The Center for Public Integrity

TEL AVIV, Israel — One of Israel's most controversial anti-terrorism tactics has been its policy of targeted killings of suspects believed to be planning attacks. Since the start of the second Palestinian intifada, or uprising, in the fall of 2000, dozens of members of the Palestinian groups such as Hamas, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Islamic Jihad have been assassinated by Israeli military and security forces. As American intelligence and armed forces continue to employ many Israeli counterterrorism and interrogation techniques, the question of whether targeted killings have become another arrow in the American quiver looms large.

Jordan, according to a U.S. State Department request that Congress appropriate the country nearly $500 million in 2007 military aid, continues "to lead the way as a regional model for democracy, good governance, economic reform, and tolerance."

Jordan, according to the State Department's 2005 Country Report on Human Rights Practices, has police and security forces that "allegedly abused detainees during detention and interrogation and reportedly also used torture." The U.N. special rapporteur on torture said in June 2006 that torture is "systematically practiced" at prisons run by the Jordanian intelligence agency.

Jordan, according to Amnesty International, is a "key hub" in the United States' secret program of "extraordinary rendition," in which terrorism suspects are kidnapped and flown to secret prisons or to countries known for torture.

The Kingdom of Jordan, long a U.S. ally, is a tangle of internal contradictions — and since 9/11, U.S.-Jordan counterterrorism efforts have made the tangle even knottier.

A major ingredient of this foreign policy stew is Jordan's strategic placement on the world map: It shares borders with both Iraq and Israel, as well as with Syria and Saudi Arabia. Another major ingredient is Jordan's historically consistent pro-U.S. foreign policy.

ICIJ's database of U.S. military assistance, compiled from data obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, shows that in the three years after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks Jordan received $2.7 billion in military aid from the U.S. government, a 170 percent increase from the roughly $1 billion it received in the three years prior to the attacks; it is now the fourth-largest recipient of U.S. military aid, after Israel, Egypt and Pakistan. Jordan was also one of the countries that the United States reimbursed, with little congressional oversight, for its help in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Despite an offer of $6 billion in cash from the United States in the weeks leading up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, the Turkish Parliament voted against allowing U.S. troops to use Turkish territory as a base for launching a northern front against Iraq.

With that rejection, the United States quickly learned that Turkey was no longer the predictable NATO ally of the Cold War years. Many in Washington were outraged, including then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who later blamed Ankara's lack of cooperation for some of the subsequent U.S. misfortunes in Iraq.

The grant resulted in part from an aggressive lobbying campaign headed by a former speaker of the House of Representatives, Louisiana Republican Bob Livingston, whose lobbying firm has represented the Turkish government since 2000 for an annual retainer of $1.8 million, Department of Justice records show. However, that didn't slow down the Washington lobbyists for the Turkish government, and it certainly didn't stop the flow of U.S. funds to a country with a long history of human rights abuses. In 2003 Congress appropriated a $1 billion grant to Turkey as a disincentive, in part, for Ankara to unilaterally invade northern Iraq, where Turkey has fought its own war against the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) for many years.

As war preparations were under way, many in Congress were disappointed that Turkey was unwilling to let the United States use Turkey as a staging ground for an invasion of Iraq. Former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, a California Republican now serving time in prison for an unrelated bribery conviction, introduced an amendment that would have deleted the proposed $1 billion Economic Support Fund grant to Turkey from the 2003 war supplemental bill.

One of the most significant fallouts from the U.S. war on terror has been the strain on America's historically strong relationship with Europe.

Allegations of secret CIA prisons in Europe and European governments' complicity with the kidnappings of terror suspects (known as "extraordinary renditions") have irritated trans-Atlantic relations, stressed the NATO alliance and jeopardized U.S. national security priorities, including maintaining an international coalition in Iraq.

Allegations began to surface about secret CIA prisons in Europe in late 2005, after the Washington Post revealed the existence of "black site" prisons there. By the time the European Parliament released its initial findings about the covert program in June 2006, European public outcry was swift and shrill.

"Bush exposes not only his own previous lies," said Sarah Ludford, a British member of the European Parliament, "he also exposes to ridicule those arrogant government leaders in Europe who dismissed as unfounded our fears about extraordinary rendition." In that practice, military or intelligence agents operating outside the normal judicial system seize terrorist suspects and spirit them away for questioning in secret locations, often to countries known to employ torture.

Evidence of covert cooperation between the CIA and European intelligence agencies continued to mount. Revelations about the involvement of Italian intelligence services in the abduction of Egyptian-born cleric Abu Omar off the streets of Milan shook the Italian government and has led to the indictment of half a dozen Italian officers as well as 26 Americans. It also led to a constitutional crisis in Italy, with the government claiming that state secrets should trump the judicial investigation and prevent disclosure of documents that could confirm Italian complicity in the CIA kidnapping. 

PORTSMOUTH, England — A plane lands in darkness and is directed to a far corner of an airfield, well out of public view. A group of men described as "masked ninjas" — wearing black overalls and hoods with slits for their eyes, nose and mouth — descend the aircraft steps and make their way to a nearby airport building. Inside a small room the detainee is waiting under armed guard, perhaps already blindfolded. He is immediately hooded as a process known as a "twenty-minute takeout" begins. Soon he is aboard the plane, on his way to another country to be harshly interrogated and possibly tortured.

That is what happened to two Egyptian asylum seekers in Sweden on December 18, 2001, and to numerous other terrorist suspects since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Events like this rarely happened before 9/11, but many sources claim that the CIA began frequent use of the practice almost immediately afterward. Now its pattern is familiar and so is its odd name: "extraordinary rendition."

The United States has never acknowledged such renditions, but the CIA's activities have been extensively studied and documented by European and other governments, as well as organizations that monitor human rights violations. One such inquiry, by Sweden's parliamentary ombudsman, was set in motion when the Egyptian asylum seekers were swept away — and Sweden landed in hot water with the United Nations Human Rights Committee.