Javier Argomaniz

Post-9/11 institutionalisation of European Union counter-terrorism: emergence, acceleration and inertia

Abstract This article applies a historical institutionalist perspective to an empirical analysis of the sources and characteristics of the institutionalisation of European Union counter-terrorism. Drawing upon the work of Stone Sweet, Sandholtz and Fligstein, this paper critically analyses the impact of external crises in the form of major terrorist attacks on the emergence of counter-terrorism as an area of European governance. It also highlights the key policy and institutional developments, studies the role of policy innovators on the institutionalisation of counter-terrorism and supports the relevance of ‘transformative’ or ‘evolutionary’ models for the understanding of institutional change in this domain.

Examining Deterrence and Backlash Effects in Counter-Terrorism: The Case of ETA

Scholars are increasingly drawing on models and theories from the field of Criminology to offer new insights on terrorist violence. A particularly useful framework by LaFree, Dugan, and Korte works from the assumption that illegal behaviour can be affected by the threat and/or imposition of punishment. It sees the results of the governments intervention in terms of deterrence (states repressive action leads to a reduction in terrorism violence), and backlash (states repressive action leads to defiance and retaliation, and to an upsurge of terrorism violence). This article applies this model to a case study of the governments responses to Euzkadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA). It uses a variation of survival analysis technique—Series Hazard—to assess the impact of six major initiatives on the risk of new ETA attacks in the period from 1977 to 2010. Mostly, the results provide support for both backlash interpretations, although important questions regarding interpretation are raised.

A Decade of EU Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence: A Critical Assessment

The Treaty on the European Union (EU) stipulates that one of the key objectives of the Union is to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). Given that the fight against terrorism is a prominent aspect of this general objective, it is remarkable that, in spite of its political relevance and decade-long history, it has only relatively recently received due attention in the academic community. At the time of writing, only a handful of post-9/11 edited volumes and special issues

European Union responses to terrorist use of the Internet

The Internet has had a transformative effect in modern societies, becoming an empowering tool for individuals and an increasingly indispensable part of citizens’ lives. Yet, like any technology, the Internet also has negative ramifications. For instance, violent groups and networks can exploit it in a variety of ways including the planning of operations, establishing communications, circulation of propaganda, training and recruiting new members, and raising funds. In light of the above, terrorists’ use of the Internet is an area that has started to attract attention from European institutions. So far, the EU response has concentrated on raising critical communication infrastructure resilience standards to prevent potential cyber-attacks. Yet, these efforts have, in reality, been motivated by security concerns regarding acts of cyber-espionage, cyber-crime, and cyber-sabotage rather than hitherto hypothetical attacks of terrorist origin. On the other hand, other malicious uses of the Internet by terrorist groups have received comparatively less attention. However, this does not make these policies unimportant. Far from it. Some initiatives at the European level of the EU designed to undermine online radicalisation, embryonic as they are, may have failed already to balance the need for effective action against the obligation to protect Internet users’ privacy rights.

Before and after Lisbon: legal implementation as the ‘Achilles heel’ in EU counter-terrorism?

Abstract Implementation has often been described as a key weakness affecting European Union (EU) counter-terrorism. However, this view is often adopted as a given and there has not been so far a systematic examination of the degree to which this represents an obstacle to the effectiveness of the EU response. This paper aims to contribute towards this goal through the use of primary sources in the study of the legal transposition of counter-terror instruments into national law, a key stage in the implementation process. It shows the presence of major implementation delays in this policy sector but, importantly, also significant cross-national variation with regards transposition failure associated with the administrative endowment of the individual member states. Furthermore, the mechanisms deployed by the Union to encourage a fluid implementation of European measures are critically evaluated and the potential impact in the process of the institutional transformations brought about by Lisbon is also examined.

The European Union Policies on the Protection of Infrastructure from Terrorist Attacks: A Critical Assessment

This article aims to provide an assessment of the evolution and contribution since 2001 of the European Union infrastructure and transport protection policies to the European fight against terrorism. Using the avowed goals of the Protect strand of the 2005 EU Counter-terrorism Strategy as a yardstick, the intention here is to evaluate the extent to which reality matches the aspirations present in the European political discourse and in particular the overall aim of ‘strengthen[ing] the defences of key targets, by reducing their vulnerability to attacks, and also by reducing the resulting impact of an attack’. In this way, special attention is paid to the outcomes from a number of initiatives in the field such as the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP), the Critical Infrastructure Warning Information Network (CIWIN), the Action Plan for the Enhancement of the Security of Explosives, the directives and regulations on aviation and maritime security and others. Continuing the pattern set out by the other contributions in this issue, the objective is to assess the degree to which initiatives have led to practical results, the political and institutional factors that have facilitated the process of policy development and implementation, the obstacles that have stood in the way of the practical realization of the initial objectives and, finally, lessons learnt.

Introduction to the Special Issue: The Complexity of Terrorism—Victims, Perpetrators and Radicalization

ABSTRACT This special issue examines the complex relationship between radicalization, victimhood. and political violence. The interrelatedness of victims and perpetrators has been long recognized in the fields of criminology and victimology but it is has been often ignored in the case of terrorism and political violence. The key aim of this issue therefore is to assist in enhancing our understanding of this interrelatedness with a particular focus on the relevance of narratives, roles, and identities of victimhood for both the victims and perpetrators. A second, more policy-relevant dimension is to examine the role of victims and perpetrators in the prevention of terrorism and political violence.

Victims of terrorism and political violence : identity, needs, and service delivery in Northern Ireland and Great Britain

Terrorism and political violence exist fundamentally as communicative acts; inherently the acts themselves serve to inspire anxiety and fear. As the recipients of such a communicative act, victims of terrorism and political violence serve as the vehicle for the dissemination of these communications to both the intended and broader audiences. Their victimising experience is thus a complex interplay between a profound personal trauma and the political/communicative dimension of the attack. Given this complexity, this article addresses how victims’ needs are understood by victims of terrorism and political violence in both Northern Ireland (NI) and Great Britain (GB). Through engagement with practitioners, victims, survivors, and community activists, this article conceptualises the existing perceptions amongst these different groups regarding needs, the delivery of services to victims in NI and GB, and examines the origins of the different approaches. Results demonstrate that victims’ needs are highly context-dependent at a public level, but relate heavily to the experiences of other victims of terrorism and political violence at a private level.

A Battle of Narratives: Spanish Victims Organizations International Action to Delegitimize Terrorism and Political Violence

ABSTRACT Spanish victims groups have provided a visible contribution to European terrorist violence prevention efforts. Instrumental and knowledge transfer motivations partly explain this interest but a separate driver that requires more attention is their opposition to the international narrative that legitimizes Euskadi Ta Askatasunas violence promulgated by the political movement of the Basque Patriotic Left. This has resulted in a “battle of narratives” played out at the international level in order to shape the future of Basque politics where victims are challenging a discourse that frames the past in a way that justifies terrorism and that leaves the door open to a future return to violence.

State Responses to Victims of Terrorism Needs in Spain

Spain currently has one of the most advanced systems of support for victims of terrorism. Undoubtedly, this is explained by the long prevalence of political violence in the country: the longest-running terrorist organisation in Europe Euzkadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA) is active since the 1960s and — albeit currently holding a permanent ceasefire — still operates. The degree and multiplicity of the violence is also an important factor: thousands of Spanish citizens have been targeted by armed groups operating at both poles of the ideological spectrum (extreme left and extreme right), separatist organisations, jihadist networks, operatives working for international terror groups and by state actors.