The focus of the first presidential debate, security and foreign policy, highlights growing public concern over the much-debated potential for an “October Surprise” that might disrupt the November elections. As both parties hurl accusations that the other will receive the benefit of any pre-election scenario, is anything being done to alleviate growing public anxiety? Does pondering the possibility of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, cancelled elections or ballot box snafus prepare us for anything or just make us more afraid of everything?

• Since 9/11 not a single terrorist attack has taken place on U.S. soil.

Many analysts have met the U.S. response to the threat of terrorism with a critical eye. How might we respond differently to a new terrorist attack? How has our ‘war on terror’ affected the world’s view of us in an ever-shrinking global community? Can we afford to alienate potential allies? What would terrorists want to accomplish by attacking us on our own soil? What other approaches might be effective in combating terrorism?

• Determine terrorist patterns to understand their motivations and evaluate their likely actions.
  
  
• Restore collaborative strategies with allies and forge cooperative relations with the Muslim world.
  
  
• Combat the root causes of terrorism: repressive regimes, failed states, inequality, humiliation, and the aftermath of colonial submission.

As the election draws closer, public fear is high not only about the threat of terror but the security of our vote. Talk of possible needs to cancel elections, following on the heels of questions about electronic voting and voter harassment raises concerns. Is there a legal framework protecting elections and precedents for canceling elections? How can we be sure we won’t be the victims of partisan “dirty tricks?”

• Two groups of independent experts will monitor the November elections. The State Department invited the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, a 55 nation body that encourages mutual election monitoring; and 20 democracy experts from 15 countries called on by activist group “Global Exchange” will be present in high stake states.

After 9/11 over half of people polled reported feeling a loss of security, difficulty sleeping and an increase in use of safety precautions when opening mail and attending public events. As the elections approach, what can we as citizens to do to control our fear instead of letting it control us? What can we learn from those who have gone through the worst of the aftermath of 9/11 or terrorist tactics in other parts of the world?

What is the best, and the worst that can happen from any potential “October Surprise?” Can we acknowledge both potentials and still go about our daily lives without living in fear? Do our warning systems better prepare us or create more anxiety? What can we do to make them more effective? What makes an individual or organization decide to blow up a building, crash a plane or takeover a school? In our race to combat terrorism, what steps have we taken to understand the motivations and social and political contexts that create terrorists? Can we predict a terrorist strike? Can we keep our fears from influencing our decision-making abilities this election season? How do we protect our nation while preserving the very ideals of civil liberties and justice derived from our constitution?