Raphael Bossong

The Action Plan on Combating Terrorism: A Flawed Instrument of EU Security Governance

After clarifying the ideal-typical characteristics of action plans, this contribution shows how the Action Plan on Combating Terrorism emerged out of a hectic process of policy-entrepreneurship by the European Commission and other integration-minded actors. This overloaded the EUs policy-making capacity and fostered policy conflict, while the strategic dimension was neglected.

The evolution of EU counter-terrorism : European security policy after 9/11

1. The EUs Response to International Terrorism 2. Dynamics of EU Security and Counterterrorism Cooperation 3. European Counterterrorism Cooperation before 9/11 4. The EUs Reaction to 9/11 5. The Return to Normality in EU Security Policy 6. Responding to the Attack of Madrid 7. The Limited Effect of the London Bombings 8. Towards a Mature EU Counterterrorism Policy? 9. The Evolution of EU Counterterrorism Policy

European internal security as a public good

Abstract This introduction argues for a new research agenda on European internal security cooperation from the perspective of public goods. We set out our case in three parts. First, we identify new empirical puzzles and demonstrate significant explanatory gaps in the existing internal security literature which public goods theory could help address. Second, we outline the building blocks of a public goods approach and provide an overview of its application, both existing and potentially, in various areas of regional security and European integration. Third, we present three complementary ways of using public goods theory to analyse internal security in the European Union, with the aim of spurring new research questions while accepting some limitations of this theoretical approach.

The European Programme for the protection of critical infrastructures – meta-governing a new security problem?

Critical infrastructure protection (CIP) constitutes a paradigmatic as well as challenging case for EU security governance, which has received limited academic attention to date. This article draws on a heuristic framework to survey the EUs capacities to ‘meta-govern’, that is, to stimulate and steer governance efforts across multiple sectoral and political divides, in this complex issue area. The main part of the paper assesses the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP), which comprises a variety of policy instruments and initiatives, on this basis. It is shown that the attempt of an authoritative regulation of European critical infrastructures has remained narrow and of questionable effectiveness. Scientific networks have developed more dynamically, while the participation of private companies and corresponding EU financial instruments are yet to show their potential. Finally, the EUs organizational capacity in CIP suffers from a lack of coordination structures in the European Commission, but also needs to take the scarcely known Joint Research Centre (JRC) into account. The conclusions highlight the barriers to comprehensive governance of as well as large research gaps on European critical infrastructure policies.

EU Civilian Crisis Management and Organisational Learning

Abstract Commentators and policy-makers stress the need to learn the lessons of EU civilian crisis management. Yet despite numerous case studies on mission performance, we know little about the EUs overall capacity for such learning. The first part of this article outlines a theoretical framework for analyzing organizational learning in the context of peace operations. It recommends focusing on administrative reform and conceptual development in Brussels, and lists various factors that are expected to facilitate or inhibit organizational learning cycles. On this basis, the second part presents a historical survey of the EUs learning efforts in civilian crisis management. Despite a dynamic expansion of mission tasks as well as corresponding review processes, organizational learning has remained haphazard and limited to capacity expansion or mission support requirements. Only since 2009 did the EU invest in more formalized lessons-learning processes, which led to more systematic information gathering and more in-depth conceptual discussions. So far, however, these initiatives could not overcome political constraints to more ambitious reforms of EU peace operations.

EU internal security goverance and national risk assessments: towards a common technocratic model?

ABSTRACT In the context of the European Unions (EU) expanding role as internal security actor, all member states have been required to generate similar integreated national risk assessments by 2014. At first sight, this could be welcomed as a departure from the ad hoc or crisis-driven policy-making dynamics that have long been criticized by critical commentators of EU internal security policy. In particular, the evolution of risk assessments relates to wider efforts to forge an evidence-based approach to internal security and to advance broader concepts of risk prevention and resilience as guiding principles for its future role in internal security. However, there is also a need for critical reflection on this growing trend and its implications for the EU. Frameworks for risk assessment need to be contrasted with the varied or lacking risk management practices on the ground and deeper contestations of seemingly technical methods of risk assessment, going beyond the question of legal implementation that dominates the ‘post-Stockholm’ debate. This article elucidates the functional and political limits for the implementation of standardized risk assessments, but also shows how the adoption of common guidelines still serves as a political tool for the legitimation of further policy initiatives in EU internal security.

Peer reviews in the fight against terrorism: A hidden dimension of European security governance

This article analyses EU peer reviews in the fight against terrorism, which constitute a significant and previously unstudied instrument of European security governance. The first part reviews some general features of security governance and outlines two analytical perspectives to assess the effect of peer reviews in this context, namely compliance and learning. The second part surveys the historical development and substantive impact of the EU’s peer reviews on the fight against terrorism. Although the first peer review after the attacks of 9/11 was slow to unfold, it eventually came to be regarded as a highly successful exercise that improved mutual trust and the coherence of the European fight against terrorism. It was therefore followed by a second peer review on consequence management in response to terrorist attacks. From a critical perspective, the article argues that the impact of these peer reviews could be doubted from both compliance and learning perspectives, as monitoring and flanking measures have remained too weak. The conclusions raise further avenues for research on peer reviews that are a regular feature of EU security governance.

EU Borders and Shifting Internal Security

This edited volume analyzes recent key developments in EU border management. In light of the refugee crises in the Mediterranean and the responses on the part of EU member states, this volume presents an in-depth reflection on European border practices and their political, social and economic consequences. Approaching borders as concepts in flux, the authors identify three main trends: the rise of security technologies such as the EUROSUR system, the continued externalization of EU security governance such as border mission training in third states, and the unfolding dynamics of accountability. The contributions show that internal security cooperation in Europe is far from consolidated, since both political oversight mechanisms and the definition of borders remain in flux. This edited volume makes a timely and interdisciplinary contribution to the ongoing academic and political debate on the future of open borders and legitimate security governance in Europe. It offers a valuable resource for scholars in the fields of international security and migration studies, as well as for practitioners dealing with border management mechanisms.

EU cooperation on terrorism prevention and violent radicalization: frustrated ambitions or new forms of EU security governance?

This article questions the effectiveness of EU efforts to prevent terrorism and violent radicalization as well as the future prospects of such efforts. Driven by the pressure of attacks, member states have agreed on a comprehensive strategy to prevent radicalization and recruitment into terrorism, but simultaneously the strategy traces the limits of EU authority in member states in this regard. Meanwhile, the European Commission has focused on indirect measures, such as research support, for counter radicalization. However, over time, both flexible cooperation among a subset of member states and new EU initiatives have generated only few or biased policy outputs. The Stockholm Programme renewed the ambition to prevent terrorism at an early stage and underlined the EUs role in evaluation and knowledge exchange. This article questions the resulting proposal to create a network of local or subnational actors for best practice exchange. The article argues that preventive counterterrorism relies on contentious scientific evidence and that authoritative evaluations remain tied to national policy-making. Finally, the EU Commission cannot mobilize sufficient resources to ensure that ‘frontline’ organizations, such as police services, implement new practices. Taken together, this limits the potential for depoliticizing multilevel governance approaches to terrorism prevention. The conclusions of this article raise further research questions on the use of knowledge and complex governance patterns in EU internal security.

Public Good Theory and the 'Added Value' of the EU's Counterterrorism Policy

Abstract This contribution analyses the EUs fight against international terrorism from the perspective of public goods theory. The first part develops an improved conceptualisation of collective action problems in this issue area, and presents a typology of related security goods according to different aggregation technologies (weaker links, summation, better shots). The second part embeds this theoretical framework in the European context, and presents an empirical survey of the EUs anti-terrorism efforts. It is argued that the EU has been comparatively effective in responding to ‘weaker’ link vulnerabilities, even if implementation records are uneven and boundaries of security cooperation remain unclear. In contrast, the EU could not effectively aggregate resources and act jointly in the international fight against terrorism. Due to the non-excludable nature of benefits (as in the case of foreign policy) or partial rivalry of consumption (as in the case of sensitive information), concerns with free-riding and crowding remain significant obstacles to collective action. Finally, the EU increasingly supports better shot efforts to develop new instruments and technologies to combat terrorism, but may be left behind by mini-lateral initiatives of its most capable member states.