Magazine / Politics / Counter Terrorism / Debate | 27/07/2007

Joining Forces to Fight Fear

After police and observant citizens foiled terrorist attacks in London and Glasgow at the end of June 2007, the discussion reopened about appropriate measures for fighting terrorism. How can Europe respond to the terrorist attacks while remaining true to its fundamental values?

The controversy over the best way to fight terrorism has been raging in Europe since the attacks in the USA on 11 September 2001. Britain and Germany are currently considering introducing tougher laws, while in Spain the debate revolves primarily around whether an alliance of cultures is possible.

A closed-circuit surveillance camera keeps watch in central London.
Photo:AP

Britain: Video Surveillance and an Anti-Terror Council

Since terrorist attacks on underground trains and buses in London in July 2005 sent Britain into shock, the British government has tightened up its security laws. In addition to CCTV surveillance of public places, Britain is also considering introducing identity cards with biometric data, a national DNS databank and a law allowing terror suspects to be detained without arrest warrants.

"We are the most spied on society in Europe, with more CCTV cameras than the rest of the EU combined," The Daily Telegraph lamented on 2 November 2006.

When terrorist attacks were prevented and the suspects detained in London und Glasgow at the end of June 2007, some commentators attributed this success to the new anti-terror laws: "The extensive use of video cameras in public places in London is a fantastic aid to the investigations. They allow one to turn back the clock and even bring the hidden enemy to light," the Danish newspaper Berlingske Tidende wrote on 3 July 2007.

The British press noted how political reactions to the threat have changed. Whereas Tony Blair always spoke of the "war on terror," his successor Gordon Brown called the attacks acts of criminality, the Financial Times observed on 6. July. Martin Kettle, on the other hand, wrote in The Guardian on 7 July 2007 that it was only the language that had changed, not the government's attitude. "The attempted bombings have given the new prime minister a perfect platform on which to pose as the national leader he strives to be."

Brown announced the formation of a national security council under his chairmanship to deal with terrorism and also called for a global register of terror suspects.

Spain: the Cultural Debate

For Spain the terrorist threat is primarily associated with attacks by the Basque separatist organisation Eta. When train bombs exploded in Madrid in March 2004 it was initially assumed that Eta was responsible. Only later was it revealed that the attacks were the work of Islamic terrorists.

The Spanish debate over security has been accompanied by a discussion about how to integrate Muslims living in Spain. People have asked how terror cells could have formed unnoticed in Spain's Muslim communities and whether Spain has done enough to integrate Muslim immigrants.

This debate has provoked some dramatic reactions. In August 2006 two men mistaken for Pakistanis were prevented from boarding a plane to Malaga because the other passengers feared a terrorist attack. El País noted on 23 August 2006 that Islamophobia had increased. "Terrorism is largely to blame, but even if it didn't exist there would be incidents of discrimination. Many citizens have become suspicious. They have assumed the role of judges dispensing very summary verdicts, condemning others for no other reason than their physical features and the way they dress. It is regrettable that we, ordinary citizens, give in to panic and go further than our authorities where security is concerned."

Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Zapatero responded to the debate by proposing an international "alliance of cultures" in which – in contrast to the oft-cited "clash of civilisations" – Western and Islamic countries would work together to fight extremism.

Citing the Islamic threat, the Spanish political scientist Edurne Uriarte rejected the idea of an "alliance of cultures" in ABC on 16 November 2006: "One no longer knows who is really responsible for the terror – global injustice or the terrorists." Writing in the same newspaper on 13 April 2007 Rafael Bardají accused Spain of not having done enough to counter Islamic terrorism, saying that Spain was a "very vulnerable country. Firstly, because it remains in the line of fire of international jihadism, and secondly, because the government hasn't prepared itself enough to face up to this permanent threat and has not educated the population enough in order to resist it".

Germany: Proactive Prevention

Unlike in Britain and Spain there have been no major terrorist attacks in Germany so far. Two attempts to detonate bombs in suitcases on regional trains in 2006 failed, but the secret services warn that Germany is also a potential target. The debate this has triggered about security measures is similar to the one going on in Britain.

In 2001 the coalition government of Social Democrats and Greens approved two so-called anti-terror packages, and the Federal Criminal Police Office and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution had their powers extended. In addition the foundations were laid for the introduction of biometric data in identity documents, while regulations governing foreigners' entering and residing in Germany were tightened up.

Writing in the Berliner Zeitung on 24 August 2006 Andreas Förster was sceptical about the new measures: "The current campaign to increase security in Germany is less about determining the potential of individual proposals, and more about convincing the public that increased surveillance means increased protection against terrorists and criminals. Once people are convinced, it will be easier to push new security laws through parliament."

After a suspect was arrested in the wake of the failed attempts to stage suitcase bombings on trains in Germany in August 2006, Stefan Reinecke, writing in the left-wing daily taz on 21 August 2006, praised the police's performance: "No-one knows how exploded trains would have changed the mood here in Germany. That in itself is reason enough to praise the police. Now even leftist liberals must ask themselves whether video surveillance in public places is such a bad thing." Peter Carstens argued in a similar vein in the conservative Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung on 4 July 2007. Pointing out that not all security laws were bad, he concluded: "It is also a civil right not to be murdered by terrorists."

In June 2007 German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble reintroduced a number of demands to the debate – extensive video surveillance, secret spying on private computers via the internet, extended powers for the Federal Criminal Police Office and the domestic use of the armed forces. Advocates of online searches point out that terrorists use the internet to plan attacks, while opponents argue that such searches would infringe ordinary citizens' right to self-determination regarding information.

Christoph Seils noted in Die Zeit on 20. April 2007 that the parameters of the debate had shifted "away from the concrete prevention of attacks and towards a preventive security state where citizens no longer have the right to be left in peace. Instead, everyone is a potential terror suspect."

An Anti-Terror Convention in Europe

"Nobody can feel entirely safe from fanatics or look in the other direction, because the threat is universal, the target being societies that are open, secular, Western and democratic…societies that embody the values that the instigators of jihad detest and seek to eradicate," the Spanish newspaper Sur noted on 24 August 2006. It thus addressed one of the problems of combating terrorism at the national level – because Islamic terrorists operate across national boundaries there have been repeated calls for greater international cooperation in fighting terrorism.

A European Anti-Terror Convention concluded by the EU member-states in 2005, came into force in June 2007. It is the first international treaty to classify various activities that may lead to terrorist attacks as criminal offences. It includes, for example, incitement to terrorism and the recruitment and training of terrorists. However, so far the EU member-states have been unable to agree on a large-scale, Europe-wide exchange of data or on the expansion of European powers of arrest.

"Perhaps travellers at airports now realise that the security measures are not exaggerated. But do the European states see how vital it is that they work together?" Adam Černý asked in the Czech newspaper Hospodarské Noviny on 3 July 2007. "Europeans currently enjoy the freedom to travel wherever they want but they're not in a position to jointly protect this freedom."

Human Rights Organisations take a ritical view of the EU Convention. The NGO Privacy International has criticised the fact that the European anti-terror measures provided for under the convention were approved without a public discussion, even though their implications go far beyond the immediate goal of fighting terrorism. It argues that once the measures are approved, the data would be used for other purposes.

The Weapons of the Free Society

Is the constitutional state in danger of curtailing individual freedom excessively? Simon Carr thinks it is: "So these jihad-jumping nutcases don't threaten our values. They threaten our lives perhaps, but not our values," he wrote in The Independent on 17 August 2006. In his opinion, more dangerous than terror are the measures taken against terror: "No", he went on, "the people who threaten our values are our leaders who have been panicking and harrying us towards un-British ideas like locking people up for three months without charge and invading other countries to change their value systems."

Writing in the Süddeutsche Zeitung on 27 June 2006 the German political scientist Herfried Münkler underlined that the crucial thing was the attitude of the individual towards terrorism: "The most effective weapon against terrorist attacks is for people to react calmly: if people behave in the days after an attack just as they would have if there had been no attack then the attack has failed."

Further articles on the subject » Security Policy / Crises / War, » EU Policy, » Crime and Law, » Europe
More from the press review on the subject » Security Policy / Crises / War, » EU Policy, » Crime and Law, » Europe