Introduction: Statistics have proven that both the European Union (“EU”) and the Russian Federation (“Russia”) suffer from terrorism in its current form. Intensifying partnerships to combat terrorism would be a good idea. This essay envisages to illustrate a common base for cooperation in the fight against terrorism despite of some general differences in policy and structure between the EU and Russia.Materials and methods: The methodological basis of the research has both an analytical and descriptive nature. As for the analytical nature, statistical, qualitative and comparative analyses were used while researching political phenomena and processes in the sphere of national security and counterterrorism. The author also applied the inductive method. The materials observed include the distinct approaches of Russia and the EU in terms of threats to national security including terrorism.Results: The author reveals there are four fundamental issues which ask for more attention in the EU-Russia dialogue on Freedom, Justice and Security and particularly with regard to the fight against terrorism. Firstly, statistics prove that Europe (EU and Russia) are impacted by modern terrorism, yet not by the same cases of terrorism. Secondly, Russia’s experience in counterterrorism is crucial. Thirdly, the scale ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’ versus ‘security’ has not the same ratio in the EU and in Russia. Fourthly, the concept sovereignty is differently interpreted by the EU, the EU Member States and Russia. Despite all the differences in views, it is clear that the EU could learn a lot from Russia, as one of the key States with considerable experience in the fight against terrorism. Although the EU and Russia face different forms and problems and the roots of Western European terrorism sometimes have a slightly different origin, this does not negate the fact that they could foster cooperation.Discussion and conclusion: The governmental approaches of the EU and Russia on national security were discussed as well as the common grounds for cooperation, namely the threat of terrorism. It is proved that both systems have different features and are not always compatible with each other. The following recommendation of setting up an anti-terrorism working group was provided as well as the advice to eliminate the political distrust.
The State’s Changing Role Regarding the Kurdish Question of Turkey: From Consistent Tutelage to Volatile Securitization
