| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| EU Adopts Maginot Wall for Terror |
| 2004-03-25 |
| Leaders are expected to adopt a Declaration on Combating Terrorism. This was drawn up by EU interior ministers on 19 March - a week after the Madrid bombings - and then adopted by foreign ministers on 22 March. Here are the key elements: EFL * the adoption of a "solidarity clause" from the draft EU constitution which provides for mutual assistance in the event of a terrorist attack * the integration of an intelligence structure on terrorism within the Council Secretariat. High Representative Javier Solana will be charged with presenting a report to the June European Council on how this might be achieved. (It will not be a "European CIA" as suggested by Belgium and Austria) * make counter-terrorism a key element of political dialogue when agreeing on external programmes with third countries. (This means that aid and trade could be affected if a country is not deemed to have cooperated sufficiently) As I pointed out the other day, the European "multilateral" approach will be purely defensive. It will rely on better coordination between police and intelligence agencies for the most part. There will be limited use of wealth transfer and sanctions to incentivize/disincentivize nations that fund or tolerate the operation of terror groups. There will be a bureaucratic coordinating body at the EU level that will add additional paperwork and probably be as useful as the Department of Homeland Security. It will be as easily flanked and turned as its predecessor 65 years ago. |
| Posted by:11A5S |
| #12 They don't really have to play offense if we do the job for them. I guess we chose the same policy prior to WWI and WWII and then got pulled in. They see this as our fight. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-03-26 2:23:22 AM |
| #11 A charitable view of Euro position is conflict between Israel and Palestinians is causing Islamic terrorism.If that conflict is resolved,that will end terrorist threat.With this belief comes anger at Israel for not reaching a deal w/Palestinians,and anger at US for not forcing Israel to deal and for attacking other countries that have nothing to do w/"root cause".Euro elites also believe their experience w/leftist terrorists(Red Brigade,et.al.)in 70's,80's shows this view to be correct.Once the "root cause"-US/Soviet confrontation-disappeared,the terrorist attacks petered out.(The Euro countries also moved left,co-opting some of the radicals).Since Europe couldn't fight Soviet Union militarily,the anti-terrorist effort became a law-enforcement exercise.To the Euro elites,the Euro way was again proven correct by Britian's struggle w/IRA.Once Britain agreed to negotiate w/IRA over giving up Northern Ireland,IRA terror attacks stopped. Unfortunately,OBL and his Al-Q leadership don't appear to care one bit for the Palestinians.They hate Western(esp.US)influence on Islam.Realizing in today's world there is no way to prevent outside influences from entering a society,OBL and Al-Q have logically concluded the only way to stop such "pollution" is to destroy Western society. If the lack of a Palestinian state was the driving force behind Al-Q,US and coalition forces should be encountering hordes of Palestinians in Iraq and Afghanistan.Instead,US and Coalition forces have encountered Saudis,Yemenis,Egyptians,Syrians,Morrocans,Brits,Canadians,Jordanians,Pakistanis-and very few Palestinians. The Euro view is logically based on their previous experience.The problem is they have misidentified what OBL and Al-Q want and are applying wrong "fix".Fortunately for Europe,OBL and AL-Q believe US is main opponent and their efforts are aimed against US. |
| Posted by: Stephen 2004-03-25 9:25:11 PM |
| #10 "* make counter-terrorism a key element of political dialogue when agreeing on external programmes with third countries. (This means that aid and trade could be affected if a country is not deemed to have cooperated sufficiently)" Initial list in the compliance-exception clause: Iran, N. Korea, Syria, Palistinian Authority, Cuba, Venezuela, China, Lebanon, Dominican Republic... |
| Posted by: Hyper 2004-03-25 5:27:50 PM |
| #9 I believe that if we just think good enough thoughts all will be well. Please Believe! Clap if you Believe in the happy EU. Clap harder for a happy and prosperous Olympics. (Off camera.... these bastards aren't clapping. Pedro.... chill babe they're Greeks) Welcome back! Hang gliding has evidently returned to the 2004 Olyi BOOM! |
| Posted by: Pedro Pan 2004-03-25 5:21:04 PM |
| #8 There ain't a motherfucker in the eu with enough backbone to stand up to his mother.....much less terrorists. eu sucks |
| Posted by: Texan 2004-03-25 4:56:32 PM |
| #7 Cross this line and I'll... Oh.. ok.. now dont cross this line or else! Hmmm..mm.... Ok now dont cross THIS line and I really mean it this time! How about this line here..... |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-03-25 4:48:19 PM |
| #6 ready to flex a military muscle Assuming they ever would, of course. Appeasement is so much easier. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-03-25 4:38:11 PM |
| #5 Integration of intelligence is a good thing for internal security, but also for the US. It will take time before Europe is gonna be ready to flex a military muscle |
| Posted by: lyot 2004-03-25 4:25:02 PM |
| #4 Lyot: They're both needed perhaps... as example and counter-example of how to be effective... |
| Posted by: Mark Onyschuk 2004-03-25 4:22:07 PM |
| #3 Somehow I prefer the Bush method of dealing with terrorism. they are both needed..Europe is military not capable so it better provide other means of assistance.. |
| Posted by: lyot 2004-03-25 4:13:42 PM |
| #2 provides for mutual assistance in the event of a terrorist attack Oh great. They'll send each other band-aids and condolences. Some defining keywords (in order of appearance): Declaration, solidarity, Secretariat, report, Council, dialogue Somehow I prefer the Bush method of dealing with terrorism. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-03-25 3:56:45 PM |
| #1 You're right, I don't see anything here about actually hunting them down and killing them. make counter-terrorism a key element of political dialogue when agreeing on external programmes with third countries. (This means that aid and trade could be affected if a country is not deemed to have cooperated sufficiently) - "Counter-terrorism" has a broad definition; can any one else see "United States" in place of "third countries"? Especially with the recent charge that the US going after al-Q has led to an "increase" in terrorist attacks? |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2004-03-25 3:35:25 PM |