The External dimension of the fight against terrorism

External and Internal Security

As a first reaction after the terrorist attack against the twin towers in Manhattan the President of the United States, George Bush, declared a “war against terrorism”. And it is true that a part of the preparations had taken place in countries outside of the United States. In a world of global communications and transports it is not possible to draw a clear line between the internal and the external aspects of security. This is a basic fact we have to take into account when reflecting about Homeland Security in the European Union.

The training camps of al Qaeda are an important element of the threat coming from abroad. One of the reasons given in Germany for our engagement in Afghanistan is that Hindelang in Bavaria has to be defended in the mountains of the Hindu Kush. Meanwhile the camps in Afghanistan have been destroyed, but we find them again in Pakistan, Yemen and Sub-Saharan Africa.

Border controls are a not negligible element of the Homeland Security of the United States. Whoever has made a trip to the United States in recent years will confirm this statement. In Europe, we have common external borders for goods, services and capital and another external border of the countries which belong to the Schengen Area. This does not facilitate an efficient supervision of these borders.

Efficient controls at the borders are very much dependent upon a close cooperation between the authorities on both sides. At best, customs control and border police should be housed in the same buildings to facilitate formal and informal exchanges of information. This is one of the reasons why our Neighbourhood Policy can be an important part of the Security Policy of the European Union.

Another aspect of the external dimension of our Security Policy is the Solidarity Clause of the Treaty of Lisbon. It says that the Union and its Member States shall act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is the object of a terrorist attack or of a natural or man-made disaster. The Treaty affirms that in such a case the Union shall mobilise all the instruments at its disposal, including the military resources made available by the Member States.

Is Europe a target for terrorists?

Citizens of the European Union have a tendency to consider terrorism as a threat that mainly concerns the United States of America. They do not take into account that Islamic terrorism clearly has declared Europe as one of its targets. They also forget the terrorist attacks in London and Madrid and the failed attacks in Germany. We also have to be preoccupied by the number of European participants in terrorist training camps all over the world.

We also have to take into consideration that the objectives of terrorism have changed. Baader, Meinhof and the Brigate Rosse had representatives of the State and Industry as their targets. What they were looking for was what the Italiens call “cadaveri illustri”. This has profoundly changed. Today's terrorism threatens every citizen of our countries.

The most preoccupying threat is the combination of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. As a warning from bioterrorism, we have seen the Aum sect in Japan using sarin and anthrax. Nuclear terrorism would be even more disastrous. Nuclear weapons in the hands of failed or irresponsible states would be a terrible threat. For the purpose of terrorism, they do not even need the full technology of missiles and enrichment. The use of what is called a dirty bomb would be sufficient.

I remember a simulation of such a terrorist event which was run for the Subcommittee for Security and Defence of the European Parliament. The scenario was that the necessary material for a dirty bomb was smuggled into the territory of the European Union from an eastern country. The bomb was exploded in the vicinity of the Brussels Airport and we were confronted with the fact that a nuclear cloud was moving across the Benelux countries in the direction of Germany.

Just try to imagine the situation of the European Union and her Member States when confronted with an aggression of this kind. Nuclear material can be found mainly in territories where the supervision of the State does not function properly. This is one of the reasons why the European Security Strategy considers failed states as a major risk and why the external aspects of security can not be neglected.

The European Security Strategy

In 2003, the Heads of State and Governments of the European Union have decided upon a Security Strategy of the European Union which had been formulated by Javier Solana. Meanwhile, this strategy has been updated in 2008.

This European Security Strategy was in a way an answer to the Security Strategy of the Bush administration which was based on the idea of coalitions of the willing. The European Strategy promotes an effective multilateral system based on the Charter of the United Nations. It also says clearly that no single country is able to tackle today's complex problems on its own.

At the time, the debate was turning around the question if pre-emptive strikes could be justified under certain conditions. The European Council finally agreed on the statement that in an era of globalization, distant threats may be as much a concern as those near at hand and that the first line of defence will often be abroad.

This statement is not only important for the external policy of the European Union but also for the further development of the area of freedom security and justice of the European Union as foreseen in the Stockholm programme.

Instruments of the European Union

Security is not an exclusive task of the armed forces and the police. Diplomacy, prevention, post-conflict reconstruction, development and dialogue are important elements of the security policy of the European Union.

The European Union disposes of a large number of instruments for maintaining peace and security.

First of all the External Action Service which is at present developed under the Treaty of Lisbon. This Service will have to integrate the instruments for running civilian and military missions and to coordinate the security aspects of our neighbourhood and development policy.

Debates in the European Parliament have demonstrated that there is a close connection between security and development. Poverty and bad governance are breeding grounds for crime and terrorism, and a secure environment is a conditio sine qua non for any economic and social development.

What recommendations for the future?

The implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon should be the occasion to improve the coordination of the different instruments which are at the disposal of the European Union. The External action service must be able to coordinate civilian and military missions of the European Union. The present instruments of analysis and planning have to be improved.

The common protection of our external borders should be strengthened. We need common standards for the necessary equipment of border surveillance. The role of Frontex should be enhanced.

For fighting natural and man-made disasters, we should implement the proposal for a civilian intervention force as proposed by Michel Barnier. This proposal has been taken up in February 2010 by the European Parliament on the basis of the report of Arnaud Danjean. Such an intervention force would be a major improvement of our capability of humanitarian intervention.