EU responses to international terrorism

Definition of terrorism

• Schmit & Jongman: ‘an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-)clandestine individuals, groups or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby- in contrast to assassination- the direct targets of violence are not the main targets […] (but) serve as message generators,

• Differences with insurgency or warfare: its psychological impact (anxiety and fear) on society is far greater than its material consequences (physical harm to persons and property)

• Transnational character of terrorism• Different constituencies and motivations

Social construction of threat perception

• Various interpretations of threats

• Causes and motivations

• Responses

• MSs’ perceptions of the threat: different experiences of the MSs, different political systems and cultures, Muslim population in the EU countries

• ESS

Early stages of EC counter-terrorism cooperation

The TREVI group• set up in 1975• Comprised of interior and justice ministers as well as police chiefs• Operation: a telex system for circulating among interior ministers,

police forces and security services (separate from the EPC, the foreign ministers, the Commission, and the Council); useful operational coordination in terms of contacts, exchange of information, adoption of a more interoperable communication techniques)

• Met biannually• TREVI did not arrive at consensus on a common definition of

terrorism, improved extradition procedure, refugee or asylum policies

• Explanations: difference in threat perception and different judicial systems

Post 9/11 responses• The European Council, ‘Action Plan on Combating Terrorism’, November

2001: calls for legislation (under the Community method) and voluntary adaptation through peer reviews and identification of best practices; many of these measures were not exclusively or primarily targeted at terrorist activities; they have led to changes across policy areas: intelligence, law enforcement, border control, capital control and foreign policy

• A counter-terrorism strategy, December 2005• 51 adopted and 33 proposed pieces of legislation as well as 22

Commission’s Communications and 21 Reports under the heading of the fight against terrorism

• The Office of a EU’s counter-terrorism coordinator- established in 2004; largely symbolic powers; no resources and competences (to propose legislation or share Council’s meetings)

• The European Police Office (Europol) – re-establishment of Joint Investigative teams and reporting duties on terrorist activities

• The Situation Center (SitCen)- increased role in assessing terrorist-related intelligence; limited staff and no explicit legal mandate

Post 9/11 responses

• Policy priorities and objectives: -No coherent and ranked set of objectives, the level of

action and the method of coordination-to facilitate policing and intelligence sharing; an

overwhelming majority of measures were not exclusively focused on terrorism and aimed at combating crime (European Arrest Warrant and the Evidence Warrant)

• Governing models; community and intergovernmental methods; growth of horizontal networks

• Accountability, legitimacy and performance problemsVery little done on tackling the root causes of terrorismErosion of democratic, legal and social norms