’s supporters, as well as by militant Islamic groups, including some supported by the

militant Islamic groups, including some supported by the U.S. troops patrol the streets of war-torn Baghdad,

U.S. troops patrol the streets of war-torn Baghdad, the capital of Iraq. While terrorist bomb- ings still occur in the city, it has become much safer since 2009. President Barack Obama (2009– ) plans to withdraw most American troops by the end of 2010, while leaving behind advisers to help the Iraqis and protect American interests in the country.

Iraqi War

47

terrorist organization al Qaeda. This war defied the expectation that the Iraqis would greet the foreign troops as liberators and would move quickly to establish a strong secular democracy in the midst of the many anti-American theocracies and constitutional monarchies in the Middle East. A death toll of more than 5,300 American soldiers and private mili- tary contractors and, by one estimate, one million Iraqis (civilian and mili- tary) also cast the war in an increas- ingly negative light.

BACKGROUND The conditions that led to the Iraqi War were established during the Per- sian Gulf War (1990–1991). Saddam Hussein invaded the small neighbor- ing country of Kuwait in August 1990 on charges that the Kuwaitis were using slanted drill holes to tap into Iraq’s oil reserves. In response, the United States and the United King- dom built a military coalition to force the Iraqi troops out of Kuwait.

The Invasion Based in Saudi Arabia, the coalition forces invaded Kuwait in January 1991 and quickly forced the Iraqi troops out. Coalition forces also bombed major cities in Iraq, in- cluding Baghdad. Their ground troops moved to within 150 miles (241 km) of the Iraqi capital before halting. President George H. W. Bush (1989–1993) declared a cease-fire on April 6, 1991. Although coalition forces could have removed Hussein from power then, they did not, deciding that doing so would fragment Iraq into several mutually hostile regions.

Hussein’s ruthless and secular dicta- torship, in fact, had held the country together for decades. As a result, co- alition forces did not support armed revolts that followed the cease-fire from Shiites in southern Iraq and from Kurds in northern Iraq against Hussein. Both revolts were brutally put down by Hussein’s forces. After- ward, the United States and the United Kingdom maintained no-fly zones in these areas to prevent Hus- sein from retaliating further against these populations, who had long sought independence.

Peace Terms The peace terms of the war forced Hussein to destroy his stockpiles of weapons of mass de- struction, also known as WMDs (bio- logical and chemical weapons, though he had also begun a program at the time to develop nuclear weapons). However, Hussein only reluctantly cooperated with the United Nations (UN) inspectors charged with ensur- ing he had destroyed his weapons, and it was clear for many years that he intended to rebuild his WMD pro- grams. Strict sanctions were imposed on Iraq, with the intention of weak- ening Hussein’s regime and forcing him to cooperate. These sanctions only strengthened his power because he used the aid meant for the Iraqi people to bolster his own supporters. During this entire time, Hussein’s public statements remained ex- tremely anti-American, although he could do little to strike back at the co- alition forces.

THE MARCH TO WAR In 2002, President George W. Bush (2001–2009), son of the president

I–

K

48

Iraqi War

who successfully led the coalition during the Persian Gulf War, argued that Saddam Hussein presented a real, immediate threat to the United States because of his stockpiled WMDs. Therefore, he asserted that the United States needed to invade Iraq and de- pose Hussein in order to neutralize the threat. Bush also alleged that Hus- sein was a supporter of Islamic ter- rorism. He was aided in his arguments by many other members of his admin- istration, including Vice President Richard B. Cheney (who had over- seen the Persian Gulf War as secre- tary of defense) and Secretary of State Colin Powell (who had helped plan and conduct the same war as chair- man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff). The official rationale for invading Iraq rested on questionable evidence, however. After the invasion, numer- ous intelligence agencies, includ- ing America’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Defense Intelli- gence Agency, alleged that the Bush administration had been highly selec- tive in accepting and interpreting evi- dence that supported its case against Hussein. In fact, some evidence, it was revealed, had been fabricated. Even before the invasion began, many questioned Bush’s rationale for war. Hussein had no history of cooperating with al Qaeda. Also, UN weapons inspectors that Hussein had allowed into the country in late 2002 had uncovered no evidence of WMDs.

INVASION AND AFTERMATH Bush issued an ultimatum on March 17, 2003, demanding that Hussein give up power within 48 hours.

Hussein defied this ultimatum, and the U.S.- and British-led invasion began on March 20. Several precision-guided bombs were dropped on targets in Baghdad where it was believed that Hussein was meeting with senior staff. Air- strikes followed against military and communications targets throughout Iraq, and several days later, ground troops invaded from Kuwait.

Armed Resistance Most regular Iraqi Army troops provided little resistance to the invaders, though heavy resis- tance came from paramilitary units organized by Hussein’s Ba’ath Party. (Ba’athists had always been his most dedicated supporters, both during the invasion and the guerrilla war af- terward.) By April 9, 2003, U.S. forces had taken control of Baghdad, though Hussein managed to avoid capture until December 13 of that year. Widespread looting and violence followed the collapse of Hussein’s government. Though coalition casu- alties had been exceedingly light during the invasion, a determined and elusive guerrilla force, or insur- gency, began killing many soldiers as well as civilians by the end of sum- mer 2003. Suicide bombers and im- provised explosive devices (IEDs), or bombs cobbled together and dis- guised as anything from roadside de- bris to children’s toys, had killed more than 1,000 American soldiers by November 2004.

Breakup of Iraqi Society Iraqi soci- ety had begun to disintegrate into four distinct segments: the majority of Shia Muslims; the minority Sunni

Iraqi War

49

Iraqi War ✪ 49 Saddam Hussein (1937–2006) For several decades, Saddam Hussein was one of the

Saddam Hussein (1937–2006)

For several decades, Saddam Hussein was one of the most recognizable and hated Middle Eastern leaders. He ruled Iraq in various capacities for more than 20 years. Born on April 28, 1937, near Tikrit, in northern Iraq, Hussein was a mediocre student and accomplished little before joining the Ba’ath Party in 1957. This revolutionary party advo- cated secular pan-Arabism (the estab- lishment of a united Arab nation) as well as an Arab form of socialism, a kind of government that controls, at least partially, a nation’s economy. After helping an Iraqi general stage a coup in 1958, then trying and failing to assassinate him in 1959, Hussein fled to Syria, then Egypt. He advanced within the Ba’ath Party and was re- warded for his support when his cousin, Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr, took over Iraq in another coup in 1968. Hussein used his position as head of

security forces to begin building his personal power. He developed a large network of Ba’athist supporters and essentially ran the country by 1979, when he forced al-Bakr to resign and declared himself president. Hussein transformed Iraq into a modern, secular state and maintained his power through the development of a massive apparatus of state terror. His numerous intelligence agencies spied on his people and ruthlessly tor- tured and killed many dissenters. Moreover, in the 1970s and 1980s he provided assistance to several terrorist organizations, including the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), in the pursuit of pan-Arabism. Hussein was captured by U.S. forces on December 14, 2003, and tried in an Iraqi court for war crimes. Found guilty, he was executed on December 30, 2006.

who had controlled the government for decades; Kurds in the north, who were a distinct ethnic group that had long sought independence; and non- religious Iraqis who wanted to re- build a civil democracy. Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish militias formed and struggled against each other as well as against the occupying forces.

MILITIAS, AL QAEDA, AND WESTERN RESPONSES Hussein’s regime had driven out many religious leaders, particularly

Shia Muslims who had ties with the Shia theocracy in Iran. When his re- gime fell, these leaders returned to Iraq and began a struggle for power that had long been denied to the majority Shia population. One of the most influential and dangerous Shia groups to form was the Mahdi Army, created by popular Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in June 2003. Tens of thousands strong, the Mahdi Army staged a bloody uprising on April 4, 2004, seizing several im- portant cities. Negotiations broke

I–

K

50

Iraqi War

down in May, when coalition forces launched successful counterattacks in Karbala, Ad Diwaniyah, An Najaf, and Sadr City. The fighting ceased in June only when al-Sadr directed the Mahdi Army to stop. The Mahdi Army remains a powerful political force, however. Other such militias continued to fight in Iraq, including groups that have explicitly associated themselves with al Qaeda. The leader of a group calling itself al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was one of the most wanted terrorists in the world from the time of the invasion to his death in June 2006. He was responsi- ble for hundreds of brutal deaths, some of which were recorded and broadcast in order to incite further violence among those resisting the occupation.

Ongoing Violence Although the pres- ence of foreign troops kept Iraq from dissolving completely into civil war, it was also one of the main factors that continued to provoke terrorist attacks and sectarian violence, or vio- lence occurring between different religious sects—mainly Shia and Sunni Muslims. While true democratic elec- tions had been held in Iraq for the first time in many decades, the coun- try’s infrastructure, economy, and governmental unity lay in ruins.

THE COST OF WAR The hopes of the Bush administration that Iraq would become a thriving de- mocracy had not become a reality by 2010. Some observers note that Iraq has become another breeding ground of terrorism. In addition, the various

peoples and religious sects have only been able to forge a fragile, somewhat unstable government. The human and financial cost of the Iraqi War also severely hampered U.S. efforts in Afghanistan to capture al Qaeda lead- ership and put an end to a resurgent Taliban, a fundamentalist Islamic group that had seized power there in the 1990s. Perhaps most detrimentally, worldwide opinion of the United States shifted dramatically following the 2003 invasion. Millions world- wide have protested Bush’s decisions regarding Iraq.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Baghdad; Bush, George W.; Iran; Taliban; Terrorist Organizations; Weapons of Mass Destruction; Al-Zarqawi, Abu Musab.

FURTHERREADING

Richie, Jason. Iraq and the Fall of Saddam Hussein. Minneapolis, Minn.: Oliver Press,

2003.

Rivera, Sheila. Operation Iraqi Freedom. Edina, Minn.: ABDO & Daughters, 2004. Shields, Charles J., and Rachel A. Koestler- Grack. Saddam Hussein. New York: Chel- sea House Publishers, 2005.

The War in Iraq: From the Front Lines to the Home Front. New York: Franklin Watts,

2008.

Islamic Fundamentalism

Term used to refer to a broad range of social, political, and religious movements that share the key charac- teristic of urging Muslims to con- duct their lives according to a literal, or strict, interpretation of the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book. The term is highly

Islamic Fundamentalism 51

controversial among Muslim and non- Muslim scholars alike. Some strains of Islamic funda- mentalism are incompatible with open societies such as those found in democratically elected republics. This incompatibility, along with the increasingly numerous acts of vio- lence committed by some militant Islamic fundamentalists (or Islamists), has resulted in a generally negative perception of Islamic fundamental- ism among non-Muslims.

CHARACTERISTICS Islamic fundamentalism depends on the idea that there is one true inter- pretation of the Qur’an—a strictly lit- eral one—and that any deviation from this interpretation in theory or prac- tice is at best mistaken and at worst sacrilegious. The term fundamental- ism originally referred to the Chris- tian belief in the literal truth of the Bible, but it has since been adapted to describe other faiths as well. Islamists believe that the Muslim world is in a state of decline, thanks to the domination of Western civiliza- tion. Western principles such as de- mocracy and the focus on individual liberties are at odds with Islam, which prioritizes submission to Allah (God) in all the forms prescribed by the Qur’an. According to the funda- mentalist view, a basic lack of piety in secular societies leads to immoral- ity. That such societies project their immorality into the Muslim world, through products, media, ideas, and even military force, is intolerable to Islamic fundamentalists. Accordingly, many Islamists seek to limit the influence of non-Muslim

cultures, particularly Western ones, on Muslim societies. They also seek to bring their societies in line with their literal interpretations of scrip- ture. Politically, these aims have manifested as agitation for Islamic governments whose laws are founded on the Qur’an. Another manifestation is a hostility, violent or not, toward Western societies and their values. As for the interpretation of scrip- ture, there exists in the Muslim world no universal agreement on sharia (Islamic law) or what exactly it pro- claims about how to live. Instead, a number of interpretive traditions teach different doctrines, though some basic principles do not vary from school to school.

Fundamentalist Doctrines All strains of Islamic fundamentalism insist on a return to the basics of Islam, as ex- pressed in the Qur’an and Hadith— accounts of the prophet Muhammad’s life that further reveal how Muslims should live. Over the 14 centuries since the religion’s inception, many strains of Islam have been mixed with local religious practices and customs, or have developed beyond a strictly literal interpretation of scripture. Fundamentalists believe that these deviations must be abandoned. The basic tenets of Islam are, of course, shared by all fundamental- ists. They believe that Muhammad (c. A.D. 570–632) received God’s final revelations, making him the last and greatest of a long line of prophets that extend back through the Chris- tian and Jewish traditions. These revelations were recorded in the Qur’an, which describes five “pillars”

I–

K

52

Islamic Fundamentalism

(religious practices) required of all Muslims. In addition to these five pil- lars, the Qur’an has rules for diet, dress, inheritance, and so forth. Vari- ous traditions of Islamic law have developed to apply these rules in practical situations, but the inter- pretation and prioritization of the Qur’an’s rules vary considerably among the traditions.

Opposition to Secular Govern- ments Another common fundamen- talist belief is a suspicion of, and even an outright antagonism toward, secular government. Most Islamic fundamentalists do not believe that religion and politics can be separated because the Qur’an gives ample in- struction on virtually every aspect of living for Muslims. Consequently, fundamentalists reason that if Islamic law is to be strictly observed, civil courts and political processes must be replaced with those founded on sharia to ensure accordance with scripture. A final point of commonality among the majority of fundamental- ists is that they view the world in a dualistic way. The Qur’an divides the world into two parts: the Muslim world and areas that have not yet been converted to Islam. Most funda- mentalists see themselves engaged in a struggle with the non-Muslim world, which they must either convert or conquer. Some interpret this struggle in violent terms, while others seek to spread Islam through peaceful means. As with all dualistic thought, this per- spective assumes only two possible states for everything: good or evil, high or low, inside or outside. Unfor- tunately, when the complexity and

diversity of human experience is re- duced to these terms, misunderstand- ings and open conflict often result.

HISTORY OF ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM Islamic fundamentalism is, at root, a reaction to modernizing and secular- izing European influences, including religious tolerance, equal rights for women, and the idea of free speech. Forms of fundamentalism have only existed for about two-and-a-half cen- turies, making them relatively recent. As the Muslim world declined in power with the fall of the Ottoman Empire in the early twentieth century, European countries grew to dominate the Middle East and North Africa both politically and economically. Funda- mentalism, which affirmed the inde- pendence and superiority of Muslim societies, grew as a result.

Beginning of the Movement The ear- liest fundamentalist movement of lasting importance was Wahhabism, founded on the ideas of the Islamic scholar Muhammad ibn Abd al- Wahhab (1703–1792). He con- demned what he saw as widespread moral decline and deviation from the Qur’an throughout the Arabian Pen- insula, and called for the abandon- ment of such practices as worship- ping saints and visiting tombs. His stance was extremely conservative and largely unpopular, though it was adopted by the powerful House of Saud, which would, over the follow- ing century and a half, conquer the Arabian Peninsula and establish the nation of Saudi Arabia. Today, Wah- habism is the official state religion of that country, one of several theocra- cies established by fundamentalists.

Islamic Fundamentalism

53

The Muslim Brotherhood A more re- cent and even more influential move- ment started in Egypt in 1928—the Society of the Muslim Brotherhood. Hassan al-Banna, its founder, sought to free Muslims from what he per- ceived as the corruption of secular- ism and Western culture. The Muslim Brotherhood grew rapidly in Egypt as well as throughout the Middle East. Its main goal was the overthrow of secular governments and the estab- lishment of theocracies based on sharia. The Brotherhood’s activities have always ranged from the charita- ble (building schools and clinics, pro- viding aid to the poor) to the violent (assassination attempts, armed upris- ings). Although al-Banna failed to es- tablish an Islamic state in Egypt, his ideas became highly influential.

Recent Developments Two individu- als who furthered the cause of Islamic fundamentalism were Sayyid Qutb (1906–1966) and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1902–1989). Qutb, a prominent Egyptian literary and so- cial critic, was directly involved with the Muslim Brotherhood beginning in the 1950s. His Islamic beliefs were strong since childhood and were in- tensified by a brief period of graduate study in the United States. Qutb was disgusted by what he saw as signs of moral depravity in American culture (including materialism, individual freedoms, and fascination with trivial entertainment). He was also dis- tressed by the weakness of Egypt’s government in the face of Western powers. Qutb was briefly imprisoned for his vocal opposition to Egypt’s gov- ernment in the 1950s, after which he

wrote one of the most influential manifestos of fundamentalist Islam:

Ma’alim fi-l-Tariq (Milestones). He felt that only an Islamic government could prevent the excesses and moral failures he despised in Western na- tions as well as in Egypt’s secular gov- ernment. Qutb was executed in 1966 on charges of plotting assassinations of government officials. For this, he is widely regarded as a martyr, dying for his religious beliefs. Milestones became one of the most influential texts in the modern Muslim world. Many fundamentalists and fundamentalist terrorist organi- zations, including al Qaeda, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and Hizbollah in Leba- non, adopted key ideas from it. Qutb effectively redefined jihad as an ex- plicitly violent struggle against the morally corrupt Western nations. He also called for the development of a global Islamic movement to establish sharia in all countries, so that all hu- mans would live according to divine law instead of what he saw as the im- perfect, arbitrary, and abusive secular systems.

Fundamentalism in Iran Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, another Islamic fundamentalist who profoundly changed the modern world, also fer- vently opposed the secular govern- ment of his native country of Iran. By the 1960s, Khomeini was a major re- ligious scholar with a widespread fol- lowing, and when he publicly con- demned Iran’s leader, Shah Moham- mad Reza Pahlavi, his arrest sparked riots throughout Iran. He was exiled to Iraq in 1964, though he continued to urge his followers to revolt. Many other groups apart from fundamen-

I–

K

54

Islamic Fundamentalism

talists were dissatisfied with the shah’s oppressive government, and by the late 1970s, they had formed a coalition that culminated in the Ira- nian Revolution of 1979. Through this revolution, Kho- meini established a theocracy in Iran based on a fundamentalist inter- pretation of Shia Islam. Since then, Iran has been a strong supporter of militant fundamentalists, as well as an inspiration to those who hope to establish theocracies in their own countries.

ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM AND TERRORISM Because of its profoundly anti- Western, anti-secular orientation, Is- lamic fundamentalism has inspired numerous Islamic terrorist organiza- tions. This is problematic for the many fundamentalists who are not militant, or not as radical as terrorists, because they share many of the same beliefs and are therefore vulnerable to being confused with militants.

Types of Fundamentalist Groups The most notorious organizations with a fundamentalist orientation include al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hizbollah. While al Qaeda is little more than a terrorist organization, Hamas and Hizbollah are also political parties and social movements. The violent tactics of all three groups have killed thousands worldwide. They also have served to polarize the Muslim world as well as to negatively affect the non-Muslim world’s collective perception of Islam. The political gains made by Hamas and Hizbollah in the last several

decades have helped rally fundamen- talists to their causes, while al Qaeda’s ranks have grown in the past decade in response to its successful attacks on September 11, 2001, as well as to the consequent U.S.-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. On the other hand, many Muslims have also be- come disillusioned with these organi- zations and their aims because they have killed a great number of Mus- lims as well as non-Muslims.

Islamic Fundamentalism Today Is- lamic fundamentalism is a powerful force in the world because it seeks to improve political, social, and eco- nomic conditions in majority Muslim countries. Many of these conditions have not been successfully addressed by sometimes corrupt and oppressive secular governments, a fact that pro- vides powerful evidence for funda- mentalist arguments. However, the record of violence, human rights abuses, and religious oppression committed by Islamic fundamentalists provides equally powerful evidence against their cause. Scholars from many disciplines argue that until oppressive social conditions—including widespread and persistent poverty, lack of ade- quate education and health care, and economic systems dominated by for- eign nations—are improved, Islamic fundamentalism will remain a potent global force.

See also: Al Qaeda; Gaza Strip and the West Bank; Hamas; Hizbollah; Iran; Iraqi War; Jihad; London Bombings (2005); September 11, 2001; Taliban; Terrorist Organizations.

Istanbul Bombings (2003)

55

FURTHERREADING

Gerges, Fawaz A. Journey of the Jihadist:

Inside Muslim Militancy. Orlando, Fla.:

Harcourt, 2006.

Ojeda, Auriana. Islamic Fundamentalism. San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven Press, Thomson/ Gale, 2003. Whitehead, Kim. Islamic Fundamentalism. Broomall, Pa.: Mason Crest Publishers,

2004.

Wright, Lawrence. The Looming Tower: Al- Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. New York:

Knopf, 2006.

Istanbul Bombings (2003)

Four terrorist attacks carried out by suicide bombers driving trucks full of explosives into two synagogues, a British bank, and the British Consul- ate in Istanbul, Turkey. The syna- gogue attacks occurred on November 15, 2003, while the other attacks oc- curred on November 20. Together, these attacks claimed nearly 60 lives and resulted in more than 700 inju- ries. The international terrorist organization al Qaeda claimed re- sponsibility for the attacks.

LOCAL OUTRAGE These violent attacks shocked Turkey, which, though it had been experienc- ing an upsurge in fundamentalist Islamic sentiment, remained a secu- lar nation that identified strongly with Europe and Western culture. Most of the dead and wounded were, in fact, Turkish Muslims. Because al Qaeda was responsible for killing Muslims, Turkish public opinion turned solidly against the group. Turkish investigators questioned dozens of suspects, of whom 74 even- tually stood trial. They claimed that

Osama bin Laden, founder and leader of al Qaeda, had given them money and instructions as early as 2001, though they had formed an indepen- dent terror cell before then that was unconnected but sympathetic to al Qaeda. The leaders, including the Turk Harun Ilhan and the Syrian Loai al-Saqa, were sentenced to life in prison. Al-Saqa remains at large, but Ilhan and five other Turks were jailed.

WORLDWIDE RESPONSE The international reaction was one of immediate sympathy and solidarity. Syria, which lies to the south of Tur- key, condemned the attacks and re- turned for trial more than 20 suspects who had fled from Turkey. The motivation for the attacks seemed to be one basic to terrorist actions: to sow fear among perceived enemies by demonstrating the ease with which the terrorists can wreak havoc and take innocent lives. To- gether with other attacks in Indone- sia, Madrid, and London, the 2003 Istanbul bombings clearly demon- strated the global scale of the menace posed by al Qaeda and by militants in general.

I–

K

See also: Al Qaeda; Bali Attacks (2002); Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamen- talism; Jihad; London Bombings (2005); Madrid Bombings (2004); Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Wagner, Heather Lehr. Turkey. New York:

Chelsea House, 2008. Williams, Julie. Islam: Understanding the History, Beliefs, and Culture. Berkeley Heights, N.J.: Enslow, 2008.

56

Jihad

Jihad

“Struggle” or “battle,” often translated as “holy war.” The concept of jihad is more expansive than a literal war against perceived enemies of Islam, however. It incorporates violent as well as nonviolent meanings and in a broad sense refers to any kind of struggle on behalf of Islam. There are four main ways of un- dertaking jihad: by the heart (strug- gling to overcome evil in oneself); the tongue (using words to spread Islam and to draw attention to wrong- doing); the hand (doing right and correcting wrongdoing); and the sword (fighting physically for Islam, either against enemies or unbeliev- ers). Because Islamic fundamental- ists have often invoked the term when calling for resistance against, or hostile action directed at, non- Muslims, people in Western nations have tended to associate jihad with the notion of a holy war undertaken to spread Islam.

VIOLENT JIHAD According to fiqh, or “Islamic juris- prudence,” jihad by the sword is the only form of warfare allowed by the Qur’an. It is not intended to convert non-Muslims to the faith but to de- fend the Islamic state. However, ac- cording to the interpretations of some Islamic scholars, including fun- damentalists, jihad can include the aim of establishing Islamic rule through violence. The term was in- voked, for instance, to establish sev- eral Islamic caliphates in sub-Saharan Africa in the eighteenth and nine- teenth centuries.

A particularly influential funda- mentalist scholar, Abdul Ala Mawdudi (1903–1979), insisted that jihad is a basic duty of all Muslims, the real sub- stance of Islam without which all re- ligious practices are empty and meaningless. Mawdudi’s vision of jihad also focused on violent resis- tance to any oppression. Jihad in this sense is a means of liberating Muslims from non-Muslim rule as well as a means of establishing Islamic rule when a Muslim leader does not en- force sharia, or Islamic law. This vision of jihad grew very in- fluential in the twentieth century, supplying many terrorist organiza- tions with a religious justification for their otherwise illicit, destructive, and fundamentally political actions. The terrorist groups Hamas, Hizbol- lah, and al Qaeda have all declared their intent to replace secular gov- ernments in Southwest Asia with Is- lamic states, and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini led a jihad that established an Islamic theocracy in Iran in 1979. Led by Osama bin Laden, the mujahi- deen who drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan in the late 1980s saw themselves as waging jihad in defense of Islam, while the jihad al Qaeda now wages against Western powers and their perceived allies is surely of this second kind: violence committed as a means of resistance.

NONVIOLENT JIHAD The conception of jihad as a violent means to establish or defend Islamic rule remains the majority view in modern Islam. This view has been strengthened by the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which have

Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998)

57

resulted in a great loss of life and have come to be perceived as hostile take- overs by a non-Muslim foreign power. However, a significant minority of Muslims understands the term pri- marily in the “by the heart” sense: as an internal, spiritual struggle, or as a broader, religiously based struggle against some social ill. For example, jihad has been declared on poverty in Tunisia. Some Islamic scholars even argue that the use of any violence is expressly forbidden by the Qur’an. While Western scholars tend to emphasize the originally expansive notion of jihad, nonviolent jihad has not yet had any effect on changing the idea of violent jihad. That is, be- lievers in violent jihad, especially Is- lamic militants, have continued to grow in number and find increasing support for their aims among popula- tions that have been harmed or op- pressed by non-Muslim powers.

CONFUSION OVER JIHAD Thus, jihad today is a highly charged and somewhat unclear term. While it can indicate a nonviolent and indi- vidual struggle of the spirit, its use as a kind of call-to-arms for violent action against non-Muslims or Mus- lims thought to have betrayed their faith in some way has resulted in uncounted deaths and untold de- struction. Leaders of extremist orga- nizations are well aware of the confusion over its meaning and have invoked jihad in both senses simulta- neously, calling for violent support from their followers while deflecting criticism by insisting that jihad only indicates peaceful struggle. This con- fusion is unlikely to disappear as long

as extremists see their actions as a legitimate form of jihad.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Al- Zawahiri, Ayman; Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamentalism; Mujahideen; Taliban; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Haugen, David M. Islamic Fundamentalism. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Katz, Samuel M. Jihad: Islamic Fundamental- ist Terrorism. Minneapolis, Minn.: Lerner Publications Co., 2004. Lewis, Bernard. The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror. New York: Modern Library, 2003.

Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998)

Two coordinated terrorist attacks on U.S. embassies in Africa—one in Nai- robi, Kenya, and the second in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, both carried out on August 7, 1998. These attacks killed 224 people and wounded more than 4,500 more. The attacks marked a turning point in public awareness of al Qaeda, the terrorist organization founded and led by Osama bin Laden and which was behind the attacks. The bombings demonstrated the vul- nerability of U.S. facilities overseas and foreshadowed the broader ter- rorist campaign al Qaeda would begin to undertake against the United States and its allies. Al Qaeda essentially stepped onto the world stage with these embassy attacks. Unfortunately, retaliatory strikes ordered by President Bill Clinton (1993–2001) resulted in increased hostility toward the United States, because one strike was

I–

K

58

Kenya and Tanzania Bombings (1998)

misdirected and the others proved ineffectual. As a result of the investi- gations that followed, Osama bin Laden was placed on the Federal Bu- reau of Investigation’s Ten Most Wanted list.

THE ATTACKS The bombings were carried out with explosive-filled trucks only 10 min- utes apart, despite a distance of 400 miles (644 km) between the bomb- ing sites. The level of coordination and expertise behind the attacks im- mediately indicated a serious threat from an organization with substantial resources. Although U.S. embassies were targeted, few Americans were killed. Most of the casualties were local people working in nearby build- ings or passing by on the streets. The Nairobi attack, which came at 10:30 A.M., far outstripped the one in Dar es Salaam in terms of casualties and destruction. More than 4,000 people were wounded and around 211 killed in the Kenyan capital, and while the embassy survived the at- tack, a nearby office building was completely destroyed. The second at- tack in Dar es Salaam came at 10:40 A.M. when a refrigeration truck ex- ploded outside the front gate of the U.S. embassy there, killing security guards and Tanzanians working in- side the building.

MOTIVATION Soon after the attacks, claims of re- sponsibility were faxed to news out- lets in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Paris. These stated that the bombings were meant to force American troops out of all Muslim lands, particularly Saudi Arabia (Is-

lam’s holy land), where American forces had been stationed since 1990, in preparation for the Persian Gulf War (1991). Osama bin Laden offered several contradictory explanations for the at- tacks, including U.S. participation in the early 1990s United Nations (UN) peacekeeping mission in Somalia, a predominantly Muslim country. How- ever, investigations since then have turned up evidence that bin Laden was, in fact, trying to lure the United States into Afghanistan, where al Qaeda was primarily based. Provok- ing the United States with these bombings might have led to a com- plex military commitment in Afghan- istan, a country with a history of hindering large-scale military inva- sions through a combination of cultural factors and difficult terrain. If this was indeed bin Laden’s ulti- mate goal, he did not achieve it with the East African bombings but rather with the September 11, 2001, attacks.

AFTERMATH AND U.S. RESPONSE Four men were prosecuted for the bombings: Mohamed Rashed al- Owhali (Saudi), Mohamed Sadeek Odeh (Jordanian), Khalfan Khamis Mohamed (Tanzanian), and Wadih el-Hage (Lebanese-born, but a natu- ralized U.S. citizen). All four had ties to bin Laden, and one, Odeh, de- scribed himself as an al Qaeda soldier. During the trial, which began in Janu- ary 2001, the connections between bin Laden, the mujahideen, the So- viet-Afghanistan war, the U.S. military presence in Southwest Asia, and al Qaeda was made clear for the first

London Bombings (2005)

59

time in public. All four men were jailed, despite U.S. insistence on the death penalty. The immediate U.S. response to the attacks was ineffective and highly controversial. On August 20, 1998, President Clinton ordered a series of cruise missile strikes on targets in Sudan and Afghanistan. The Sudanese target, the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum North, was the country’s primary source of medi-

cine. After it was destroyed, an inves- tigation revealed no evidence that it was a chemical weapons plant, as the Clinton administration had been wrongly informed by its advis- ers. The Afghanistan strikes targeted

al Qaeda training camps, but later in-

vestigation revealed that the camps

were largely empty at the time. Un- fortunately, these strikes bolstered support for al Qaeda among militant Muslims.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamental- ism; Jihad; Mujahideen; Somalia; Ter- rorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Akhahenda, Elijah F. When Blood and Tears United a Country: The Bombing of the American Embassy in Kenya. Lanham, Md.:

University Press of America, 2002. Ferguson, Amanda. The Attack Against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2003. Hirsch, Susan F. In the Moment of Greatest Calamity: Terrorism, Grief, and a Victim’s Quest for Justice. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2006.

L–N

London Bombings (2005)

A series of bomb attacks carried out

in London, England, on July 7, 2005, on a bus as well as on three London Underground trains. These terrorist attacks, the biggest and deadliest ever on London’s transit system, killed 52 people and wounded more than

700.

The attacks were carried out by four suicide bombers, all of whom were British-born Muslims. Two of the bombers videotaped statements explaining their motivations; these videos were later aired by the Arab news network Al Jazeera. Although they were not connected with any terrorist organization, they echoed

many sentiments of militant Mus- lims to the effect that Western societ- ies need to be destroyed because of their oppression of Islam. The bomb- ers were motivated in part by Great Britain’s participation in the U.S.-led invasions of Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

TIMELINE AND INVESTIGATION Three bombs exploded on three dif- ferent trains of the London Under- ground at 8:50 A.M. on July 7, 2005. The fourth bomb exploded at 9:47 A.M. on the back of a double-decker bus. All four bombers were killed. These bombings, which occurred without any warning, stunned the world. They were immediately

L–

N

60

London Bombings (2005)

Tony Blair on the London Bombings I n response to the devastating 7/7 attacks in

Tony Blair on the London Bombings

I n response to the devastating 7/7 attacks in London, British prime minister Tony Blair delivered a speech

on July 16 in which he identified the true cause of such attacks, what he called the evil ideology that drove extremists to kill in the belief that they would go to heaven as a result.

Senseless though any such horrible murder is, it was not without sense for its organis- ers. It had a purpose. It was done according to a plan. It was meant. What we are confronting here is an evil ideology. It is not a clash of civilisa- tions—all civilised people, Muslim or other, feel revul- sion at it. But it is a global struggle and it is a battle of ideas, hearts and minds, both within Islam and outside it. This is the battle that must be won, a battle not just about the terrorist methods but their views. Not just their barbaric acts, but their bar- baric ideas. Not only what they do but what they think and the thinking they would impose on They demand the elimina- tion of Israel; the withdrawal of all Westerners from Mus- lim countries, irrespective of the wishes of people and government.

We don’t have to wonder what type of country those states would be. Afghanistan was such a state. Girls put out of school. Women denied even rudimentary rights. Peo- ple living in abject poverty and oppression. All of it justi- fied by reference to religious

The idea that elected gov- ernments are the preserve of those of any other faith or culture is insulting and wrong. Muslims believe in democracy just as much as any other faith and, given the chance, show

The spirit of our age is one in which the prejudices of the past are put behind us, where our diversity is our strength. It is this which is under attack. Moderates are not moderate through weak- ness but through strength. Now is the time to show it in defence of our common values.

Madrid Bombings (2004)

61

likened to the September 11, 2001, attacks that al Qaeda carried out against the United States and are referred to in a similar way (as 7/7, whereas the American attacks are referred to as 9/11). Because of increased security measures put in place after the blasts, a second round of attempted suicide bombings was stopped on July 21, 2005.

Simple Materials Investigations soon revealed that the bombers had been caught on security cameras as they boarded the trains and bus. The bombs were created from simple materials that required little exper- tise to assemble. The plan was also quite simple. These details were deeply disturbing, since they raised the question of how many other “homegrown terrorists” might be planning similar attacks, or how many others might have been inspired by the bombings.

The Perpetrators The four bombers were soon identified as Hasib Mir Hussain (an 18-year-old college stu- dent), Mohammad Sifique Khan (a teaching assistant and youth worker), Germaine Lindsay (a 19-year-old), and Shehzad Tanweer (a young university graduate). Both Lindsay and Khan were married, expectant fathers. In two videotaped statements (made before the attacks) that were aired by Al Jazeera on September 1, 2005, and July 6, 2006, Khan and Tanweer spoke about their devotion to Islam and their anger at the ac- tions taken by Western governments against Muslims worldwide. They described their attacks as partial

retaliation for British support of the United States and Israel.

A NEW ERA Although London had experienced occasional terrorist attacks prior to 7/7, those attacks were mostly the work of the Irish Republican Army (IRA), a terrorist organization that had been fighting for the reunifica- tion of Northern Ireland (part of the United Kingdom) with the Irish Republic. In a sense, the 7/7 attacks marked a new era in British history, much as 9/11 started a new chapter of American history. Britain’s Muslim and Arab-descended citizens were re- garded with newfound suspicion, while the British Muslim community was further polarized by the violent tactics. Many expressed solidarity with Britain’s open, democratic soci- ety and denounced the attacks.

See also: Afghanistan; Al Jazeera; Is- lamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; Madrid Bombings (2004); September 11, 2001; Sleeper Cells; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Langley, Andrew. The Bombing of London 2005. Oxford: Raintree, 2006. Stewart, Gail B. The London Transit System Bombings. Detroit: Lucent Books/Thomson Gale, 2006.

L–

N

Madrid Bombings (2004)

Series of 10 coordinated bombings targeting the commuter train system of Madrid, Spain, which took place on March 11, 2004. The bombings, which killed 191 people and injured

62

Madrid Bombings (2004)

about 1,800 more, are the deadliest attacks during a time of peace in Spanish history. An investigation into the attacks lasting nearly two years concluded that there was no direct link with al Qaeda, although the terrorist organi- zation stated that it was “proud” of the attacks. Instead, the attacks were carried out by a loose organization of Moroccan, Syrian, and Algerian Mus- lims inspired by al Qaeda. As such, this group constituted a sleeper cell. The bombings, which took place three days before Spain’s general elections, greatly influenced Spain’s new government.

THE ATTACKS A total of 10 bombs were exploded aboard four commuter trains at the peak of rush hour on March 11, 2004. The explosions all took place be- tween 7:37 and 7:39 A.M. Bomb dis- posal units discovered three more bombs left unexploded and defused them. The four trains were either stopped at or just outside three train stations: Atocha Station, El Pozo del Tío Raimundo Station, and San Euge- nia Station. The victims of the attacks came from 17 different countries, but the majority were Spanish. The attacks shocked the country and the world. Over the following several days, about one-fourth of Spain’s 45 million people partici- pated in protests against terrorism and held memorial services. The day of the attacks has come to be known as 3/11 (mimicking the 9/11 that stands for the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States), or, in Spanish, 11-M.

POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS The perpetrators of the attacks were not immediately known. Speculation arose that Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA), a Basque separatist group, was responsible, but this was quickly disproven. (ETA has committed many acts of terrorism against Spain to try and achieve its goal of creating an in- dependent Basque state; the Basques are an ethnic group who live in north- ern Spain near the French border.) It is clear, for example, that had ETA been involved the Partido Popular, or People’s Party (PP), likely would have remained in power. However mas- sive demonstrations against Prime Minister José María Aznar’s govern- ment on the day before the election helped guarantee a victory for the Socialist Party, led by José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.

MOTIVATION The bombs were set off by suicide bombers carrying backpacks, a fact that helped investigators trace the support and training given to the per- petrators. A militant Islamic organiza- tion in Morocco, the Islamist Combat Group, was identified as a likely source for this support. This organi- zation has been known to provide logistical support for al Qaeda opera- tives, although the Madrid attacks were not officially sanctioned nor directed by al Qaeda. A group of seven suspects blew themselves up on April 3, 2004, when police surrounded their apartment in Leganés, a Madrid suburb. Twenty- one men were eventually found guilty of participating in the attacks, three of whom were given the maximum

Mujahideen

63

Spanish prison sentence of 40 years for their leadership: Jamal Zougam (Moroccan), Othman el Gnaoui (Mo- roccan), and Jose Emilio Suarez Trashorras (Spanish).

SIGNIFICANCE The Madrid bombings were particu- larly shocking because they occurred in a country unused to terrorist attacks by Islamic militants. How- ever, because their perpetrators were acting on their own rather than on instructions from al Qaeda or any other group, these attacks potentially pointed to a new and more troubling phase in the global struggle against terrorism, one in which independent cells of terror- ists might operate in Western na- tions without the direction of a centralized organization.

See also: Al Qaeda; Bin Laden, Osama; Islamic Fundamentalism; Jihad; London Bombings (2005); Septem- ber 11, 2001; Sleeper Cell; Terrorist Organizations.

FURTHERREADING

Barrett, Jane. “Court finds 21 guilty of Ma- drid train bombings.” 31 October 2007. Reuters. Available online. URL: http://