Connect with us

Terrorism

Turkey’s Independence Struggle

Published

on

[yt_dropcap type=”square” font=”” size=”14″ color=”#000″ background=”#fff” ] W [/yt_dropcap] e are witnessing terrorist organizations using a tool in the war between countries. Turkey has been fighting PKK terrorist organization for 35 years. But this is just tip of the iceberg. The PKK is just a simple terrorist organization.

Turkey, on the other hand, is a powerful state based on the Ottoman Empire, whose history is full of wars, which dominated 3 continents. The continuation of this war for 35 years indicates that Turkey has not fought a simple terrorist organization. For 35 years, Turkey has been fighting against the coalition of countries that provide arms to the PKK terrorist organization and provide logistical support. It is not possible to fight against Turkey unless the PKK terrorist organization obtains support from the outside. A simple terrorist organization can never fight a big state for 35 years.

States with imperial aims in the Middle East use the PKK terrorist force against Turkey. When Turkey does not accept the policies of these states, the PKK terrorist organization is attacking in Turkey. Bombs explode in Turkey when Turkey, Asia and Middle East countries and oil and natural gas agreements are made. These are never a coincidence.

Turkey has made important progress in the defense industry in recent years. These progresses are very important in terms of Turkey’s national independence. Because Turkey understood that on July 15th the coup and occupation initiative was solitary and that allies were not helped. In fact, Turkey understand that some of its allies were supporting the FETO terrorist organization in the coup attempt. For this reason, after the coup and invasion attempt, the prospect of economic and political independence emerged.

Turkey is a strategically important country. Countries that are friendly with Turkey have achieved significant gains. Some countries support terrorist organizations against the possibility of the axis change of Turkey. Terrorist organizations used against Turkey and supported by some countries are PKK terrorist organization, FETO terrorist organization, ISIL terrorist organization.

Let’s just look at the attack by the PKK and ISİL terrorist organizations in Turkey in 2016. (Source: http://www.aljazeera.com.tr/haber/2016daki-bombali-saldirilar)

January 12, 2016 – Istanbul, Sultanahmet

In the suicide attack of ISIS in Sultanahmet Square in Istanbul, 13 German tourists lost their lives. Fourteen foreign nationals were injured in the explosion.

January 14, 2016 – Diyarbakır, Çınar

In the Çınar district of Diyarbakir, the Police Headquarters building, where the police lodge was located, was attacked by PKK members with bombed vehicles. Two of them lost their lives. 39 people were injured, including 6 police and 8 police officers.

February 17, 2016 – Ankara

In Ankara, 29 people, including civilians, lost their lives in a bombed vehicle attack on service vehicles carrying Turkish Armed Forces personnel. 61 people were injured in the attack. Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the attack was carried out by the PKK in Syria. The PKK-affiliated organization TAK stated that the action was carried out by them.

March 13, 2016 – Ankara, Red Crescent

A car bomb was detonated near Güvenpark in Ankara Red Crescent. The PKK killed 37 people and 71 people were wounded in the attack.

19 March 2016 – Istanbul, Istiklal Street

Istanbul, on Istiklal Street, killed 5 people, including himself, as a result of an explosion of the bomb on the member of ISIS. 37 people were wounded in the attack. Twelve of the injured were foreign nationals.

March 31, 2016 – Diyarbakır

7 policemen were killed in the bombardment attack on the police service near the Diyarbakir Bus Station. 13 police and 14 civilians were injured. The attack was organized by the PKK.

April 27, 2016 – Bursa

Bursa, Ulu Camii next to a live bomb attack that killed a person, 13 people were injured. Attack PKK-affiliated TAK has undertaken. Dönem Interior Minister Efkan Alla explains that the attacker is a 24-year-old PKK member Traitor.

May 1, 2016 – Gaziantep

Gaziantep police headquarters building was attacked with a bombed vehicle, 2 police martyrs, 19 police, 23 people were injured. It was announced that the attack was linked to ISID.

May 12, 2016 – Diyarbakir

A bomb-loaded truck belonging to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) killed 16 people, 23 others were injured in the Dürümlü field of Sur province of Diyarbakir.

June 7, 2016 – Istanbul, Vezneciler

The Istanbul Vezneciler was attacked with a bombed vehicle. Six policemen were killed and five civilians were killed in an attack targeting the aggressive force. 36 people were wounded in the attack on 3 heavy. The attack was a TAK.

June 8, 2016 – Mardin, Midyat

The police headquarters in Mardin’s Midyat district was attacked with a bombed vehicle. Two of the police have lost their lives in the attack. 34 people were injured. PKK attacked the attack.

June 28, 2016 – Istanbul

At the Istanbul Atatürk Airport, 45 people were killed and 239 people were injured in the armed attack on three people who were reported to be members of ISIS.

August 1, 2016 – Bingöl

7 policemen were killed and 2 policemen were wounded in bombardment attack against armored midibus carrying agile police officers in Bingöl. PKK attacked the attack.

August 10, 2016 – Diyarbakir

On the way to Mardin in Diyarbakir, besides a vehicle belonging to agile force, the bomb-laden vehicle lost five civilian lives after the explosion of the vehicle. 5 police and 12 people were injured. PKK attacked the attack.

August 10, 2016 – Mardin, Kızıltepe

Mardin Kızıltepe municipality in the parking lot bomb-loaded vehicle detonated during the passage of vehicles carrying agile force teams. In the explosion, a police officer and two civilians lost their lives. 5 police officers injured 30 people. PKK attacked the attack.

August 16, 2016 – Diyarbakir, Çınar

In the Çınar district of Diyarbakir, the PKK attacked the Regional Traffic Directorate with a bombed vehicle. In the attack, 5 police officers were martyred, one kid lost 2 civil lives.

August 17, 2016 – Van

Police detonated a bomb-laden vehicle parked in front of two April Police Station in Van city center, and the police lost four lives. Twenty police officers and 72 police officers were hurt. PKK attacked the attack.

August 18, 2016 – Elazig

Elazığ Police Department, organized by the PKK bombers attacked 5 security guards were killed, 217 people were injured.

August 20, 2016 – Gaziantep

52 people lost their lives in a suicide attack on a henna night in Gaziantep, 94 people were injured. Officials said the attack was behind ISIS.

August 26, 2016 – Sirnak, Cizre

11 police officers were killed and 78 people were injured in the bombed vehicle attack in the agile force branch directorate in Cizre province of Şırnak. PKK attacked the attack.

September 12, 2016 – Van

The PKK attacked the first day of the Feast of Sacrifice in Van city center with a bombed vehicle. At the police point in front of AK Party Provincial Presidency, 53 people were wounded in the explosion and 53 people were injured. PKK attacked the attack.

October 6, 2016 – Istanbul, Yenibosna

Ten people were injured in a motorcycle-bombing explosion near the police station in Yenibosna, Istanbul. One day after the security units, a PKK member caught in the province of Aksaray said that the attack was a fallacy.

4 November 2016 – Diyarbakır, Bağlar

The Police Department, located in the Bağlar district of Diyarbakir, was attacked by a vehicle loaded with a bomb near an additional building where the branches of Anti-Terror and Aggressive Force took place and 2 police officers lost their lives. The attack was carried out by both the ISIS and the PKK-linked TAK. The Governor of Diyarbakir announced that the PKK was attacking.

November 24, 2016 – Adana

The bomb-loaded car exploded in Adana Governor’s car park. Two people lost their lives in the attack and 33 people were injured. The attack was undertaken by the organization TAK.

December 10, 2016 – Istanbul

Besiktas-Bursaspor after the match in front of the Vodafone Arena was detonated a vehicle in the course of 45 seconds later, immediately stopped at a nearby Maçka Park a person himself exploded.

Most police officers lost at least 38 people during the attacks targeted by the police. More than 150 people were injured. Officials pointed to the PKK as a felicitous assault.

These are attacks that are only in 1 year. Turkey is in a great war. The countries behind these terrorist organizations know the Turkish state very well. These are so cowardly countries that they do not want to fight directly with Turkey. Because they know very well how they are being disrupted by the Turks in history.

But as President Erdogan said in his historical speech breaking record on Youtube:

“Turkey is not just the name of country

Turkey also is a name of hope for millions of oppressed and aggrieved Muslim.

We know clearly the purpose of ruse in Syria at the expense of 400.000 innocent people

We are quite aware of the underlying causes that why the terrorist organization are dragging region again into blood and destruction, while they were at the phase of armistice once.

I’m telling one more time;

THEY WON’T SUCCEED !

If the point had been preponderance of numbers or weapons:

Sultan Alp Arslan wouldn’t have succeed

Kilij Arslan wouldn’t have succeed

Malik Shah wouldn’t have succeed

Murad Hüdavendigâr wouldn’t have succeed

If the point had been just technology the Gallipoli campaign would result in different,

Turkish war of independence would have result in different

They won’t divide our citizens !

They won’t break into pieces our country !

They won’t prevent us from waving to our flag !

They won’t silence the azans that play five times every day !

do you know what is the point ?

“la galibe illlallah” [The victor only belongs to Allah ]

We will know that !”

Terrorism

Beyond Bombs and Bullets: A Comprehensive Approach Needed to Defeat ISIS

Zakir Gul, Ph.D.

Published

on

Many articles with similar ideas have been written about the current situation with ISIS and what will happen to the terrorist organization in the future. Most of these articles, however, ask incomplete or incorrect questions, which leads to inaccurate assessments of the safety of the world when ISIS is defeated. The articles typically ask questions such as: Can it be claimed that removal of ISIS from the territory in which it operates mean the end to ISIS, or is it only the displacement of terrorism? Shall we celebrate the defeat of ISIS or still be concerned about it? These questions, unfortunately, are incomplete and do not address key elements of the issue. The critical, and more appropriate, questions to ask are: Will the violent and extreme mindset and ideology end when ISIS is defeated? Is it possible that ISIS will transform itself or merges with another terrorist group? Is hard power the solution?

ISIS is just another body into which the violent and extremist ideology of jihadi Salafism has entered. The body dies, but the soul does not. When the body dies, the bad soul will enter another body of a different name. In the case of a defeated ISIS, the organization will die physically but survive as others take up its cause. As long as the violent and extremist ideology and dark soul of ISIS survives, there will always be a body for the soul to wear. The jihadi Salafist ideology will live a new life in a body transformed into another shape and structure.

Failure to ask the right questions means being unable to see and diagnose the problem correctly, intervene correctly, respond correctly, offer the correct solutions, and correctly assess the outcome rightly. In other words, a mistaken first step often leads to subsequent missteps and dire consequences in the long run. For example, when tar is on fire, the expected and first response would be to douse the fire with water; however, the compounds in the tar render water ineffective in putting out the fire and may even make the situation worse.In terms of terrorism, ISIS is the tar, and the commonsense first response would be to use all power available to eradicate the organization.

The literature on terrorism acknowledges that terrorism and radicalization are complex and multidimensional concepts that involve social, psychological, political, financial, and educational issues. Given this mix of factors, could a military and/or law enforcement intervention be the solution to terrorism and radicalization? The answer is “no.” Could the hard power be the solution to some psychological factors (i.e., alienation) or political factors (i.e., political exclusion and oppression) of joining terrorist groups? Again, the answer is “no.” The answer will always be “no” until the solution offered addresses the multiple dimensions of the problem with a comprehensive, but individualized, approach. A reliance on bombs, bullets, and warfare alone will not suffice.

For example, if an individual joins a terrorist group because of a family issue—such as forced marriage, domestic violence, or alienation from close relatives, lack of love and respect among family members—then the approach should focus on family structures and family environments. If an individual whose spouse, children, or extended family members were killed by government security forces longs for revenge and is recruited as a suicide bomber, a military/law enforcement solution alone will not solve the underlying problem. Nor is it the correct approach when an individual has joined a terrorist organization in response to the lack of democratic and human rights. If militants are recruited and exposed to propaganda in virtual environments, then the counterterrorism approach should address those virtual environments to neutralize the terrorist indoctrination. If potential militants are easily swayed by radicals misinterpreting and exploiting religious scriptures because they are poorly educated and lack religious awareness and knowledge, then the counterterrorism approach should focus on counter-narratives and religion-awareness programs. A continued emphasis on tanks, gunfire, and bombs, is a waste of precious money, time, and effort, and lives and, worse yet, justification of terrorist narratives.

Continue Reading

Terrorism

Jihadists of Katibat Imam al Bukhari are afraid of the US strike

Uran Botobekov

Published

on

The US State Department added Central Asian jihadist group Katibat Imam al Bukhari (KIB) to the US government’s list of specially designated global terrorist organizations on March 22, 2018.

As noted in the statement “the Department of State has designated KIB as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Section 1(b) of Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, which imposes strict sanctions on foreign persons determined to have committed, or pose a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States. This designation seeks to deny KIB the resources it needs to plan and carry out further terrorist attacks. Among other consequences, all of the group’s property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in any transactions with the group.”

It is already common knowledge that,KIB is fighting in Syria as part of the al Qaeda-linked rebel coalition Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham. The KIB detachment was created in Afghanistan on the basis of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. KIB also operates in Afghanistan and has pledged loyalty to the Taliban, who are in turn tight allies with al-Qaeda and the Haqqani network. After the outbreak of the civil war in Syria in 2012, KIB, on the recommendation of Al-Qaeda, moved to the province of Idlib and distinguished itself as one of the major rebel groups fighting against the regime of Bashar Assad. A group of the jihadists of the KIB is also based in Afghanistan today and is fighting together with the Taliban. About 200 militants are known to fight in the KIB. The propaganda materials of the group are actively disseminated in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Russia and Kazakhstan.

Three days after the decision of the US State Department to include KIB in the list of global terrorist organizations, Shura of the KIB issued its own statementin response. In itsown statement, which was released via Telegram on March 25, 2018, KIB protested their designation as terrorists by the State Department. KIB states that it “was surprised by the American resolution to enlist the Imam al Bukhari Brigade on the world terror list notwithstanding that we do not have ideological or intellectual ties with any faction internationally enlisted.”

It is most interesting that Shura of the KIB, for its protection, used a lot of peaceful terms in their response such as «international law», «rights of freedom», “murderous Assad regime”, “struggle for а decent life of the Syrian people”, etc.

KIB claimed in their response, that their volunteers from many Central Asian countries, including Uzbekistan, formed their brigade “as a result of the war’s long duration in Syria and the increasing number of expats.”Shura of the KIB described his mission in the Middle East as protecting the simple and peaceful Syrian people from the bloody regime of Assad and his external sponsors, Hezbollah, Iranian Shiite militants and Russia.

KIB also claimed that they’ve been fighting with the Free Syrian Army to protect civilians against threats like ISIS, “which pushed ISIS to assassinate our previous leader (Sheikh Salahuddin).””The classification of Imam al-Bukhari Brigade by U.S., turns a blind eye on thousands of the Iranian-backed foreign Shiite militias that commit war crimes against the Syrians, and proves that the U.S. applies double standards and it is only concerned about its interests,” KIB continued.The Shura of group vowed to stay the course “in spite of pains and problems whether in our country or by the world order.”

In this regard, it should be noted that the “justifiable arguments” of the KIB that its fighters are fighting against the regime of Bashar al-Assad and precisely because of this fact they should not be included in the list of world terrorist groups does not make sense.Firstly, not only the numerous factions of armed revolutionaries and the fragmentary Syrian opposition are fighting against the regime of Bashar Assad, but also the world jihadist groups ISIS and Al-Qaeda.However, their goals are completely different. If the peaceful Syrian opposition wants to build a democratic state in Syria in the future, then ISIS and Al Qaeda are fighting for the establishment of the Islamic Caliphate in the Middle East.Al-Qaeda backed KIB that affiliated with Jabhat al Nusra, completely shares the position of his patrons.

Secondly, radical Salafism and militant Takfirism are the fundamental basis of the jihadi ideology of the KIB.In accordance with the ideological doctrine of KIB that was recently published on its Telegram channel, the group considers its goal the construction of an Islamic state in Central Asia, the overthrow of the regime of Bashar al-Assad, and the protection and spread of jihadi ideology around the world by force.

Jihadists of Katibat in training

Thirdly, jihad is the main tool for KIB in achieving its goals, that is, in building the Islamic Caliphate.In their propaganda materials, KIB leaders urge Muslims to wage jihad against the godless regimes of Central Asia and the West.After President Trump decided the U.S. Embassy would move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, KIB leader Abu Yusuf Muhojir posted on his Telegram page a pledge to defend the Al-Aqsa Mosque and wage jihad on the West.

The Syrian Liberation Front (SLF) — a joint venture formed by Ahrar al-Sham and the Nur al-Din al-Zanki Movement in February — has joined KIB in denouncing the State Department’s designation as well.In its statement the SLF argues that the KIB is an “independent” faction comprised of Uzbeks who were “forced out of their country” and who now fight against the Assad regime and ISIS. It is known that Ahrar al-Sham is an al Qaeda backed Salafi-jihadi group who fought alongside Al Nusrah Front in the past.The SLF also points to the assassination of KIB leader Sheikh Salahuddinlast year, alleging that ISIS cooperated with “Russian intelligence” in the killing.

In this regard, it should be noted that the assassination of the leader of KIB Sheikh Salahuddin is related to the confrontation between ISIS and al-Qaida, which led to internal fighting among the Central Asian jihadists in Syria.His real name was Akmal Jurabaev and he was born and grew up in the Uzbek town of Namangan. He shared the religious views and Salafi ideology of the Taliban and al Qaeda. On April 27, 2017, during the evening prayer in the mosque of a Syrian city of Idlib, Sheikh Salahuddin was killed by an Uzbek militant who was a member of ISIS. The Islamic State distributed the following statement via Telegram messenger in this regard, “The emir of detachment of Katibat al-Imam Bukhari, Sheikh Salahuddin, was punished according to the Sharia law for all the betrayals he committed.”

The Uzbek militant from Tajikistan, known as Abu Yusuf Muhojir, was appointed the new leader of the group. The Uzbek social networks have characterized him as the distinguished military strategist who has implemented a series of successful operations against the army of Bashar Assad. After the comprehensive analysis of his public speeches in the audio format published on the Telegram, we can draw the following conclusions: Abu Yusuf Muhojirhas the deep religious knowledge, knew the nuances of the Islamic Fiqh (jurisprudence) and jihad.

It is no accident that in their statements, KIB and SLF appealed to the fact that the leader of the Uzbek jihadists, Sheikh Salahuddin,was assassinated by ISIS militants.Using this argument that Uzbek militants are fighting with ISIS and their leader has fallen by the hands of Abu Bakr al Baghdadi supporters, KIB is trying to justify its terrorist activities and to avoid international persecution in accordance with the US list of Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

This is not the first time that the United States has designateda Central Asian jihadist group on the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) list.After designation of a terrorist group in the list of global terrorists, the US special services are allowed to carry out operations to eliminate the leaders of those terrorist groups, to take decisive measures to destroy financial schemes and to effectively put international pressure on them.

As is already known, the US State Department has designated the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan(IMU) in the Foreign Terrorist Organizations list on September 25, 2000.As a result, the leader of the group Tahir Yuldash (2009) and the military commander of the group Juma Namangoni (2001) were killed as a result of US missile airstrike.

On June 17, 2005, the US State Department designated the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU) to the Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.The IJU is a splinter faction of the IMU, and a substantial number of its members are from Central Asia.The IJU has been waging jihad in the Afghan-Pakistan region for more than a decade. It maintains close ties with al Qaeda and Taliban leaders. The US has killed several top IJU leaders, including its emir, Najmuddin Jalolov, in drone strikes in North Waziristan 2009.

On December 29, 2004, the US State Department designated Uyghur Salafi-jihadi group the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (the Turkestan Islamic Party) to the Terrorist Exclusion List (TEL).As a result, leaders of the Turkestan Islamic Party Hassan Mahsum (2003) and Abdul Shakur al-Turkistani (2012) were killed in US drone strike.

Based on this, we can assume what fate awaits the leaders and militants of the KIB in the near future. The designation of the KIB in the Specially Designated Global Terrorist list testifies to the US Government’s determination to combat the jihadist ideology of Salafism worldwide.This is a tangible support to the governments of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan, which are facing a real threat of transnational terrorism.After all, the backbone of the KIB is made up of people from the Ferghana Valley of Central Asia, mainly of Uzbek nationality.

According to the Soufan Group, out of 5,000 people who left Central Asia for Syria and Iraq, about 500 jihadists in the ISIS ranks went back to their homes. But among the returnees, there are almost no militants KIB, Katibat al-Tawhidwal Jihad (KTJ), IJU and TIP, which are affiliated with al Qaeda. After the fall of ISIS, it is the militants linked with the al Qaeda that pose a big threat to the countries of Central Asia. Therefore, the emergence of two theatres of war for al Qaeda backed Central Asian militants in Syria and Afghanistan and the relative ease of transit between these two theatres via Turkey increases the threat that jihadists can return to Central Asia at an opportune moment, such as at a time of political, social or economic crises.This would be dangerous for the regimes of Central Asia.

Therefore, the designation of the KIB by the US government into the list of global terrorist organizations gives a positive impetus to the efforts of the Central Asian countries in respect to counterterrorism.But so far the Central Asian governments have not openly reacted to the initiative of the US State Department. Perhaps such a reaction followed through diplomatic channels, which are closed to the public.

The war in Afghanistan and in the Middle East over the past 17 years has shown that the United States is in the forefront of the fight against transnational terrorism and religious extremism. Therefore, it would be difficult for the Governments of Central Asia to do without US assistance in combating the radical ideology of Salafism and world jihadism.

The Central Asian states are in a bind insofar as there is little they can do to stymie the growth of the KIB, KTJ, IJU and TIP in Syria given their lack of influenceand likely also their lack of intelligence.As a result, the Central Asian governments will likely need to develop comprehensive national security strategies with allies both within the region and abroad to manage the complexities of emerging threats.To achieve results in the fight against jihadism, the Central Asian countries need to solve three main tasks.

First, to intensify cooperation with the United States and the exchange of intelligence data.Successful coordination between law enforcement agencies will help to block the channels of financial, material and military assistance to the jihadist groups from Central Asia, affiliated with al Qaeda.Joint cooperation will contribute to the dismantling of bases, camps and training centers for Central Asian jihadist groups in Syria and Afghanistan, neutralizing prominent leaders and identifying commercial organizations and foundations that subsidize them. The fight against Al Qaeda is a more difficult than with ISIS, as it does not have its own territory, which can be hit. In the fight against Al-Qaeda, the United States has significant anti-terrorist experience, effective intelligence tools and advanced technical capabilities.

Secondly, given the increased role of another Uzbek group Katibat al-Tawhidwal Jihad in the global jihad and their successful terrorist acts in Russia (the explosion of the metro in St. Petersburg) and in Kyrgyzstan (the explosion of the Chinese embassy in Bishkek), the governments of Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan should lobby the US to include the KTJ in the list of global terrorist organizations.

Thirdly, for successful international coordination of anti-terrorist efforts, security agencies and special services of the countries of Central Asia need to get rid of block thinking and anti-American sentiment, which is a legacy of the Soviet empire and which is being initiated by Russia.Kremlinis known to consider Central Asia as an area of its influence. Putin is imposing its anti-American ideology on the countries of the region, which impedes the joint struggle against world jihadism. The confrontation between Russia and the West on the activities of the Taliban and the future regime of Bashar al-Assad enable jihadist groups from Central Asia to successfully assimilate into a global jihad. Therefore, the governments of Central Asia must work out their own self-position, which allows them to actively cooperate with the US in the fight against the global jihadist threat in the world and stop being a Putin’s “whipping boy”.

Continue Reading

Terrorism

How to stop terrorism: EU measures explained

MD Staff

Published

on

Stopping terrorism requires tackling issues such as foreign fighters, border controls and cutting off funds. Learn about the EU’s counter terrorism policies.

Security is a major concern for Europeans: the vast majority (80%) want the EU to do more to fight terrorism. However, European policy makers also realise that terrorism has no borders.

EU measures to prevent new attacks run from more thorough checks at Europe’s borders, to better police and judicial cooperation on tracing suspects and pursuing perpetrators, cutting the financing of terrorism, tackling organised crime, addressing radicalisation and others.

Improving  border controls

In order to safeguard security within the Schengen zone, systematic checks at the EU’s external borders on all people entering the EU – including EU citizens – were introduced in April 2017.

To record the movements of non-EU citizens across the Schengen area and speed up controls, a new entry and exit registration system was agreed by Parliament and EU ministers on 30 November 2017. These new external border controls are expected to become fully functional by 2020 at the latest.

Stopping foreign terrorist fighters

At least 7,800 Europeans from 24 countries are believed to have travelled to conflict areas in Syria and Iraq to join jihadist terrorist groups, according to Europol. Although there is a decrease in travel, the number of returning foreign fighters is expected to rise if Islamic State is defeated militarily or collapses.

In order to criminalise acts such as undertaking training or travelling for terrorist purposes, as well as organising or facilitating such travel, Europe put in place  EU-wide legislation on terrorism that, together with new controls at the external borders, will help to tackle the foreign fighter phenomenon.

Making use of air passenger data

Airlines operating flights to and from the EU are  obliged to hand national authorities the data of their passengers such as names, travel dates, itinerary and payment method.

This so-called PNR data  is used to prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute terrorist offences and serious crimes. Negotiations took more than five years and Parliament insisted on safeguards for sensitive data (revealing racial origin, religion, political opinion, health or sexual orientation) and data protection.

Stepping up the exchange of information

The man who carried out the Berlin Christmas market attack used multiple identities to evade border and law enforcement authorities. This, and other similar cases, show the importance of effective information sharing between different authorities (law enforcement, judicial, intelligence) in EU countries.

The EU already has many databases and information systems for border management and internal security. The Parliament is currently focusing on rules that will enable the interoperability of the databases and allow for the simultaneous consultation of the different systems.

Europol, the EU’s police agency, supports the exchange of information between national police authorities as the EU criminal information hub. In May 2016 the Parliament agreed to give more powers to Europol  to step up the fight against terrorism as well as to set up specialised units such as the European counter terrorism centre, which was launched on 25 January 2016.

Tackling the financing of terrorism

An effective measure to stop terrorists is to cut their sources of revenue and disrupt logistics. The Parliament wants EU countries to track suspicious financial transactions and charities and also look into the trafficking of oil, cigarettes, gold, gems and works of art.

MEPs have completed the latest update of the EU’s anti-money laundering directive, which tightens the rules on virtual currency platforms and anonymous prepaid cards.

MEPs also managed to secure additional resources in the EU’s 2018 budget to better fight terrorism and organised crime. The European Commission recently set up a blockchain observatory in response to Parliament calls to monitor virtual currencies, such as Bitcoin, to prevent them being used to finance terrorism.

Reducing access to dangerous weapons

The EU does everything possible to prevent dangerous weapons falling into the hands of the wrong people. The revised firearms directive closed legal loopholes that allowed terrorists to use reconverted weapons, for example in the Paris 2015 attacks. It requires EU countries to have a proper monitoring system, while keeping exemptions for hunters, museums and collectors.

Parliament is also pushing for better control of arms exports  and an embargo on arms exports to Saudi Arabia.

Preventing radicalisation

Most of the terrorist attacks in Europe were perpetrated by home-grown terrorists. Parliament therefore proposed measures to fight radicalisation and extremism in prisons and online by making use of education and social inclusion.

The EU’s added value

The EU level is the main forum for cooperation between member states in the fight against terrorism, even though counter-terrorism policies are to a large extent the responsability of countries..

MEPs decide on a par with EU ministers on major EU counter-terrorism laws. Traditionally, Parliament makes sure fundamental rights and data protection are respected.

The EU’s counter-terrorism strategy is based on four strands: prevent, protect, pursue and respond. The current framework that the European Commission follows in its proposals is the European Agenda on Security 2015-2020, which aims to facilitate cooperation between EU countries in the fight against terrorism, organised crime and cybercrime.

In recent years there have been many EU policies on counter-terrorism and it involves many people, organisations and strategies. The Parliament set up a special committee  to suggest ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the EU’s response to terrorism.

Continue Reading

Latest

Newsdesk2 hours ago

New Solar Project to Restore Electricity to Over One Million Yemenis

The World Bank announced today a new project to finance off-grid solar systems in Yemen to power vital basic services,...

Tech4 hours ago

The Artificial Intelligence Race: U.S. China and Russia

Artificial intelligence (AI), a subset of machine learning, has the potential to drastically impact a nation’s national security in various...

Economy5 hours ago

Upswing in global growth won’t last forever: IMF says world must prepare now for leaner times ahead

While the world economy continues to show broad-based momentum, a new report released Tuesday by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is...

Newsdesk7 hours ago

Japan works with UNIDO to boost employment in Lebanon

The Government of Japan has announced that it will fund a project to create jobs in the carpentry and construction...

Middle East7 hours ago

The Saudi Export of Ultra-conservatism in the Era of MbS – an Update

There has long been debate about the longevity of the Saudi ruling family. One major reason for doubts about the...

Americas8 hours ago

Poll Shows Americans Support the Invasion of Syria – What they Misunderstand About that War

The first even marginally trustworthy poll of American “registered voters” regarding the April 14th U.S.-and-allied missiles-invasion of Syria, shows an...

Intelligence9 hours ago

ISIS and the Continuing Threat of Islamist Jihad: The Need for the Centrality of PSYOP

Defining the Problem The National Security Strategy of the United States (NSS) calls for direct military action against ISIS in...

Newsletter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy