European Union Counter-terrorism Research Articles

Conspicuous by their absence? The member states in European Union counter-terrorism

ABSTRACT This article investigates member state influence on the making of EU counter-terrorism policy. Crucially, member states have not been viewed as major drivers of change in EU counter-terrorism, despite their experience of attacks, policy expertise, and the domestic salience of the issue. To address this gap, I show how member states acted as policy entrepreneurs during EU Passenger Name Records (EU-PNR), on which final agreement was reached in 2016. Specifically, I demonstrate that the UK Home Office was a prominent, long-term actor in the development of the EU’s counter-terrorism policy and worked with the Commission to build an alliance in favour of EU-PNR. However, it was only with the ‘window of opportunity’ presented by jihadi terrorist attacks between 2015 and 2016 that members of the French government were finally able to pressure critical elements of the European Parliament into agreement.

Collective securitization and crisification of EU policy change: two decades of EU counterterrorism policy

ABSTRACT One of the founding fathers of the European Union (EU) was very correct in suggesting that people would only recognize the necessity of change once a crisis was upon them, as the “war on terror” would show. The EU, as this special issue shows, joined in this “war on terror”, whereby it collectively securitized the threat to become a European, rather than a national security threat – a European “war on terror”. It aims to assess the collective securitization process in EU counterterrorism, evaluating this as a process between a construction of security threats and the development of supranational governance through crisification. It posits that EU counterterrorism needs to be analysed as a process driven by collective securitization as part of an ongoing process of crisification that leads to increased supranational governance.

Towards a Secure Economic Growth: Development of a Common European Union Counter-Terrorism Policy

Purpose: The main objective of this paper is to examine the process offorming political and legal tools for counteracting and combating terrorism which has a significant impact on economic growth in the European Union. Design/Methodology/Approach: A mixed research method was used during the research work. To minimize the occurrence of irrelevant results and repetitions, during the systematic review of academic sources the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Analysis method was used. In the case of European Union source documents, the EurLex legal acts database was explored, considering strictly defined criteria. The selected collection of literature and EU source documents was analysed using the Qualitative content analysis method. Findings: EU countries, despite the conflict of interest that often separates them, were able to jointly develop and implement a substantial package of regulations of a political and legal nature, which evolved from ad hoc activities to preventive measures. The areas that currently require special attention include cybersecurity, counteracting the sources of terrorism (radicalization of attitudes), combating social exclusion, proper physical protection of critical infrastructure and public spaces, as well as tightening international cooperation to cut off all sources of financing terrorism. Practical Implications: The study results seem to be particularly important in the context of developing an optimum and effective tool for the long-term European Union policy in the field of counteracting and combating terrorism phenomenon, which is one of the key factors ensuring the maintenance of a sustainable level of economic growth. Originality/Value: The study was conducted after the outbreak of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic, which significantly remodelled the economy and safety environment in European Union countries. The article contains a critical analysis of undertakings performed at the EU forum to counteract and combat the phenomenon of terrorism. The research considers the latest EU legal regulations - the legal status of May 2021. Keywords:

Counterterrorism and the rule of law in an evolving European Union: plus ça change?

By taking the European Union (EU) as a principal focal point, this chapter will evaluate critically the rule of law challenges arising from the production and operation of counterterrorism norms. The article will focus on four case studies, two involving the rule of law ex ante (at the stage of adoption of EU law) and two involving the rule of law ex post (looking at its impact). In terms of ex ante rule of law challenges, the chapter will analyse the production of binding standards by the global executive and the trickle-down effect of these standards at the regional, EU and national level and the limits of scrutiny and justification of counterterrorism legislation on emergency grounds. In terms of rule of law ex post, the chapter will examine challenges of counterterrorism law to the principle of legality via over-criminalisation and the adoption of vague and broad definitions of terrorism, as well as challenges to the right to a fair trial and principle of effective judicial protection resulting from state arbitrariness in the mechanism of producing terrorist sanctions. The contribution will question whether the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, and the process of constitutionalisation of criminal law it entailed, has made a difference regarding the compliance of EU counterterrorism law with the rule of law.

EUROPEAN UNION STRATEGY FOR THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM

The article analyzes the European Union counter-terrorism strategy. The authors give a brief outline of the formation of a system of supranational bodies of the EU. The absence of an integrated approach to the issue, the lack of narrow definitions of the terrorist threat is indicated. Given that, despite the fact that the EU’s attention is again (if not more) focused on the security aspect of terrorism (i.e. the fight against terrorism), and not on the myriad of other complex aspects that lead to it (i.e. the prevention of terrorism), the authors of the article conclude that the EU still does not fully understand the nature of terrorism. Its political dynamics are still driven by crisis situations, and the EU does not seem to want to deviate significantly in real terms from any of its previous strategies. In the authors' view, the EU’s approach to combating terrorism (politics, not rhetoric) will remain the same: focusing on security cooperation while promoting initiatives that create the impression that other areas, such as civic cooperation and intercultural dialogue, are not completely excluded . This will remain the main focus of the EU's anti-terrorism policy: with each terrorist attack (whether group or single), calls will be intensified to expand security cooperation in the context of EU integration and ensuring public safety. According to the authors, the development of a single concept will enhance the joint actions of states to destroy the terrorist threat.

Analiza dokumentów strategicznych Unii Europejskiej: Human Security jako paradygmat unijnej polityki przeciwdziałania terroryzmowi

AN ANALYSIS OF EU STRATEGIC DOCUMENTS: MAKING HUMAN SECURITYA PARADIGM WITHIN EUROPEAN UNION COUNTERTERRORISM POLICYThis paper analyses European Union strategic documents for evidence that EU counterterro­rism policy is founded on the Human Security HS approach. It concentrates on three main strategic documents: the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy 2005, the European Agenda on Security 2015, and the EU Global Strategy 2016 which define the EU’s current approach to terrorism. Three determinants are established to research whether counterterrorism policy is founded on the HS pa­radigm: a people-centred approach, the presence of a wide range of threats, and a strong presence of non-state actors. The analysis shows that counterterrorism policy is constructed on the HS paradigm, however with strong and influential leverage from member states. This paradigm was chosen by EU institutions because it guarantees a strong position of EU agencies in contrast to the traditional mem­ber state-centred approach to security. It helps also to show that EU security policy makes citizens a priority, which could increase legitimacy of the EU in the eyes of its people.

European Union Counter-Terrorism Strategy

English Abstract: Terrorism is defined as the use or threat of violence for political, religious, or ideological ends. It is not a new phenomenon in Europe. To this end, in 2005 the European Council adopted the European Union counter-terrorism strategy. The Strategy, with respect to human rights, pays particular attention to four main pillars: prevent, protect, pursue and respond. The Strategy explains how Member States of the European Union have to: prevent new recruits to terrorism, protect possible goals, pursue the aim of obstructing terrorists' capacity to plan and organise a threat and, finally, respond to terrorist assaults. This paper will be focused on the first pillar. With respect to the structure and organisation of detention regimes, Member States have to prevent radicalisation and violent extremism in prisons. Everything is done with respect to article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In this paper it is proposed to explain some solutions for terrorist prison regimes. The first prison regime is “dispersed”, which entails a place, where people, who are kept in a prison for terrorist crimes, are with ordinary prisoners. Another solution is the “concentrated” prison regime; in this case the detained convicted terrorists are not with ordinary prisoners. Finally, the best solution may be a combination of the two, based on risk evaluation. Italian Abstract: Il terrorismo viene definito come l'uso o la minaccia della violenza per ragioni: politiche, religiose o ideologiche. Non e un fenomeno nuovo in Europa. A tale scopo, nel 2005, il Consiglio Europeo ha adottato la strategia Europea contro il terrorismo. La Strategia, con il rispetto per i diritti umani, pone particolare attenzione a quattro principali pilastri che sono: prevenire, proteggere, perseguire, rispondere. La Strategia spiega come gli Stati Membri dell'Unione Europea debbano: prevenire che i terroristi reclutino nuovi soggetti, proteggere possibili obiettivi, perseguire lo scopo di annientare la capacita dei terroristi di pianificare e organizzare una minaccia e, da ultimo, porre rimedio agli attacchi terroristici. Questo articolo si focalizzera sul primo pilastro. Con il rispetto della struttura e della organizzazione dei regimi detentivi, gli Stati Membri devono prevenire la radicalizzazione e la violenza estremizzata nelle carceri. Il tutto deve essere compiuto nel rispetto dell'articolo 3 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo. In questo articolo sono proposte alcune soluzioni ai regimi detentivi per terroristi. Il primo regime detentivo che si chiama “ disperso”, concerne un luogo, ove le persone, che sono detenute per delitti terroristici, sono assieme agli altri detenuti. Un' altra soluzione viene chiamata “concentrata”, in questo caso i detenuti per delitti terroristici non sono con gli altri detenuti, ma sono posti in un area separata del carcere. Da ultimo, la miglior soluzione potrebbe essere la combinazione delle due precedenti, quindi una soluzione basata sulla valutazione del rischio nel caso concreto.

Countering terrorism in Europe: the role of the EU

Since September 2001, the European Union (EU) has developed a cross-institutional, multilevel and multifaceted approach to the fight against terrorism in parallel with efforts to build a strategic concept regarding its security identity. EU counter-terrorism encompasses instruments of different natures and the participation of several institutions and agencies, gathering a wide range of different policy areas. Over the last decade, the EU has emerged as a relevant counter-terrorism actor in Europe encompassing both internal and external instruments. EU action in countering terrorism is developed together with a legal dimension whose importance has been reinforced by the action of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Parliament. The article combines sociological institutionalist theory with constitutionalism to present elements for an innovative assessment of the EU as a counter-terrorism actor in Europe. It draws on policy and judicial developments from the last 14 years, and it argues that the constitutional foundations of the EU contribute decisively to the definition and mode of action of its counter-terrorism policy. This process distinguishes EU action on counter-terrorism particularly from other international counter-terrorism actors and adds new elements to assessing EU’s actorness in the broader field of security.

The EU as an International Counter-terrorism Actor: Progress and Constraints

During the first decade after the 9/11 attacks, the European Union (EU) has developed into an international counter-terrorism actor in its own right, a role increasingly accepted by third countries. This is a result of many influences, including a more favourable legal basis after the Amsterdam Treaty reforms; enhanced institutional capabilities, such as the growing importance of the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator; the use of a broad range of instruments, such as intelligence sharing; and the application of geopolitical priorities, guided by meetings at the United Nations and the Council of Europe (among other fora). At the same time, the EU's counter-terrorism role has remained subsidiary, both legally and politically, to that of its member states. Furthermore, a lack of its own operational capabilities, its institutional complexity, and its problems of cross-policy coordination continue to act as powerful constraints on the EU's counter-terrorism responsibilities.

Border Controls as a Dimension of the European Union's Counter-Terrorism Policy: A Critical Assessment

This article critically examines the use and effectiveness of border controls in the European Union (EU)'s counter-terrorism policy. It shows that the EU has made substantial progress towards achieving the objectives that it had set for itself in this policy area, but has not managed to fulfil all of them, and certainly not by the deadlines originally set. It further argues that, contrary to their usual depiction in EU official documents, these border control measures make a limited contribution to the actual fight against terrorism, whilst having some negative effects. From that viewpoint, the fact that the EU has failed to meet all of its objectives in the use of border controls for counter-terrorist purposes may paradoxically be seen as a positive outcome.

A Decade of EU Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence: A Critical Assessment

The Treaty on the European Union (EU) stipulates that one of the key objectives of the Union is to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ...

The European Union Counter-terrorism Coordinator and the External Dimension of the European Union Counter-terrorism Policy

The post of European Union (EU) counter-terrorism coordinator (CTC) has often been seen as ineffectual. However, this article argues that such a critical assessment of the post of EU CTC is due to a significant extent to an over-emphasis on the internal dimension of the EU CTC's activities. Consequently, it suggests focusing on the external dimension of the EU CTC's work, which has often been largely overlooked. For that purpose, it develops an international actorness analytical framework. On that basis, the article demonstrates that, despite the limitations inherent to this post, the EU CTC is already significantly advanced in the process of establishing himself as a fully-fledged counter-terrorism actor on the international stage. Evidence shows that he is increasingly considered an important component of the external dimension of the EU counter-terrorism policy by both member states and third states and bodies.

The evolution of the European Union’s ‘fight against terrorism’ discourse: Constructing the terrorist ‘other’

The purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which the European Union (EU)’s counter-terrorism discourse, the ‘fight against terrorism’, is constructed, and the ways in which it functions both rhetorically and in practice. It argues that ‘EU identity’ is constituted through and is central to the constitution of EU counter-terrorism policy. The approach taken is constructivist in nature, drawing on a discourse analysis of primarily European Council policy documents, as well as the reports and speeches of the EU Counter-Terrorism Co-ordinator. In particular, it identifies three strands of the discourse that, it is argued, play a key role in the construction of a terrorist ‘other’. These three strands include terrorism as crime and as an emotive act of violence; terrorism as an act perpetrated solely by non-state actors; and terrorism as a ‘new’ and ‘evolving’ threat. The article proceeds in three steps. First, it outlines the theoretical considerations that underpin this research, including its empirical application. Second, it demonstrates how each strand of the discourse is constructed. Third, it discusses the functioning of the discourse, including the contested nature of the ‘terrorism knowledge’ that underpins the EU’s counter-terrorism approach. The article concludes by reflecting on what this case study contributes to our understanding of EU counter-terrorism policy, as well as explaining how the notion of the terrorist ‘other’ could provide the basis for a future research agenda that deepens our understanding of how the identity of the EU is constituted.

The development of the European Union counter-terrorism framework

The development of the European Union counter-terrorism framework

The external dimension of the European Union's counter-terrorism: an introduction to empirical and theoretical developments

Having recently completed its first decade of existence, the EU's counter-terrorism policy has been receiving increasing scholarly attention as reflected in the specialized literature devoted to this emerging policy area. Its external dimension, nevertheless, has not been the subject of thorough and systematic analyses which scrutinize its characteristic features and principal actors, policies and interests. Against this backdrop, the introductory article of this Special Issue aims at providing a contextualised assessment of the external dimension of EU counter-terrorism while discussing the impact of the Lisbon Treaty upon this policy field. It proceeds with an examination of the policies, interests and actorness dynamics associated with the EU's counter-terrorism policy in highlighting the major findings and conclusions conveyed by the five contributions to this Special Issue. Its conclusion points to possible avenues for future research on the basis of identified underdeveloped topics, under-theorised aspects and neglected issues in the existing literature.

The external dimension of EU counter-terrorism: the challenges of the European Parliament in front of the European Court of Justice

Since 11 September 2001, the European Union (EU) has significantly increased its involvement in counter-terrorism. A sizeable cluster of those new EU counter-terrorism acts were challenged in front of the European Court of Justice, and many of those acts ended being annulled by the Court. In the foreign dimension, the European Parliament challenged three counter-terrorist acts: the first Transatlantic Agreement on passenger name records, the EU technical assistance to the Philippines and the EU UN terror list. The analysis of the nature and implications of these three cases shed light on the evolving configuration of the EU foreign policy in terms of both institutional design and ideological choices.

A Rhetorical Spillover? Exploring the Link between the European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and the External Dimension in EU Counterterrorism

The European Union (EU) counterterrorism policies have often been viewed through the prism of the EU's Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). Yet although macro-strategic decision-making is mainly located within the Council's Secretariat and Council of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Ministers, its external dimension reserves a role for the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).This rhetorical 'spill-over' of an internal security concern onto the CSDP is an interesting yet under-researched development. This is partially due to the fact that CSDP is far from being one of the most developed aspects of the European counterterror response.Yet this occurs in a context where the need for an active use of CSDP as a counterterrorist tool is emphasized in high-level political proclamations. This article will, therefore, aim to explain this disparity between EU discourse and reality. In addition, and building on recent debates in the field of terrorism studies, it provides a critical assessment of the conceptual foundations that link CSDP and Counter-terrorism (C-T) in the EU's discourse while evaluating the short- and medium-term potential for a more vigorous evolution of these policies.

EU Counterterrorism and Aviation Security: Supranational Rules but Intergovernmental Politics?

Even though it is far from institutionalized, the field of international aviation security is dominated by growing global trends such as the proliferation of the ban on liquids in hand luggage and of the installation of body scanners in airports. The initiators of these two trends are the US in coalition with specific European states. In these cases, the European Union (EU) varies from being an early adopter to a belated one, depending on its internal politics. By employing its veto powers in full, the European Parliament (EP) has achieved a relevant influence over the policy content. In turn, despite the supranational character of decision-making rules in the EU aviation security area, the European Commission has played a weak role as an agenda setter in the substantive choices and has concentrated on performing as a coordinator - thus playing a similar role to its involvement in a number of EU intergovernmental issues. In any event, the agenda of EU aviation security is firmly in the hand of the Member States. After adopting a standard, the EU has tried to export it; yet in that process, the Commission's role is also weakened vis-a-vis the Member States' capacities.

The European Union's counter-terrorism policy towards the Maghreb: trapped between democratisation, economic interests and the fear of destabilisation

This article sheds light on the European Union's counter-terrorism policy in the Maghreb taking into account the diverse influences and interests shaping its strategic thinking. To explain the complex web of opportunities and constraints, the article refers to Terry Deibel's framework for the analysis of foreign and security affairs. The author concludes that the Union's counter-terrorism policy in the Maghreb has been shaped more by the desire for regional stability and greater trade relations and energy security than by the goal of promoting democratic values and human rights. Moreover, the promotion of democracy is perceived by EU policy-makers as a destabilising factor that could endanger counter-terrorism efforts.

Preventive Policing, Surveillance, and European Counter-Terrorism

A European Union counter-terrorism strategy was devised in 2005.1 Of its four strands—prevent, pursue, protect, and respond—only two have a direct connection with policing. Perhaps surprisingly, th...