Nous Sommes Charlie: Discussing the EU Reaction to the Growing Risk of Terrorist Attacks

Global Jurist ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Capone

AbstractIn the aftermath of the deadly attacks occurred in France at the beginning of 2015 the European Union has faced an unprecedented wave of terrorism which has led to the adoption of new measures set up to counter the increasing risk of further offences. Terrorism is not new on the EU agenda, in particular since 2001. Several EU Member States have been directly involved in the US “war on terror”, triggered by the 9/11 attacks. In the following years the tragic events occurred in Madrid and London have urged the EU to design a comprehensive counter-terrorism strategy, which is based on four pillars i. e. prevention, protection, pursuit and response. The terrorist attacks carried out in January 2015 have marked the beginning of a new era in the struggle against terrorism and have prompted the adoption of a new policy, based on enhancing citizens’ security, prevention and international cooperation, which added an additional layer to the EU strategy already in place. Despite the immediate response, a few months later Paris and the whole Europe have suffered from an even more dreadful attack, which led to question the effectiveness of the newly adopted approach. In light of the current developments, this contribution has a twofold purpose.

Author(s):  
Mads Dagnis Jensen ◽  
Peter Nedergaard

The Danish EU coordination system is set up to secure a consensus-oriented and consistent positioning of Denmark in the EU decision-making process. It was established in connection with Danish membership in 1973, but it has roots that go further back. Over time, the Danish coordination system has undergone changes with increased decentralization to the sectoral ministries, through parliamentarization, and via increased transnationalization with linkages to the administrations in the EU and other EU member states. The system secures that the negotiators have a high degree of credibility in the eyes of other delegations, and it ensures a high score when it comes to implementation of EU legislation in Denmark. However, it also has some disadvantages. The key coordination lens in the form of the European Affairs Committee of the Danish Parliament is overloaded, and it is often involved too late in the Brussels negotiations. All in all, the Danish EU coordination system corresponds to the way the Danish political system works in other venues.


Author(s):  
Sanja Arezina

After the promotion of ?Made in China 2025? initiative and the beginning of US President Donald Trump?s tenure in power, in US and whole world there has been a rising negative attitude towards Chinese presence. The launch of a US-China ?trade war? and the closure of the US market for Chinese direct investment and product coincided with growing discontent of EU member states over the treatment that European companies have had at the Chinese market. As a result, there has been a change of the positive perception of the PR China by the EU member states, that was created mainly by strong inflow of Chinese investments and assistance within the ?One Belt, One Road? initiative, into a negative perception that is now forming policy changes and introduction of protectionist measures towards Chinese direct investments in European market. In this article, the author talks about the different perceptions (positive and negative) that have been formed in the PR China within the EU, the factors that have influenced the change in the perception of EU member countries towards the PR China and the consequences on the dynamics of the development of different policies at EU level. To be able to prove the basic hypothesis that Brussels, unlike the US, still shows some pragmatism by making policy changes moderate enough that the EU can remain loyal to open market principles while preventing these principles from becoming strategic vulnerability, the author uses the structural-functionalist analysis, induction, and deduction.


Author(s):  
E.V. Alferova ◽  
T.V. Zakharov

In recent years, European states have been repeatedly subjected to deadly terrorist attacks. The threat faced by EU Member States is multifaceted: from the return of foreign terrorist fighters from conflict zones to the extremist activities of homegrown terrorists and «lone wolves». In order to prevent terrorist attacks and combat terrorism, EU authorities and national states develop counter-terrorism policies and legislation. Based on the long-term activities of the UN in this area and on its own experience, the European Union adopts a large number of political and regulatory legal documents. The EU’s anti-terrorism policy and legislation are becoming more effective and realistic year after year, and intergovernmental cooperation mechanisms are being developed in the form of international treaties or politically binding recommendations and guidelines. In recent years, a number of new legal and other standards have been developed, which, together with existing international and regional strategies, conventions, recommendations and agreements, form the basis for current and future work in the field of combating terrorism and preventing radicalization and extremism leading to terrorism. The article examines some key documents of the EU and the Council of Europe adopted after September 11, 2001, including the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy of 2005, updated in 2016, as well as new directions and measures to combat terrorism in the last three years (2018-2020). Based on the legal databases of the Council of the EU, the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the Council of Europe, a quantitative sample and an approximate count of anti-terrorist and related regulatory legal and individual acts adopted in 2018-2020 were made. The proposals of scientists and experts, including those expressed at the forums of international organizations, on improving the EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy are summarized.


Information ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Berbecaru ◽  
Antonio Lioy ◽  
Cesare Cameroni

The European Union (EU) Regulation 910/2014 on electronic IDentification, Authentication, and trust Services (eIDAS) for electronic transactions in the internal market went into effect on 29 September 2018, meaning that EU Member States are required to recognize the electronic identities issued in the countries that have notified their eID schemes. Technically speaking, a unified interoperability platform—named eIDAS infrastructure—has been set up to connect the EU countries’ national eID schemes to allow a person to authenticate in their home EU country when getting access to services provided by an eIDAS-enabled Service Provider (SP) in another EU country. The eIDAS infrastructure allows the transfer of authentication requests and responses back and forth between its nodes, transporting basic attributes about a person, e.g., name, surname, date of birth, and a so-called eIDAS identifier. However, to build new eIDAS-enabled services in specific domains, additional attributes are needed. We describe our approach to retrieve and transport new attributes through the eIDAS infrastructure, and we detail their exploitation in a selected set of academic services. First, we describe the definition and the support for the additional attributes in the eIDAS nodes. We then present a solution for their retrieval from our university. Finally, we detail the design, implementation, and installation of two eIDAS-enabled academic services at our university: the eRegistration in the Erasmus student exchange program and the Login facility with national eIDs on the university portal.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-149
Author(s):  
Gabriela Belova ◽  
Gergana Georgieva

Abstract The following article is dedicated to a new data protection regime in the European Union, in particular the Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and the Council on the protection of natural persons regarding processing of personal data by authorities aiming at prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of crime offences, including execution of criminal penalties. For this purpose, the authors look first at the data protection within the Prüm framework as well as at the relevant provisions of Lisbon Treaty. Тhe important cases of the European Court of Human Rights are analyzed. Whereas in 2014 EU Member states focused on the question whether or not to retain data, the 2016 conclusion was that in some aspects data retention is the most efficient measure to ensure national security, public safety and fighting across serious crimes. The terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels call to better equip security authorities. The EU legislature made significant progress on the Data Protection regime. The Directive (EU) 2016/680, the so called the ‘Police and Criminal Justice Directive’, repeals the Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA and will enter into force on 6 May 2018.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Filauro ◽  
Zachary Parolin

This study applies improved household income data to measure and decompose trends in pan-European income inequality from 2006 to 2014. To contrast the relative significance of economic homogeneity versus the efficacy of welfare state and labor market institutions in shaping income distributions, we compare the structure of inequality in the EU-28 to that of the 50 United States. This comparison stands in contrast to the standard practice of evaluating the US against individual EU Member States. Despite the greater relative heterogeneity of the 28 EU Member States and our corrections for the underreporting of household income in the US, post-fisc income inequality in the EU-28 remains lower than that of the US from 2006 onward. Moreover, inequality appears to be rising in the US while it has remained stagnant since 2008 in the EU-28. In both unions, and particularly the US, within-state income differences contribute more to union-wide inequality than between-state differences. In a counterfactual analysis, we find that if the EU-28 matched the between-state homogeneity of the US, but maintained its relative within-country inequalities, pan-European inequality would fall by only 20 percent. Conversely, inequality in the US would fall by 34 percent if it matched the within-country inequality of the EU-28. Our findings suggest that the strengthening of egalitarian institutions within the 28 Member States is more consequential than economic convergence in reducing pan-European income inequality. We highlight institutional challenges toward achieving a ‘more equal’ Europe and discuss implications for future EU policymaking.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 7-53
Author(s):  
Marco Ventura

This article argues that more and better knowledge about the past and present of the formula ‘freedom of religion or belief’ is likely to result in a stronger consistency between the terminology and the concept, while being conducive to a richer national and international conversation on the protection and promotion of ‘religion or belief’ related rights and freedoms. In the first section (The emergence) the author maps the chronology and context of the emergence of the formula: while confirming the importance of the United Nations, it is emphasized that UN documents were not alone, and were not in isolation. In particular, the importance of the Conference, then Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and of a general international conversation, accelerated by the adoption in 1998 of the US International Religious Freedom Act, is underlined. In the second section (The features) the most significant features of the formula are identified, and it is suggested that those features should be taken as the reasons why in the last two decades the formula has proved successful at the UN and OSCE level, as well as in the context of the European Union, mainly in its external action. In the third section (The EU laboratory) the formula is mapped in the EU context and the EU framework is interpreted as a laboratory where the formula is received, challenged and reinvented in a variety of ways. In the fourth and final session (The translation) ten sets of questions are offered with respect to the linguistic and legal translation of the formula in EU Member States. If addressed, it is held, those questions might considerably improve knowledge on the formula in both its top-down and bottom-up dynamic unfolding, thus empowering scholars and actors engaged with combining the global power of the formula in English and its variations in different languages and cultures.


2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Vileyn

In federal polities citizens have multiple public identities: they are addressed as members of the federal polity and as members of a sub-federal polity. Consequently, citizens are represented at the federal level through two channels of democratic representation: federal representation and sub-federal representation. Although this is a crucial element in the set-up of a federal system, the existing literature on representation hardly touches upon this and hence we introduce an approach to systematically compare these channels of representation. In this paper we conceptualize and operationalize the new concepts and apply our approach to democratic representation in 13 federal polities, including the EU, EU member states and non-EU member states. Our analysis shows that the EU has the highest degree of sub-federal representation (i.e. representation of the member states), but also shows that the EU stands not alone among federal polities. Belgium, Canada and Switzerland are clearly characterized by a high level of sub-federal representation as well, while countries such as the US and Australia are much more based upon federal representation. We also show that the variance between the countries can be understood by looking at the systemic features of the states.


2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 79-99
Author(s):  
Justyna Misiągiewicz

Nowadays, energy security is a growing concern in state foreignpolicy. Interdependency in the energy field is a very important dimensionof contemporary relations between states and transnational corporations.Energy security is becoming a key issue for the European Union (EU). TheUnion is one of the world’s fastest-growing energy markets and the biggestimporter of energy resources. For the foreseeable future, Europe’s energydependence will probably increase. Facing a shortage of energy, Europe isdependent on imports and the EU member states need to diversify their energysupplies. The Caspian region contains some of the largest undevelopedoil and gas reserves in the world. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, thenewly independent Caspian states became open to foreign investment. Thegrowing energy needs have given the EU a strong interest in developing tieswith energy-producing states in the Caspian region to build the necessarypipeline infrastructure. In this analysis, the pipeline infrastructure that exists orwill be built in the near future will be presented. The analysis will concentrateon routes transporting gas from the Caspian region and the most importantproblems and solutions in designing the midstream energy system in the region.The key aim of the article is to analyse the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC)infrastructure project, which will inevitably contribute to the EU’s energy securityinterest.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document