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.
