The EU as a Global Counter-Terrorism Actor in the Making (original) (raw)
Related papers
THE EU'S EXTERNAL ACTION ON COUNTER-TERRORISM
FIIA Report, 2020
Terrorism is one of the most significant security threats in Europe. As it is transnational in character, countering it requires both cooperation between EU member states and widespread external action. This report examines the latter by focusing on the concepts, development, actors and structures, as well as the practices of the EU’s external action on counter-terrorism. The EU’s external action on counter-terrorism is performed in four different frameworks: diplomacy, crisis management, external aid, and the external action of the EU’s internal security agencies. All of these have their own policy-making structures with different actors and mandates, and hence the overall picture is complex. Several ongoing institutional reforms add to the complexity. Although the EU’s external action on counter-terrorism has its challenges and limitations, the EU has shown that it is capable of adapting its approach to changing needs. The EU can add value to the counter-terrorism action of its member states by developing and promoting common concepts and practices, maintaining an overview of the threat, and facilitating cooperation with different partners. However, the EU’s external action on counter-terrorism is dependent on the ability of the member states to agree on common goals and the ability of the different EU actors to coordinate their actions.
The EUs Mature Counterterrorism Policy A CRITICAL HISTORICAL AND FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT
This paper takes stock of the EU's response to international terrorism since 9/11. The first part provides a summary historical overview, which highlights the event-driven and contingent development of the EU's counterterrorism policy. The second part presents a critical assessment of policy outcomes according to the objectives set out in the EU's Counterterrorism Strategy. Measures 'to pursue', and 'to protect' against, terrorists seem to have grown substantially. In practice, however, they are undercut by a lack of focus and use at the operational level. Similarly, formal capacities 'to respond' to terrorism have been boosted, but there are doubts as to their relevance in real crisis situations. Yet most importantly, the EU remains unable to do more 'to prevent' terrorism. This seriously limits the overall effectiveness and output legitimacy of the EU's efforts. The concluding third part extrapolates these findings into the future, and argues that EU counterterrorism policy is increasingly path-dependent and technologically lop-sided. This maturation process is then briefly discussed from two competing normative positions. The paper sides with a more conventional intergovernmental reading that regards EU counterterrorism policy as politically constrained and basically legitimate, but finishes by stressing the need for adequate ex ante control mechanisms.
Perspectives on European Politics and Society 14, no. 3 (2013): 325-338., 2013
"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 counterterrorism policy by both member states and third states and bodies."
European Security, 2012
The construction of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice has seen the pooling of a significant amount of national sovereignty at the European Union (EU) level through the establishment of internal EU competences. This process has also had the important side-effect of an increasing development of an EU interest in various areas of security, including in counter-terrorism. This article examines the processes through which the EU interest in counter-terrorism is constructed. It argues that, in line with social constructivist literature, it is important to conceptualise interests as being mutually constituted through interactions amongst political actors. It further develops two arguments in this respect. First, the United States (US) has exercised significant influence on the shaping of the EU interest in counter-terrorism. This point is particularly well-illustrated by the Passenger Name Record case. The second argument put forward by this article is that the process through whic...
Counter-terrorism in the EU’s external relations
Journal of European Integration, 2017
The renewed emphasis on national political boundaries across Europe would seem to go hand-inhand with a weaker external personality for the EU. However, there are several prominent examples of EU leadership that challenge this notion, from the December 2015 UN climate change agreement to common sanctions against Russia to a new Global Strategy. This paper examines a policy area that lies at the intersection of populist outrage and external engagement: counter-terrorism. In the wake of the 2015 and 2016 Paris and Brussels terrorist attacks, the EU has made significant strides in enhancing the external dimension of its counter-terrorism policies, particularly in terms of intelligence sharing, formal and informal diplomacy, and the internalexternal nexus of security. The article argues that major terrorist attacks in 2015-2016 have served as critical junctures of crisis, driving counter-terrorism policies forward and emphasizing the notion of European boundaries beyond any functionalist or securitization explanation.
The EU as a Global Security Actor: A Comprehensive Analysis beyond CFSP and JHA.
Palgrave, 2013
The purpose of this book is to investigate the role of the EU as an international security actor in a comprehensive manner. This entails including the so-called ‘new’ security problems into the analysis, as well as different short-to-long term instruments at the EU’s disposal, that are only rarely taken account of in these types of analyses (Zwolski, 2012a). However, this poses challenges which need to be addressed, such as: (a) the difficulty in delimiting security from non-security policies of the EU, due to the contested nature of the security concept; (b) different perceptions of security among Member States, even if there is agreement on security strategies at the EU level; (c) the arguable lack of an overarching ‘grand strategy’ or a ‘strategic vision’, which would help to make better use of the diversity of security instruments at the EU’s disposal; and (d) a connected challenge of assuring consistency in developing and conducting the EU’s international security policy. All these factors hamper an effort to adopt a comprehensive approach, and thus they have to be addressed. Nonetheless, they do not prevent scholars from attempting a more encompassing analysis. In fact, considering the very complex and multi-dimensional nature of the EU’s external security governance, it is only such a comprehensive approach which can offer a more accurate image of the EU as an actor in international security.
Critically assess the EU’s role in the ‘War on Terror’
'Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.' 1 With this statement, former President George W. Bush declared in 2001 the war against terror. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 represented a milestone in human history. At the EU level, politicians have since then strongly argued in favour of greater co-operation in fighting terrorism. The European Security Strategy of 2003 even lists terrorism among the five main threats facing EU Member States (EUMS). Yet, has the threat of international terrorism led to changes in governing modes and arrangements in the EU at all? Is the EU an actor in the fight against international terrorism? This essay assesses the EU's role in the War on Terror. The evaluation concludes that the EU plays a limited role in the War on Terror and gives little added-value to national governments policies.
EU’s Role in Fighting Terrorism
International terrorism, a phenomenon with constant development, is today a certainty and has dramatically marked the beginning of this century and millennium. This problem has reached a global dimension and it represents a concern to the entire international community. Over the time, numerous international and regional regulations have been framed, in order to prevent and combat terrorism. The European Union condemns terrorist acts and recognizes the central role of the United Nations, in fighting against terrorism and promoting security, as well as the contribution of the new NATO in what concerns the defense and security promotion. Europe has to act more firmly in order to consolidate the defense against terrorism and the European Union's borders. At the same time, the European Union considers that only a concerted and firm action from all the states and the major actors on the international scene would lead to the identification of the solutions which can contribute to the efficient fight against terrorism and, by these means, provide for the international peace and security. The proportion of the danger terrorism represents has turned the fight against this phenomenon in an international community's desideratum.
Studia Politologiczne, 2022
This article examines legal, institutional and knowledge-based aspects of counterterrorism policies developed by the European Union in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the United States in 2001. It focuses on selected areas in which progress has been made in the framing of the EU's strategies, policies and actions. The following case studies are included: counter-terrorist legislation, especially the framework decision and directive on combating terrorism; the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator as an institutional intermediary within the EU's institutional architecture and in the external dimension of counter-terrorism cooperation; Europol's TE-SAT report as an instrument of strategic awareness-building, which has facilitated the explaining of the nature of terrorist threats across the EU. The main assumption underpinning this paper is that the EU has managed to ensure an uneven yet constant development of counter-terrorism measures which have contributed to a more effective fight against terrorism.