Counterterrorism in the European Union

The Jihadist Terrorism report was interesting to note that the most successful attacks were likely to be lone wolf attacks while the ones to fail would involve group effort. This honestly does make more sense as the lone wolf can become spontaneous and randomly attack people - though with a lower potential body count. It also seems that ISIL is more accessible for people to join its ideology and mission rather than Al-Qaeda with its more complex attack planning, thus more ISIL activities being reported. My question though is what domestic policies were in place that makes some member states more vulnerable or successful than others? The EU most likely will have to address this unequal state of affairs in their agencies they assigned (addressed in the documents preceding this one).

Bringing up Buddhists as perceived to be attacking Sunni Islam made me remember that Aum Shinrikyo, the Japanese doomsday cult responsible for the Tokyo subway sarin attack (killed thirteen people and injured more than a thousand), had self-perceived itself to be Japanese Buddhism offshoot. I was a bit confused for the indicators this report used to measure its failed and complete attacks though. Why did the May 24 France attack fail when it injured 13 people via IED (page 36)? The attack did successfully go through, it just didn't kill anyone. The succeeding paragraph also confused me for the same reason. The male IT specialist working for a police intelligence unit is the prime example of what I had meant in a previous post with "ghost skins" for Europe. They needed to address that in their reports for investigation and not just mention the abuse of private and nonprofit sectors' services.

The mental illness distinction seemed to be very important, as according to Bruce Hoffman, it's important to distinguish motive due to terrorism being perceived by the actor as righteous and inherently unselfish compared to other types of criminal acts.

Overall, it seems the general trend for the profile of a terrorist that I can gather from this report is usually male, young in their 20s, and used either blades or IEDs. I was surprised not to see the use of vehicles as much, though I may have conflated past news reports with the EU's situation from 2015 to 2019.

A section that grasps my attention from the Counter-Terrorism Agenda for the EU was the EU's strategy and agenda for border security when protecting its internal and external borders within the Schengen area and new technologies to support such efforts on page 12. It highlights that EU nations must regulate their borders, as lenient border security opens/ exposes possible threats to communities and nations, while referencing the 2015 Paris terrorist attack orchestrated by foreign terrorist fighters from Syria. Taking into account that many refugees/asylum seekers who enter the EU are from Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan and enter through the sea borders(mainly Greece, Italy, and Spain), was the EU's commissions agenda to tighten border security a reflection of the many EU nations' reluctance to house refugees?

I question this because when looking at the European Commission Statistics on migration to Europe and its illegal EU border crossings by nationality for 2019 (https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/promoting-our-european-way-life/statistics-migration-europe_en#illegalbordercrossings) , Syrians and Afghani's made up the majority by 17 and 24 percent. Because of the active war zones and Islamic terrorist presence in counties like Syria and Afghanistan, asylum seekers from those regions have become a negative connotation with an association to terrorism. When looking at the recent October terrorist attacks in France, both terrorists were of refugee status acting in the name of Islam and one was in association with Russian jihadists. Terrorist attacks like these have sparked xenophobic tension and rhetoric towards Muslim migrants and refugees from both EU citizens and politicians, pushing for tight border security.

Today's reading was interesting and relates fully to what I have been posting on for the past couple weeks. What surprised me the most is that some cases of right-wing extremism were deemed as not terrorism. Right-wing extremism is not talked about as often as Islamic terrorism and I believe it is time to take right-wing extremism as seriously. I personally did not know that there were as many attacks by right wings extremists as portrayed by the article. I think even the media plays a role in choosing not to broadcast certain things to the public and maybe if they did it would be just for a couple days and then the story is forgotten. On the other hand, when it is a Radical Islamic terrorist attack the story is on every news channel.

One of the most fascinating (and disturbing) elements of this document is the link between sexual frustration plays in violent radicalization. As @Alex Gintz touched on, the lack of self-awareness and resulting conspiratorial attitudes towards women that stem from male loneliness and sexual frustration are problems that need to be solved at the socio-cultural level rather than the political one.

It's a connection that can be seen outside of terrorism as well. Many of the infamous school shooters in the United States (such as at Sandy Hook and Santa Barbra) were motivated by their unfulfilled desires and sense of victimization.

Just as I've commented on previous documents discussed, the key is finding ways to help these young men avoid the pitfalls of social isolation. Education supporting emotional and sexual health will be vital.

Right wing terrorism is a major issue facing the world today. It is the suppression and rejection of minorities all around the world. I like that the article touches on how it is made up of several subcurrents that all come together to make up right-wing extremism. As a human rights advocate, I would like to stress the importance of our inalienable rights. These are rights that are the exact same for all citizens, no matter their background. No one minority is given less rights, or deserves less attention. We are all created equal, and these types of groups threaten the equality that we have been striving to achieve. These groups use fake theories such as the "Great Replacement" to justify their actions. They genuinely believe that Jews are trying to replace the general population. Being Jewish, this is not only extremely offensive, but extremely inaccurate.

The concept that "right-wing extremist ideology is not uniform but feeds from different sub-currents, united in their rejection of diversity and minority rights" really stood out to me. White supremacy is nothing new- but we traditionally think of groups like the KKK (in the US) or the Nazi party. However, more recently white supremacy has been evolving and gaining momentum. The older white supremacy ideologies have been combining with a mixture of anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, and the newer alt-right and neonationalist movements. As the line blurs between different right-wing extremist beliefs, I think that the threat of right-wing terrorism will only grow.

Secondly, the problem of online radicalization of terrorists, specifically right-wing extremists, cannot be overstated. Over a third of white supremacist extremists who carried out terrorist attacks from 2011-2019 explicitly stated they were inspired by another similar attacker or showed reverence for their acts. The copycat effect that is perpetuated on the dark web is truly terrifying. This link has some really good graphics to visualize lot of what this Europol document mentions.

The first thought that came to mind after finishing today's document was that I don't think it's surprising that far-right extremism gets a bit of a free pass, for want of a better term. The reasoning for most far right extremism is often less-explicit on the surface and based outside of religion or spirituality, with a pseudo-political core. This would seem to make it easy to bring people under the umbrella of more extremist views through rhetoric alone. One example of this is what I regard as an extremely unhealthy dialogue surrounding male-female relationships. Technically, there's nothing politically dangerous about sexually frustrated men feeling that their lack of success in relationships indicates some form of female inferiority to men. Despite this lack of technical danger, a man, particularly a young one, who is struggling with a sense of belonging and purpose as a result of romantic failure is much more susceptible to falling into an echo-chamber of extreme, resentful, misogynist views. For aspects like this that contribute to the development of far-right extremism, I don't believe there's a political solution.

“The right-wing scene is described as extremely heterogeneous both from a structural and ideological perspective (pg. 5).” At first glance, this may seem somewhat assuring given that there would be no clear message or real structure to the right-wing extremist groups and demonstrate an inability to carry out any violent attacks consolidated by some widely supported or common goal and ideology. However, what’s more concerning from the right-wing terrorism article as opposed to Juhadist terrorism are these public networking events that have been cited in the article that can help make it easier for different groups under right-wing extremism to meet and perhaps coordinate a more unified message that I believe would lead to more attacks. What’s even more concerning is that in the EU, some of these violent attacks by right-wing extremism aren’t classified as terrorism under national legislation. Specifying violent right-wing extremist attacks under national legislation as terrorism in Europe may deter certain right-wing extremist groups from carrying out attacks. If Europe and the rest of the world truly wish to tackle terrorism and pass comprehensive counterterrorism legislation, that should begin with defining terrorism as terrorism despite what groups this may or may not affect.

While there is little to no white-supremacist attacks in China, I appreciated the chapter's focus on the interconnectivity of these extremist groups. It amazes me that Europe's far-right extremist groups use music venues and concerts to network between the groups. While thee groups remain largely are independent to each other, their ability to coordinate a possible large-scale attack is heightened by these networking events. The "Rock against Communism" music genre was noted as a massive unifying event for these groups. I believe events like this, meant to side-step home country bans on specific groups, create a greater security risk for Europe as a whole than any one group could pose.

While wholly outside of my specialty, today's article was still an interesting read. My greatest takeaway from the reading was that the existence of multiple ideological draws to terrorism in Europe are not only threats to the general cosmopolitan population of Europe, but direct threats to each other in their ultimate aims. I wonder if the two "groups" (loosely defined) might try to undermine each other?

Today's article on Right-wing terrorism is disturbing. In comparison to Jihadist terrorism, it seems as if right-wing terrorists can have more interactions with one another. I simply couldn't fathom a Jihadist group in Europe being allowed to do paramilitary training in public spaces without law enforcement getting involved. In addition to this, I find it interesting that other right-wing attacks aren't considered terrorism under national legislation. If this was the case, these statistics would be doubled.

I understand that there is a racial bias in terrorism, yet I fail to understand why right-wing terrorism fails to have the same counterterrorism efforts as other forms of terrorism. If anything, it's more harmful than international terrorism as the perpetrators actively seek to blend into all forms of society and successfully do as they're white. Governments across the EU have far-right groups/members in their parliaments and are gaining more traction as immigration to the EU increases. Xenophobia, racism, and populism are also gaining traction as a result.

While the article doesn't specifically relate to Latin American immigration, I argue that these current counterterrorism policies will impact immigration in the future should far-right members gain enough traction to influence foreign policy.

It's kind of interesting to note that France has arrested significantly more suspected jihadists than any other European country. Some of this could potentially be explained by the fact that France (at least in 2018) has the highest proportion of Muslims to non-muslims in all of Europe, largely due to migration from the Maghreb and the Sahel. Though of course, not all Muslims are Jihadists, and this correlation does not equate to causation.

A more prominent factor may be the fact that France has historically had some shaky relationships with Muslim countries. Wounds from French colonial regimes in Algeria, Tunisia, and Morroco remain to this day, and French presence in the Sahel and the middle east may fuel hatred against them. More recently, France banning the hijab and President Macron's controversial comments about Islam may further widen the rift between France and the Muslim world, leading to more risk for terrorist attacks in France.

My two main takeaways from this piece will echo what has already been said. Nevertheless, I was impressed that this document made a point of discussing the links between mental health and terrorism. It's always easy to assume absolute malevolence on the part of a criminal, however human beings are too complicated for such a quick, clear-cut standard of judgement. I was also impressed to see a clear definition of Jihadist terrorism. Over the past 5 years or so, I feel as though there's been a serious upswing in the use of the term terrorism as applied to many different acts of violence. I worry that applying the term terrorist to perpetrators of shootings, for example, will discredit the severity of the cause motivated nature of terrorist acts, awful as general shootings may be.

Today's article on Jihadist terrorism was informative. While the term is frequently mentioned, this is the first document I've come across that defined the term and provided clear examples. Seeing the general trend decrease from 2016-19 reveals that counterterrorism efforts are working in the EU. I wonder how much of this is due to mental health work on this demographic? The statistics on mental health provided useful information on discerning mental illness from extremism. If more research can be done in this area, I think the spread of radicalization in the EU might decrease extensively.

While this isn't comparable to my specialty, the cases detailed reveal a general pattern of gender and age. Potential research should be done on masculinity and extremism. I recall the UK statistic on men having untreated mental health issues that they fail to seek help for as a result of their gender. With the EU being generally individualistic in some aspects, a man's feelings of having a "Greater purpose" in life in conjunction with mental illness might lead to extremism.

The last thought I have on this article is on the rise in Xenophobia. Despite the data revealing a decreasing trend in individuals arrested, coverage on the topic is increasing in Western media. I wonder if this information will add to the growing dissent on immigrants in the EU.

I am concerned that the problem of jihadist terrorism will be exacerbated in Western Europe. As there has been a consistent stream of radical Islamist attacks in Western Europe since around 2015, negative perceptions of Muslims has been growing. For example, there has been a number of anti-Islamic laws in Europe like France's veil ban. As individuals feel excluded or disenfranchised by society, anger and frustration are more likely to lead to aggressive responses.

I was also rather impressed by the number of foiled attacks and arrests in early planning. Connecting this to Russia, just this week 19 people were arrested by the FSB in Russia as suspected radical Islamists.

I think it is important to note that the three completed attacks were carried out by lone suspects (although IS claimed responsibility for one), and in contrast the majority of foiled attacks had multiple suspects. As the document mentions, jihadists in Europe have very loose networks. The lack of formal structure it difficult not only to identify radicalized individuals that may pursue violence, but also to investigate and stop attacks.

While outside of my specialty, this article remains a fascinating read primarily because of the connection it suggests between mental health issues and certain terroristic tendencies, and because it gives a clear definition of Jihadism to identify and work against. I think that it would be of indescribable benefit to the situation of the Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang if the CCP made an effort to properly define extremism, and isolate/identify as legitimate extremist attacks as examples of extremist attacks, thereby producing an actual counterterrorist campaign out of the current, general anti-Uyghur policies in place. For reasons that I feel are obvious, I doubt that the CCP will ever do that.

It was interesting to read the mental illness aspect to terrorists' behaviors. I think most people do not think of terrorists as mentally ill, but rather just radical and extreme. In addition, as mentioned, personality disorders are a contributing factor to why some people choose to join a terrorist group. One sentence that caught my eye is "radicalisation offered him an identity". People look for whatever means they ca get in order to have a sense of direction.

It was interesting to see the number of plots that were foiled, I think that was a great sucess by the law enforcement agencies.

The Europol Jihadist Terrorism article was very enlightening. A few things I thought the article did well:

1. Defined what Jihadist terrorism is and gave a little bit of background and context.

2. Discussed the link between terrorism and mental health.

3. Discussed the number of foiled terrorist plots by law enforcement in 2019.

Areas for expansion: While I think the article did a good job introducing or discussing the link between mental health and terrorism (something we haven’t really read or considered until this point), I would like to see more studies/cases/research done on that don’t necessarily give a timeline, but a more defined analysis of how mental health can lead to terrorism or “violent acts” considered to be terrorism specifically.

However, I think this article does open up a broader discussion of how mental illness is treated in certain societies or countries. For instance, are the perpetrators that carry out these violent attacks that are linked to mental illness getting treatment for it before they carry out these attacks? Do their disorders go unnoticed until they carry out an attack? Although this article does directly relate to terrorism, I think one major takeaway from it could also be how mental illness is diagnosed/treated. The article only gives a few examples of instances that untreated disorders (perhaps) can not only put the individual at risk, but in the case of the Hague stabbings in the Netherlands in 2018, put others at risk as well. We can’t allow an illness to get to that point especially when extremists may target people who are more susceptible to radicalization or simply target those that could be acting out as a symptom of their disorder.

What constitutes as terrorism is the “unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims”; and when looking into the document, it is a bit confusing to understand if the mental state of these perpetrators are being labeled accordingly. Another form of terrorism that seems to get confused for political terrorism is the religious side of terrorism where extreme heinous acts are carried out on specific ethnic groups. On page 35 we see that Jihadist terrorism is better suited for those with mental instability which cause a radicalization effect which in turn blurs the ideological conviction of the crime. Take for example on page 36 when a court case came about involving “The Hague (Netherlands) on 5 May 2018, for example, the court held that there was no terrorist motive and that the perpetrator’s actions were the result of a psychotic disorder“. If we look at statistics though we see there is a steady decrease in arrested suspects in the EU, from 687 people in 2015 to 436 in 2019. I feel that implementing AI to facial recognize people at airports would be beneficial to catching those that may inflict harm on others for political gains or mental instability. To further explain my thoughts on AI software and in airports, I feel that right after exiting and entering the aircraft, one should have their picture taken and uploaded into a database to track individuals on how long they have been gone and to have their picture in a database to reference later. If a camera picks up their face signature after an attack and the perpetrator gets away, it would send a signal to authorities with both a clear photo from the airport and a small clip of the person in action committing the crimes. This would fall under defense innovation and counter terrorism measures.

I liked that the Europol Jihadist Terrorism chapter gave a precise and clear definition of what Jihadism is and who would be classified as a Jihadi terrorist. This helps policymakers/ judges to better understand the characteristics of this type of extremism and how to better combat radicalization towards Jihadism. China could take note of definitions like these, which would enable them to better identify suspected terrorists in the PRC. Because China does not have a clear definition of any type of terrorism, they employ a mass surveillance and detention strategy of suspect demographics, such as the Uyghurs of Xinjiang. There have been legitimate extremist attacks in the province, such as the needle attacks in 2009, but labeling any Uyghur's that hold anti-CCP views as extremists have resulted in the reported 1.5 million detainees in their re-education camps. China has a complicated argument to make in justifying these mass detentions in the name of combating terrorist extremism.

I also appreciated the chapters linkage of mental health and terrorism. Many extremist tendencies/ actions are very similar to tendencies of those combating mental health disorders. Regarding The Hague stabbings in May of 2018, the judge presiding over the case determined his actions were the result of his paranoid psychosis, eve though his actions appeared to be a terrorist act. Mental health disorders could present symptoms similar to extremism and I am happy to see institutions like Europol are distinguishing between the two.