EU and the US and Their Security Needs Assessed

¶ … Net Assessment: U.S. And the EU THE U.S., THE E.U. AND TERRORISM A Net Assessment Relationship, Dependence and Vulnerabilities The Past and the 9/11 Event The United States and the European Union did not have a direct organizational connection on counter-terrorism since the 9/11 event except through multi-lateral collaborations like the Interpol, the United Nations, the Financial Action Task Force and similar fora (Segell, 2004). In view of a common concern and as an offshoot of their broad partnership, the EU and the U.S.

entered into a joint intelligence counter-terrorism collaboration. This co-occurred with the restructuring, broadening and integration of EU states. Their common interests and concern led to the establishment of the intelligence agency cooperation in response to the 9/11 event. The EU separately honed its own strategies in implementing the UN Security Council Resolution 1373 by taking a position within the purview of the EU's Second Pillar (Segell). Their Difference and Distinct Vulnerabilities Interestingly, terrorism was a cause of trouble between the EU and the U.S. (Segell, 2004).

European terrorists dwelt in academic environments in earlier times. Their groups carefully selected their targets from Europe, which served as "staging point" for the September attacks in New York. Things changed because these New York attacks were different from early ones and altogether unique. European terrorism was domestic while that of the U.S. is global in nature and more sophisticated. The difference in attacks created differences in perceptions as well as responses to the threat. Terrorism in the U.S.

is perceived in association with the Cold War because of its domestic infrequency. In contrast, it was not unusual for European governments to deal with domestic terrorists in the 70s and the 80s (Segell). A Difference in View and Approach to Terrorism As a consequence of the 9/11 disaster, the U.S. assumed a hard-line stance against terrorism, which would not yield to blackmail or make any compromises or concessions (Segell, 2004).

EU found this rigid pose incompatible with its own and for some time, could not find a common ground with the U.S. As regards the fight against terrorism. The 9/11 event led to the strengthening of the anti-terrorist intelligence cooperation between them. Europol's powers would exceed those, which were decided during the European Conference in London in March 1998. At this Conference, the Spanish representative stressed the need for the enlargement of Europol's powers to properly respond to the threat of terrorism.

Europol then was invested with the major tasks of opening and analyzing files on terrorism; the empowerment of security agencies specializing in terrorism; and the coordination of investigation teams from EU member states in a common fight (Segell). Bridging the Gap The realistic key to truly defeating terrorism is to foil acts of violence (Segell, 2004). This can be done by gathering and analyzing.