The Identity of the European Union and the Fight Against Terrorism
الموضوعات :
Hassan Ghadiri
1
,
Armin Amini
2
,
Mohammad mehdi Mirzaei
3
1 - Department of Political Sciences and International Relations , Faculty of Law and Political Sciences , Karaj branch , Azad Islamic University , Karaj , Iran.
2 - Department of Political Science, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran
3 - Department of Political Science, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran
الکلمات المفتاحية: European Union, Identity, Civil-normative Power, Terrorism, World system,
ملخص المقالة :
While other major global players emphasize the tangible characteristics of power, this alliance focuses on intangible power structures. For this purpose, this union is the only powerful normative identity player in the world community. Analysis of the position of this union in this context and its role in the fight against terrorism is the primary goal of the present article. Now, the main question is, what effect does the European Union's identity positioning have on this union's role in the fight against terrorism in the world system? According to the findings of the research, the European Union, be-sides enjoying normative identity advantages, as an essential international actor seeks an independent role in the fight against terrorism, but the lack of growth of standard military and security power in line with the development of normative power faces this union with a challenge and continues to rely on NATO under the leadership of the United States. The surge of terrorist activities in the territorial sphere of the European Union, the perceptual and psychological environment of the strategic and security policy-makers of the European Union on how to deal with terrorism, the specific attitude of right-wing European statesmen towards trends of terrorism, and the lack of social integration of Middle Eastern Muslim immigrants in European norms have led to more alignment and coherence of the European Union's strategic and security policies against terrorist movements.
Bakker, Edwin and Beatrice de Graaf, (2011). "Preventing Lone Wolf Terror-ism: Some CT Approaches Addressed", Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol. 5, No. 5-6.
Barroso, Jose Manuel, (2009). "Europe's Rising Global Role", Available at: http://www.themoscowtimes.com
Bull, Hedley, (1982). "Civilian Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2.
Checkel, Jeffrey T., (January 1998). "The Constructivist Turn in International Re-lations Theory", World Politics, Vol.50, No.2.
Coolsaet, Rik, (2010). "EU Counterter-rorism Strategy: Value Added or Chime-ra?", International affairs, Vol. 86, No. 4.
Gavrilovic, J. (2016). "The European Fight Against Terrorism, Diversity in Unity or Unity in diversity?", M.Sc. the-sis, Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rot-terdam, Faculty of Social Sciences.
Ginke, Bibi van and Eva Entenmann, (2016). The Foreign Fighters Phenome-non in the European Union, Hague: In-ternational Center for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT).
Hayes, Ben and Jones, Chris, (2013). "Catalogue of EU Counter-Terrorism Measures Adopted since 11 September 2001", SECILE, available at: https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/news/2013 /dec/secile-catalogue-of-EU-counter-terrorism-measures.pdf
Howarth, Jolyon, (2010). "The EU as a Global Actor: Grand Strategy for a Glob-al Grand Bargain?", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 48, No. 3.
Khalouzadeh, Saeed and Davoud Kiani, (2008). "The European Union and the International System", in Mahmoud Vaezi and Davoud Kiani, The European Union and International Politics, Tehran: Center for Strategic Research of the Ex-pediency Council.
Khalouzadeh, Saeed, (2010). "Common Foreign Policy of the European Union", in Seyyed Abdul Ali Qavam and Dawood Kiani, European Union; Identity, Securi-ty and Politics, Tehran: Strategic Studies Research Institute.
Kim, Nam-Kook and Viviana Passoni, (2010). "From Modern Power to a Post-modern Example: The Evolution of the European Union", International Area Re-view, Vol. 13, No. 3.
Kratochwil, F., (1989). Rules, Norms and Decisions: on the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Re-lations and Domestic Affairs, Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lucarelli, S., & I. Manners, (Eds.), (2006). Values and Principles in Europe-an Union Foreign Policy, Abingdon: Routledge.
Manners, Ian, (2002). "Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 2.
Manners, Ian, (2006a). "European Union, normative power and ethical foreign pol-icy", In: David Chandler and Volker Heins (Eds.), Rethinking Ethical Foreign Policy: Pitfalls, possibilities and Para-doxes, New York: Routledge.
Manners, Ian, (2006b). "Normative Pow-er Europe Reconsidered: Beyond the Crossroads", Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2.
Manners, Ian, (2008). "The normative ethics of the European Union", Interna-tional Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1.
Mayer, H., & Vogt, H. (Eds.), (2006). A Responsible Europe? Ethical Founda-tions of EU External Affairs, Basing-stoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Renard, Thomas, (2012). "EU Counter-terrorism Policies and Institutions After the Lisbon Treaty", Center on Global Counterterrorism Cooperation, available at: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/153959/Renard_policybrief_1216.pdf
Renard, Thomas, (2017). Terrorism and Counterterrorism in Continental Europe, in: Jacinta Carroll, Counterterrorism, Barton: The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).
Romaniuk, Scott Nicholas, (2010). “Ci-vilian or Military Power Europe? The Evolving Nature of European Union Power”, New Balkan Politics, Issue 12.
Sabaghian, Ali and Abbas Sarvestani, (2018). "Anti-terrorist policies of the Eu-ropean Union; Trends, efficiency and perspective", Strategic Studies Quarterly, 21st year, number 1.
Shirgholami, Khalil, (2007). "The Euro-pean Union and Normative Foreign Poli-cy", Foreign Policy Quarterly, Year 21, Number 4.
Sjursen, Helene, (2006 a). "The EU as a "Normative" Power: How Can This Be?", Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2.
Sjursen, Helene, (2006 b). "What kind of power: European foreign policy in per-spective", Guest editor, Special issue of Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2.
Thorhallsson, Baldur and Anders Wivel, (2006). "Small States in the European Union: What Do We Know and What Would We Like to Know?", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 19, No. 4.
Wendt, Alexander, (1992). "Anarchy is What States Make of It - the Social Con-struction of Power Politics", Internation-al Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2.
Whitman, R. G. (Eds.), (2011). Norma-tive Power Europe: Empirical and Theo-retical Perspectives, Basingstoke: Pal-grave Macmillan.
Wright, Nick, (2011). "The European Union: What Kind of International Ac-tor?", Political Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 2.
www.europol.europa.eu, 2017
Youngs, Richard, (2004). "Normative Dynamics and Strategic Interests in the EU's External Identity", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 42, No. 2.
International Journal of Political Science
ISSN: 2228-6217
Vol 13, No 2, June 2023, (pp. 39 -56)
The Identity of the European Union and the Fight Against Terrorism
Hassan Ghadiri1, Armin Amini2*, Mohammad Mehdi Mirzaei3
1, 2*, 3 Department of Political Science, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran
Received: 19 Feb 2023 ; Accepted: 18 June 2023
Abstract
While other major global players emphasize the tangible characteristics of power, this alliance focuses on intangible power structures. For this purpose, this union is the only powerful normative identity player in the world community. Analysis of the position of this union in this context and its role in the fight against terrorism is the primary goal of the present article. Now, the main question is, what effect does the European Union's identity positioning have on this union's role in the fight against terrorism in the world system? According to the findings of the research, the European Union, besides enjoying normative identity advantages, as an essential international actor seeks an independent role in the fight against terrorism, but the lack of growth of standard military and security power in line with the development of normative power faces this union with a challenge and continues to rely on NATO under the leadership of the United States. The surge of terrorist activities in the territorial sphere of the European Union, the perceptual and psychological environment of the strategic and security policymakers of the European Union on how to deal with terrorism, the specific attitude of right-wing European statesmen towards trends of terrorism, and the lack of social integration of Middle Eastern Muslim immigrants in European norms have led to more alignment and coherence of the European Union's strategic and security policies against terrorist movements.
Keywords: European Union, Identity, Civil-normative Power, Terrorism, World system.
*Corresponding Author’s Email: arminamini8@gmail.com |
Introduction
During the Cold War period, the European Union has always had a glimpse of acting in the field of international politics, but the bipolar conditions of the world and the high power of the United States prevented the Union from playing an active role in the realm of international politics. Important events such as the collapse of the bipolar system, the withdrawal of the Eastern and Central European countries from the Soviet Union, the reunification of the two Germanys, as well as regional crises such as the developments in the Balkans and the Second Persian Gulf War, changed the conditions governing the international system. The above factors provided a platform for the political activity of the European Union in the international arena. For this reason, the European Union took serious steps towards political unity in the 1990s. Since then, the European Union has tried to achieve a geopolitical identity in addition to its geo-economic and geo-cultural identity in the form of frameworks such as the common foreign and security policy and the European defense and security policy.
The European Union is undoubtedly one of the most important players in the world community. This union has presented a new model of governance. Although the basis of the formation of such a pattern has been the economy, gradually emphasis has been placed on other cases of convergence. The lack of relative military power and reliance on superiority in the economy have made the strategic role of the European Union in the future of the world system face with questions and doubts. The conducted research also emphasizes this dimension of the power of the European Union, while a kind of void is felt in the immaterial view of the European Union. This union, itself a product of post-Cold War identity norms, opposes military action in the first stage. And according to the declared policies of the European Union, before taking military action against terrorism, its roots must be destroyed. Also, in order to fight terrorism, it is necessary to get international support and obtain legal permits from the United Nations. Another category is the issue of multilateralism of the European Union against unilateralism in the eyes of the United States of America, and the European Union believes that in order to advance the fight against terrorism, multilateralism should be included in the agenda of the European Union. According to the European Union, it is possible to create stability and security at the global level only through international cooperation mechanisms, not unilaterally. But the West's failure to fight terrorism and its spread to other parts of the Middle East, especially Yemen, Iraq, and Syria, and the weakness of the central governments of these countries led to the emergence of new terrorist groups. Now, terrorist groups consider European countries as their new targets. England, Germany, Belgium, France, and Turkey have all been exposed to terrorist attacks. What seems obvious is that the emergence of a common threat against European countries leads them to be more united. Examining the position of this union in the identity-normative context and its role in the fight against terrorism is the main goal of this article. Now, the main question is, what effect does the identity position of the European Union have on the role of this union in the fight against terrorism in the world system?
According to the findings of the research, the European Union, while enjoying identity and normative advantages, as an important international actor, is looking for an independent role in the fight against terrorism. But the lack of growth of common military and security power in line with the growth of normative power has made this union face a challenge and it still relies on NATO under the leadership of the United States.
Background and theoretical view of the research
The investigation of the developments of the European Union is always of interest to thinkers and researchers in the field of international relations. The end of the bipolar system and the decline of unilateralism and attention to multilateralism in recent years have made the need to pay attention to the European Union as an important player in the international system even more apparent. Various research has been done in the form of articles and books in English on the subject of value, identity, and normative power of the European Union, but there are gaps in domestic research.
Among the theorists who have discussed the normative power of the European Union, the theories of Manners (2002 & 2006 & 2008), Sjursen (2006), and Youngs (2004) are important. Ian Manners is one of the active theoreticians who has theorized about the normative power of Europe. In an article entitled " Normative Power Europe: A contradiction in terms?" published in 2002, he examines the normative power of Europe. This article is actually a response to Hedley Bull's (1982) article entitled " Civilian Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?". In fact, Manners in this article, unlike Bull, who emphasizes military power and considers civil power to be important under military power, and ultimately concludes that Europe is not an actor in international affairs. He emphasizes the normative power of the European Union, and for this purpose, he organizes his discussions under the abolition of the death penalty.
Manners (2006) also pursues the issues related to the normative power of the European Union in an article entitled " European Union, normative power and ethical foreign policy". In this article, he somehow seeks to escape from what is considered moral power or soft power against normative power. By explaining the concept of normative power, Manners seeks to analyze this concept against ethical foreign policy. " The normative ethics of the European Union" is another study by Jan Manners in which he claims that the European Union will always be a normative power in world politics.
In his study, Sjursen (2006) examines the normative power or civil (civilian) power of the European Union in the world system. By entering into the foreign policy of the European Union, the author analyzes the international role of the European Union by considering the normative power. Lightfoot and Burchell; Fiott and Bouris are other theorists of the normative power of the European Union.
The researches carried out regarding the role and position of the European Union in the world system have emphasized the economic dimension of this union, while the current research emphasizes the role of this union in the fight against terrorism while paying attention to the cultural-normative position.
According to the literature review of the topic, the consistent theory that has the ability to explain and analyze the topic is the constructivist theory. In this approach, identities, norms and culture play an important role in global policies. In fact, the supporters of this approach are considered the norms and basis of international games, and they prevent governments from directing and provide a rational rationale for the acceptability of their actions (Checkel, 1998: pp. 329-333). The identities and interests of governments are created by norms, interactions, and cultures, and this is the "process" that determines the issue of governments' interactions. In fact, the constructivist approach has a special emphasis on views, opinions, and their effects, that is, factors whose material effects are not necessarily immediately visible.
Constructivism also deals with how people's identities and social norms can be expanded with institutional relationships between them. In addition to the regulatory aspect, the constructivist approach also pays attention to the formative aspect of norms, and they believe that norms arise as a result of processes such as interactions, and this is a noticeable difference between these two approaches (Kratochwil, 1989).
2) A theoretical look at the normative power of the European Union
Constructivists, especially Wendt, argue that social phenomena such as norms, threats, power, and identity are constructed through an interactive process that creates collective meaning (Wendt, 1992, pp. 391-397). Paying attention to normative and immaterial power is constructive in the constructivist approach. Also, the postmodern theory in international relations has also said a lot about the normative power of the European Union. Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean Baudrillard, Jacques Derrida and Julia Kristeva have all made important contributions to the question of the European Union and normative theory (Manners, 2006, p. 125).
Considering these propositions, it should be said that several decades ago attention was paid to the normative power of the European Union. More specifically, thirty years ago, in the pages of the Journal of Common Market Studies, Hadley Bull (1982) made a sharp criticism of the civil (civilian) power of European society in international affairs. Since then, the increasing role of the European Union in the fields of security and defense policy led to the seductiveness of military power in Europe (Manners, 2002: 235). Some experts claim that the normative foreign policy of the European Union is a product of a different way of looking at the world. For some experts such as Leonard and Cooper, this normative foreign policy is a product of the power of the European Union. According to these two, after centuries of conflict, European countries have come to the conclusion that cooperation and convergence is the only way to achieve security, peace and prosperity. This internal logic originated from Kant's thoughts, has spread to the worlds of politics and has created the normative foreign policy of Europe (Shirgholami, 2007, p. 887). Robert Kagan argues that "the Europeans come from Venus and the Americans from Mars" believes that the United States relies on its military power; The US has a strategic perspective in international relations, which is called Hobbesian war of all against all. And the European Union, with the Kantian approach, focuses on the soft approach and on civilian instruments (Sjursen, 2006, p. 237).
Based on this, a group of scientists (such as Smith, Tello and Liddy) believe that the European Union can influence some of the world's results. But this actor is effective only on the margins and only as a civil (civilian) power and through the use of normative tools (Howarth, 2010, p. 458). Europe, in striving for the post-Westphalian order, seeks to leave the traditional relations between units in the world community, and by highlighting the immaterial dimensions of power, it seeks to implement its desired values and norms. This approach has been seriously followed in the policies of the European Union since the early 1990s and after the Maastricht Treaty, but attention to it in this Union goes back to the previous years. However, it should be acknowledged that during the last decade, there have been many discussions about the normative power of the European Union (Sjursen, 2006) (Lucarelli and Manners, 2006) (Mayer and Vogt, 2006) (Whitman, 2011).
3) The position of the European Union in the world system
The European Union, as one of the most important and coherent alliances made up of governments in political-economic dimensions, has taken many steps towards greater convergence and coordination as well as expanding its territory after the Second World War. Although this union has introduced a new concept and perception of cooperation and convergence between governments into the literature of international relations, but in fact, to understand its place in the world system, it should be looked at more carefully.
In the early years of the convergence of European countries (in the years after the Second World War), we are witnessing a form of convergence in which the economic color is very colorful. This factor caused other dimensions of convergence not to grow proportionately, in other words, while the member states were converging in the economic spheres, they did not take the same steps towards political, security, cultural and identity convergence. This led to the creation of an alliance among European countries whose economic sector had grown a lot, but other sectors and pillars faced low growth or even no growth.
Nevertheless, from the 1970s, the concept of norms and values entered the documents and declarations of the European Union. In the meeting of European leaders in 1972, which led to the declaration of European identity, the member states wanted to "implement the principles of democracy and conform to the standards of the rule of law and human rights" in the foreign relations of the European community. The European Council of Heads in 1988 emphasized the role of the Union in maintaining peace, resolving regional conflicts, strengthening democracy, supporting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, strengthening the effectiveness of the United Nations, and improving economic and social conditions in less developed countries (Shirgholami, 2007, p. 902).
After the end of the bipolar system and due to the structural changes in the European Union based on the Maastricht Treaty, we are witnessing greater convergence among the members and decisions to expand this union. In fact, the approval of the Maastricht Treaty in December 1991 and its implementation since the beginning of 1995 is a turning point and a distinct difference in the performance of European policies.
Range | Tool | Preference of applied power type | the period |
Europe-colonial countries | force | Emphasis on material power | 1648 - 1945 |
West block | Force-diplomacy | Material powers (with emphasis on international institutions) | 1945 - 1949 |
West block | Diplomacy - Force | material (economic) power | 1949 - 1992 |
world system | (under US supervision) | Material (economic) power, non-material power | 1991 - mid-90s |
world system | Diplomacy - pressure | Civil or normative power | Mid 90s onwards |
Table 1) Applied power and means of applying power in Europe after the Treaty of Westphalia in Europe
The decisions of the union during the meetings of the 1990s were taken in order to improve the state of the union regarding convergence in different dimensions. In these meetings, decisions were made regarding the expansion of the members of this union, which resulted in a surprising growth for the number of members of this union. It is surprising in the sense that the union that started with six countries and during its 4 decades of life in the bipolar era, only 6 other countries joined it; During about 12 years (1995 to 2007), fifteen more countries were added to its members. Therefore, such uneven expansion created challenges and problems for this union. However, what was felt more and more with the expansion of members and the deepening of the convergence process in the European Union, was the need for reforms in the structures and institutions of this union.
The conditions governing the world system, especially after the Cold War and the events of 9/11, necessarily put Europe in a position to have more maneuvering power. Undoubtedly, today the European Union is the only economic and to a certain extent political-regional block that has relatively clear global influence and role-playing. But its transformation into an organization with 27 members has had a restraining effect on the speed of action and effectiveness of the common foreign and security policy of the European Union and has provided the ground for the intervention and influence of the United States in the developments of Europe and its foreign policy.
Having said that, we can reflect on the fact that the total power resources of the European Union, despite the lack of common security and foreign policies, are now more than the total power resources of the United States of America. Therefore, despite its limited hardware capabilities, Europe will try to rely on its "soft power" to find a solution to the crises facing this union.
Soft power, which is actually a characteristic of the European Union, in which the prestige of culture, value and foreign policy is prioritized over economic role and military power. The neo-medieval empire explains another concept that the European Union shares, especially focusing on the power of the decision-making structure (Kim and Passoni, 2010, p. 204).
Sjursen's empirical observations about the European Union's policy in the following cases clearly show the distinction between the European Union's foreign policy and other great powers. Promotion of democracy, introduction of human rights clauses in trade agreements, emphasis on encouraging regional cooperation and focus on strengthening international institutions (Sjursen, 2006, pp. 235-236). Manners argues that far from the discussions of military and non-military (civilian) power, the influence of the ideas of Europe's international identity/role indicates normative power (Manners, 2002, p. 238). In other words, what Manners means by military power is "the ability to use military tools" and what he means by normative power is "the ability to shape normative concepts" (Manners, 2002, p. 240). Smith also argues that the lack of a European defense identity, with the tendency to support the integrity of NATO from the belief in the inherent merit of civilian power, has consequently made the European Union a civilian power by default (Wright, 2011, p. 13).
In fact, considering the relative advantages of its non-material structures (normative power) in the world system, the European Union seeks to cover the weaknesses related to its material power and improve its international role and position in this system. Within the governance and institutions of the European Union, there is an approach that believes that the future international order will give more emphasis to non-material structures of power, for this reason, the European Union should be a leader in this field. By distancing itself from emphasizing the hard aspects of power, the European Union can direct the thoughts of the world system to itself as a normative actor, and this issue will be considered a reliable position for the European Union in the future. (See Figure 1)
Figure 1: General advantages of normative power for the European Union
The sources of influence of normative power are based on the ability to expand and guarantee stability and security through the use of economic and political forces, this expansion and guarantee is not done through military means. Various elements, including trade, cooperation, financial aid and assistance, institutional dialogue, and the promise of EU membership for European countries are the ones that produce the civil (civilian) power of the EU (Romaniuk, 2010, p. 4). Duchene believes that the lack of common military tools in this collection, instead of being a source of weakness, shows the dignity of its role in the world. Extending this claim to the current situation of the European Union, Whitman believes that even if the Union develops its military capability, its civil character will remain in place as opposed to the secondary nature of military instruments. In fact, there is a big normative difference between the protection of human rights and democracy through military means versus the pursuit of the same goals through assistance and diplomacy (Shirgholami, 2007, pp. 894-893).
4) Security strategy of the European Union in the fight against terrorism
The growth of terrorist attacks and extremism in the member states of the European Union and the change in the security environment of the European Union due to the fragility and collapse of neighboring states have turned the issue of terrorism and extremism into one of the most important security challenges of the European Union. In order to fight this pervasive challenge, this union has implemented many institutional policies and measures, especially after 9/11. The European Union's anti-terrorist cooperation has grown significantly in some areas in the past two decades and has created effective measures and frameworks such as the following in order to fight terrorism. European arrest warrant, legal measures to finance terrorism, creation of counter-terrorism coordination post, creation of external border protection coordination agency and strengthening of the capacities of institutions such as Europol and European Justice. In the last two decades, the anti-terrorist policies of the European Union have gone through two contradictory and opposite trends. On the one hand, the expansion of the range of terrorist threats and the inability of the member states to protect and ensure the security of their citizens have led them as rational actors towards institutional cooperation at the European Union level. On the other hand, due to the sensitivity of security, judicial and internal affairs issues, the member governments do not want to hand over their powers to a supranational institution. This has caused the role of the European Union in anti-terrorist policies to be limited to a coordinator and facilitator.
The structural problem of the European Union has existed since its establishment and no one is able to solve it, and that is the gap between the small and large member states of the Union (Thorhallsson and Wivel, 2006, p. 653-655). Following the developments that have made the European integration somewhat uneven in the last few years, as well as the Lisbon Treaty, which should be included in the basic treaties of the Union; There have been different attitudes towards the potential and transnational power of the Union, especially in the face of international crises and challenges.
On June 20th, 2003, Javier Solana, the High Representative of the European Union for Common Foreign and Security Policy, presented the security strategy of the Union in the next decade to the Council of the Heads of the European Union in the city of Thessaloniki, Greece. In this plan, which was compiled under the title "A safer Europe in a better world", Solana mentioned three main strategic goals of the European Union. First, we (the European Union) can play a private role in stability and good governance. Second, more broadly, we need to build an international order based on effective multilateralism. Finally, we have to deal with new and old threats (Khalouzadeh, 2010, pp. 244-243).
According to many experts, considering the special conditions and unique characteristics of the European Union; The relative advantage of this union lies in its normative characteristics or value power (Barroso, 2009, pp. 3-4). Kent Waltz, while writing an article in 2000, reconsidered his belief that the European Union or the coalition of European countries led by Germany can become a great power. Waltz claimed that he will not see such a horizon until there is a fundamental change in the structure of cooperation among European Union member states. Regarding the military power of the European Union as one of the important indicators for becoming a great power, he states: "The European Union is no longer considered a great power due to not benefiting from this indicator; Although the integration of the military power of the union members can provide the index of military power, the problem is that this integration has not yet taken place" (Khaluzadeh and Kiani, 2008, pp. 94-93). According to some, the lack of common military tools among the members of the European Union is not only considered as a weakness of that union; Rather, according to the role of this union in the evolution of the international system, it plays a role in increasing its power. On the other hand, Louis Gibbs believes that the European Union's extensive military power does not make it rely on the platform of great power. According to him, in a situation where there is no political capacity to use this military power, having this power will be meaningless (Khalouzadeh and Kiani, 2008, pp. 94-95).
According to Jose Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Union Commission; "Today, in the world, traditional and non-traditional figures are considered as a security concern. He also introduces the spread of weapons of mass destruction, autocratic regimes and the risk of extremism as the leading challenges after the 9/11 incident. In Barroso's view, in globalization, non-traditional security challenges go their way without respecting national borders" (Barroso, 2009, pp. 3-4). It is safe to admit that after the end of the Cold War and the bipolar system, the members of the European Union no longer face a direct threat to their territorial integrity. Rather, they are threatened by indirect dangers such as illegal immigration, terrorism and drug trafficking. On the other hand, the increase of EU members to 27 members has made this union unable to reach a single security system in dealing with terrorist threats.
After the events of 9/11, new elements such as regional conflicts, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, failed states and evil states and organized crime were added to the European Union's national security strategy. With the addition of these issues in recent years, the European Union, while redefining its security and defense structures, seeks to leave the European shell and play a role in the entire international system. Examples of this issue can be seen in "Operation Artemis" in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2003, the peacekeeping mission in the province of "Aceh" in Indonesia, and the presence in Afghanistan during peacekeeping and security building.
It seems that the dominant scenario in the current process of EU defense-security policies is to play a complementary role in the security connection between regional security mechanisms and the collective security organization and to create solutions to pursue anti-security issues outside the defined borders. Besides these facts, the evidence of the 21st century shows that the transatlantic relationship (in all its different forms) is increasingly evolving and changing its shape. Although this view is controversial, many analysts have pointed to the process of "continental divide" (a divergence between the United States and European governments); which can be seen in each of the fields, which has traditionally acted as united forces. Meanwhile, instead of focusing on strengthening the transatlantic relations, the European Union members have focused on the process of European convergence, and it can be said that they are still searching for a more effective and independent role than the United States in the security and political arena of the international system.
Considering the existing realities and still conflicting interests within the European countries, reaching a common understanding and vision of security-defense policies is still an uncertain time. Following the change in the geopolitical environment, the transfer of powers and the increasing divergence between Paris and Berlin in the period after the Cold War and after the 2000 Nice summit, the axis of Paris and Berlin as a point of reference for European politics has lost its previous importance. Considering the current position of the two countries in the European equations, this axis is unbalanced and ineffective and is not compatible with the realities of Europe. Although the conventional cooperation between Germany and France continues, the other two sides do not have the same views on important European issues as in the past. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent terrorist acts in London and Paris caused the emergence of a new form of terrorism, which is fundamentally different from the old terrorism in terms of strategy and goals. And this has caused a fundamental change in the approach of the European Union and the expansion of institutional cooperation to fight this growing threat. However, the history of the European Union's institutional cooperation to fight terrorism dates back to the 1970s. However, due to the considerations of the member states regarding the sharing of information and national sovereignty in security fields, anti-terrorist policies and institutional cooperation of the European Union remained limited until the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Despite the extensive institutional and legal actions of the European Union to fight terrorism, especially after 9/11 and the Madrid and London bombings; The different nature of the recent terrorist attacks, including the short time intervals, the variety of tools, targets and actors, has caused the challenge of terrorism to remain as one of the fundamental unsolved challenges of the European Union (Sabaghian and Sarvestani: 2018, p. 140).
The attacks of 9/11 and the importance of terrorism for the United States and the European Union forced both parties to deal more seriously with this issue. This issue made the two sides emphasize on strengthening cooperation in the fight against terrorism. On the other hand, the two sides' approach to terrorism was not completely the same and this issue caused differences between the two sides. In general, it can be said about the relationship between the European Union and the United States of America; A culture-centered view believes that the common cultural and civilizational infrastructure of the United States of America and the European Union will lead them to adopt the same and coordinated positions towards international issues. The policy-oriented approach, however, is based on the belief that the European Union and the United States are considered democratic countries, because liberal peace between liberal countries and war against authoritarian regimes is implicitly considered a value. Therefore, the political-value foundations bring harmony between the positions of the European Union and the United States. The third point of view is based on the realist and power-oriented approach and believes that national interests are the main essence of international politics and power is also the main tool in achieving goals. Therefore, the European Union and the United States have convergent and identical positions only in areas that their national interests require.
Although terrorism is not a new issue for the European Union; But the vulnerability of this union against terrorism and the chain growth of terrorist attacks in the last few years has increased public awareness and European skepticism about the effectiveness of the European Union in fighting terrorism more than ever before. Also, the adoption of joint policies to fight terrorism, such as the following, has led to widespread debates about the relationship between freedom and security in the European Union and the violation of treaties, European values and fundamental rights in the eyes of the public. Common border control, electronic monitoring of citizens, access to citizens' personal information is among these.
In general, EU member states and parties, as rational actors, contribute to the development of EU anti-terrorist policies based on rational choices and the benefits they gain from joint anti-terrorist cooperation. Second, with the spread of terrorism as a global threat, national governments are unable to provide security for their citizens within the framework of their Westphalian borders and alone, and this has led them to transnational cooperation in the fight against terrorism. Third, due to the sensitivity of security and anti-terrorist issues, cooperation in this area has remained mostly temporary, event-oriented and limited; And despite the limited institutional cooperation in this matter, the member states of the European Union do not have much desire to hand over their national sovereignty to transnational institutions (Sabaghian and Sarvestani: 2018: p. 143).
This has made the European Union, as a dynamic organization, to adopt more pragmatic policies in order to fight terrorism and ensure the security of European citizens, and to further strengthen the capacity of European institutions to fight terrorism.
5) Anti-terrorist policies of the European Union
The Treaty of Lisbon and the institutional balance in the fight against terrorism: The Reform Treaty or the Treaty of Lisbon (December 2007) made a fundamental change in the anti-terrorist policies of the European Union, especially in its internal dimension. As argued by Thomas Renard, the Treaty of Lisbon had three major effects on EU counter-terrorism policies. which are: First, after the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union plays an important role in internal security, and by reforming the decision-making system and adopting the qualitative majority voting system, decision-making in this union has become easier and more flexible. Second, through increasing the supervisory role of the European Parliament, as well as increasing the supervisory role of national parliaments to monitor Europol and the common defense and security policy, it has helped to maintain the balance between European institutions and also maintain the balance between security and fundamental freedoms. Third, through the expansion of the competences of the European Court of Justice to cover all issues related to freedom, security and justice, it left a significant impact on the EU's anti-terrorist policies in both internal and external dimensions (Renard, 2012, pp. 1-2).
The emergence of ISIS and the challenge of foreign fighters: The emergence of ISIS affected the anti-terrorist policies of the European Union in two ways: European citizens joining this terrorist group (the challenge of foreign fighters) and the possibility of the presence of ISIS in the neighboring countries of the European Union (the challenge of the fragility of neighbors). According to the report of the International Center for Combating Terrorism in The Hague, the ISIS group has attracted many fighters from different parts of the world, including the European Union. According to this report, the number of European fighters who joined this group was between 3922 and 4294; About 30 percent of them have returned to Europe so far. According to various official documents of the European Union, the phenomenon of foreign fighters may be considered a potential security threat to the European Union in four ways. 1. Travel of citizens of EU member states to Iraq and Syria to become foreign fighters; 2. The return of fighters to Europe due to military training and field experience can be a threat to EU countries; 3. The effect of the phenomenon of foreign fighters and terrorist activities on social cohesion in the European Union; 4. Preventing fighters from traveling to Iraq and Syria may increase their terrorist attacks inside the EU (Ginkel and Entenmann, 2016, pp. 3-4). In addition to the challenge of foreign fighters and EU citizens joining terrorist groups, developments in the Middle East and North Africa region and the European Union being surrounded by fragile countries such as Libya, which enables ISIS to enter the European Union through them. The relationship between the internal and external security of the European Union has become more prominent.
Nice and Berlin terrorist attacks and the challenge of lone wolves: The June and December 2016 terrorist attacks in Nice and the Berlin Christmas market were the latest terrorist shock to the European Union. With the appearance of lone wolves, there were changes in the assessment of threats to European citizens and the arming of people's daily lives. The anti-terrorist measures of the European Union and preventing the immigration of fighters and confiscating their passports have caused extremist groups to adapt their discourse to the new geopolitical realities in view of these policies and logistical limitations. and ask their supporters to act individually on local terrorist operations without organization and leadership (Renard, 2017, p. 88). Lone wolves are one of the most complex and unpredictable forms of terrorism, and because they are carried out by one person, identifying and dealing with them has become a nightmare for European security and intelligence organizations. Lone wolves may lack tools, professional skills, and organization; But due to the use of unusual tools such as vehicles and kitchens, attraction of local criminals and lack of organizational connections, their identification is usually difficult and their attacks are deadly (Bakker and De Graaf, 2011, p. 45). To respond to this challenge, the European Union created the Counter-Terrorism Center in 2016 to fight foreign fighters, share information on terrorist financing, combat online terrorist propaganda and arms trafficking, and international cooperation between counter-terrorism authorities. Also, in 2017, the European Parliament approved a new directive to replace the 2002 Council of Europe decision-making framework and expand its scope to cover new threats such as lone wolves. This directive included extensive preventive measures such as the following against the challenge of lone wolves. traveling abroad to join terrorist groups and return to Europe; Recruiting for terrorism, training and giving training for terrorism; Aiding, participating and attempting to commit a terrorist attack, inciting and encouraging terrorism, and financing terrorism and terrorist groups.
In total, the anti-terrorist policies of the European Union have gone through six stages since 2001:
9/11 event and considering terrorism as a foreign threat; Before the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon were attacked by terrorists in 2001, the issue of terrorism was rarely on the common agenda of the European Union. And the events of 9/11 should be considered a turning point in the transformation of this union into a leading and effective actor in the coalition against terrorism. The European Union's response to 9/11 was swift and comprehensive. Only ten days after the attacks of 9/11, the European Council of Justice and Home Affairs announced in an extraordinary meeting in Brussels that the fight against terrorism is the priority of the goals of the European Union (Hayes and Jones, 2013, p. 23). While the measures related to the action plan were being carried out, the US attack on Iraq under the pretext of weapons of mass destruction and the division of the European Union countries into two fronts in favor and against this attack, is one of the anti-terrorist motives of the European Union. And in order to overcome these differences, this union updated and consolidated its security and defense policy by renegotiating its common defense and security positions with the member states and through the approval and development of the European Security Strategy.
Madrid attacks and the acceleration of anti-terrorist policies of the European Union; London and Madrid terrorist attacks, which was Al Qaeda's criticism of Spain and England for accompanying these two countries in the war against terror and supporting the United States' military actions against Al Qaeda and the Taliban; It showed once again that governments alone are not able to protect their citizens, and made anti-terrorist policies the first priority of European Union decisions. The bombings in Madrid caused the European Union to step into a completely new phase of thinking about fighting terrorism and its root causes, while evaluating the factors that lead to the support and employment of terrorists, at the meeting of the Council of Heads in March 2004 (Coolsaet, 2010, p. 860). The new action plan set seven strategic and high-level objectives for EU actions in preventing and fighting terrorism. In addition to updating the action plan in 155 areas, the Declaration on Combating Terrorism also published a statement on European solidarity against terrorism and joint action and mobilization of all resources when one of the member states is attacked by terrorists; But the lack of strategy and binding document as well as the slow implementation of anti-terrorist measures in the member states remained two challenges of the European Union in the fight against terrorism (Gavrilovic, 2016, p. 17).
London bombings and the challenge of domestic terrorism: terrorist attacks in London once again increased the anti-terrorist political movements of the European Union and showed that the anti-terrorist policies of this union are guided by terrorist attacks. In addition, British citizenship and the self-organization of its agents changed the EU's understanding of the threat of terrorism and shifted the focus of attention from external terrorist threats to the process of spreading extremism and terrorist recruitment inside (EP, 2017, p. 33).
Conclusion:
In the 1990s, the European Union took serious steps towards political unity. Since then, the European Union has tried to achieve a geopolitical identity in addition to its geo-economic and geo-cultural identity in the form of frameworks such as the common foreign and security policy and the European defense and security policy. What seems obvious is that the emergence of a common threat against European countries leads them to be more united. In this case, the competition of governments to provide national security gives way to cooperation to provide public security within the framework of common security. Such alignments can be seen in the form of security cooperation in NATO Chargob or other security cooperation arrangements. In this way, the European Union is looking to help the United States.
Intensification of terrorist movements in the territory of the European Union; The perceptual and psychological environment of strategic and security policy makers of the European Union on how to deal with terrorism; The specific attitude of right-wing European statesmen towards terrorist tendencies and the lack of social integration of Middle Eastern Muslim immigrants into European norms will lead to greater alignment and coherence of the European Union's strategic and security policies against terrorist movements. While possessing military power plays an important role in defining civil power; The European Union has realized this important shortcoming of its role in the world system (lack of coherent military power) and has sought to strengthen the common foreign and security policy and the process of creating its own defense and security policy. But until the realization of this wish, it seems that we have to wait a long time.
References:
Bakker, Edwin and Beatrice de Graaf, (2011). "Preventing Lone Wolf Terrorism: Some CT Approaches Addressed", Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol. 5, No. 5-6.
Barroso, Jose Manuel, (2009). "Europe's Rising Global Role", Available at: http://www.themoscowtimes.com
Bull, Hedley, (1982). "Civilian Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2.
Checkel, Jeffrey T., (January 1998). "The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory", World Politics, Vol.50, No.2.
Coolsaet, Rik, (2010). "EU Counterterrorism Strategy: Value Added or Chimera?", International affairs, Vol. 86, No. 4.
Gavrilovic, J. (2016). "The European Fight Against Terrorism, Diversity in Unity or Unity in diversity?", M.Sc. thesis, Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam, Faculty of Social Sciences.
Ginke, Bibi van and Eva Entenmann, (2016). The Foreign Fighters Phenomenon in the European Union, Hague: International Center for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT).
Hayes, Ben and Jones, Chris, (2013). "Catalogue of EU Counter-Terrorism Measures Adopted since 11 September 2001", SECILE, available at: https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/news/2013 /dec/secile-catalogue-of-EU-counter-terrorism-measures.pdf
Howarth, Jolyon, (2010). "The EU as a Global Actor: Grand Strategy for a Global Grand Bargain?", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 48, No. 3.
Khalouzadeh, Saeed and Davoud Kiani, (2008). "The European Union and the International System", in Mahmoud Vaezi and Davoud Kiani, The European Union and International Politics, Tehran: Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council.
Khalouzadeh, Saeed, (2010). "Common Foreign Policy of the European Union", in Seyyed Abdul Ali Qavam and Dawood Kiani, European Union; Identity, Security and Politics, Tehran: Strategic Studies Research Institute.
Kim, Nam-Kook and Viviana Passoni, (2010). "From Modern Power to a Postmodern Example: The Evolution of the European Union", International Area Review, Vol. 13, No. 3.
Kratochwil, F., (1989). Rules, Norms and Decisions: on the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lucarelli, S., & I. Manners, (Eds.), (2006). Values and Principles in European Union Foreign Policy, Abingdon: Routledge.
Manners, Ian, (2002). "Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 2.
Manners, Ian, (2006a). "European Union, normative power and ethical foreign policy", In: David Chandler and Volker Heins (Eds.), Rethinking Ethical Foreign Policy: Pitfalls, possibilities and Paradoxes, New York: Routledge.
Manners, Ian, (2006b). "Normative Power Europe Reconsidered: Beyond the Crossroads", Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2.
Manners, Ian, (2008). "The normative ethics of the European Union", International Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 1.
Mayer, H., & Vogt, H. (Eds.), (2006). A Responsible Europe? Ethical Foundations of EU External Affairs, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Renard, Thomas, (2012). "EU Counterterrorism Policies and Institutions After the Lisbon Treaty", Center on Global Counterterrorism Cooperation, available at: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/153959/Renard_policybrief_1216.pdf
Renard, Thomas, (2017). Terrorism and Counterterrorism in Continental Europe, in: Jacinta Carroll, Counterterrorism, Barton: The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).
Romaniuk, Scott Nicholas, (2010). “Civilian or Military Power Europe? The Evolving Nature of European Union Power”, New Balkan Politics, Issue 12.
Sabaghian, Ali and Abbas Sarvestani, (2018). "Anti-terrorist policies of the European Union; Trends, efficiency and perspective", Strategic Studies Quarterly, 21st year, number 1.
Shirgholami, Khalil, (2007). "The European Union and Normative Foreign Policy", Foreign Policy Quarterly, Year 21, Number 4.
Sjursen, Helene, (2006 a). "The EU as a "Normative" Power: How Can This Be?", Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2.
Sjursen, Helene, (2006 b). "What kind of power: European foreign policy in perspective", Guest editor, Special issue of Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2.
Thorhallsson, Baldur and Anders Wivel, (2006). "Small States in the European Union: What Do We Know and What Would We Like to Know?", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 19, No. 4.
Wendt, Alexander, (1992). "Anarchy is What States Make of It - the Social Construction of Power Politics", International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2.
Whitman, R. G. (Eds.), (2011). Normative Power Europe: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wright, Nick, (2011). "The European Union: What Kind of International Actor?", Political Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 2.
www.europol.europa.eu, 2017
Youngs, Richard, (2004). "Normative Dynamics and Strategic Interests in the EU's External Identity", Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 42, No. 2.
