The repercussions of September 11th have profoundly reinforced the continued importance of the nation-state, territory and the politics of identity. It has also provoked renewed interest in empire and imperial behaviour with specific reference to the George W. Bush administration and the occupation of Iraq in 2003 (see Hardt and Negri 2000, Flint 2003, Hyndman 2003, Ferguson 2004). Critical geopolitics and allied disciplines such as International Relations and Ethics have quite rightly investigated how geographical expressions such as ‘axis of evil’ have reinforced representations of the United States as not only a ‘vulnerable’ state but also a morally righteous imperial state (see for example Singer 2004). This has been important in vindicating and legitimating US military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as placing further restrictions on international air travel and civil liberties within the United States. Likewise, those who oppose, for example, the 2003 invasion of Iraq define their responses as inherently directed against an identifiably territorial presence: the United States. External enemies and dangers continue to play an important role in reinforcing domestic identities and politics within states. The decision by Spanish voters to elect a new government in March 2004 reflected an overwhelming rejection of Prime Minister Aznar’s close association with the American-sponsored ‘war on terror’ following terrorist attacks on Madrid’s railway stations that were initially blamed on the Basque separatist group ETA.