The evolution of counterterrorism in the European Union (EU) over the past two decades has been reflected at the level of EU member states through their respective national strategies, which have adapted the overall EU counterterrorism posture. While in the periods following the 9/11, 2004, and 2005 terrorist attacks in the United States, Spain, and the United Kingdom, respectively, the focus was on using hard power to respond to threats and vulnerabilities, after 2020, the approach changed to preventive and anticipatory efforts online and offline through whole-of-society measures. Although national counterterrorism strategies have, overall, followed this change in emphasis, their implementation remains unclear, and challenges in measuring and assessing impact persist. The ever-changing nature of radicalization and extremism continuously exposes the shortcomings of the EU’s counterterrorism efforts. This post is the third and final part in a three-part blog series on the evolving counterterrorism strategies of the EU. 

Lessons learned

The EU has adapted its counterterrorism approaches throughout the years, especially in the aftermath of terrorist attacks. As such, the focus of its actions was adjusted accordingly, priority areas were redefined, and new objectives were set. Initial developments focused on improving information sharing, strengthening border control measures, reinforcing the roles of EU-wide entities (e.g., Europol, Eurojust, Frontex), synchronizing legal frameworks and terminology, and countering terrorism financing.

More recently, experiences concerning radicalization, extremism, and terrorism within the EU have highlighted further crucial points that must be addressed within the EU’s counterterrorism efforts, namely:

• Prevention of radicalization: Shifting from the reactive approach adopted after 9/11 entails addressing the root causes of phenomena that potentially lead to violence. As such, a special focus has been given to the prevention of radicalization, focusing on particularly vulnerable environments (such as prisons and the online sphere) and groups (especially youth).

• Reintegration of vulnerable individuals: Faced with the issue of individuals leaving for and returning from Syria and Iraq after 2015, the EU needed to quickly respond to the new risks that these individuals posed. Despite the use of hard power measures such as limiting freedom of movement within the EU, there was a need to establish measures to address long-term challenges. Hence, reintegration and rehabilitation initiatives – including disengagement and deradicalization programs – are a new cornerstone of the EU’s counterterrorism policy.

• Online sphere: Especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, which increased the time people – mainly youth – spent online, the risks that these online technologies pose concerning radicalization processes and extremism are deemed significant. The management of nefarious content and actors on social media platforms has become a priority for the EU.

• Supporting survivors and victims: The consequences of terrorist attacks are long-lasting and go beyond those directly impacted by them. Providing long-lasting support to victims across various aspects (e.g., medical treatment, counselling, judicial aid, advice on legal, financial, and bureaucratic matters) has been identified as a key measure in the attempt to restore what was lost and build community resilience in times of division and anger.

• Community resilience: Communities are key actors in counterterrorism, playing a crucial role in preventing radicalization and extremism. Resilient communities are better prepared to deal with the consequences of terrorism and violent extremism, as well as to avoid radical and extremist narratives from taking hold. Importantly, communities are fundamental for supporting survivors and reintegrating perpetrators, providing key resources and assistance.

Implementation and assessment

In 2015, the European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2015 on anti-terrorism measures called for the European Commission (EC) to “regularly evaluate the current instruments and undertake a corresponding assessment of the remaining gaps in the fight against terrorism”. The EC did so, having produced a Comprehensive Assessment of EU Security Policy in 2017. 

In a 2020 follow-up report on the implementation of Home Affairs legislation in the field of internal security from 2017-2020, the EC recognized the need to regularly and continuously evaluate its implementation of this legislation, particularly given the rapid evolution of risks. The overall assessment in the report is positive, highlighting legislative and operational milestones achieved across several security areas, including counterterrorism. 

Despite this, the report also noted challenges in terms of transposing EU legal documents into the specific legal contexts of member states. For example, it found that 16 out of 25 member states had failed to transpose Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism into their national legislation by the established deadline. Although at the time of the report, 15 of those member states had already completed this process, such delays in transposition pose challenges for a concerted EU-wide approach to counterterrorism.

In 2021, the EC produced a report on the evaluation of Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism. This report yielded overall positive results, concluding that the Directive was adequate, effective, and relevant across all aspects. However, independent evaluations presented dissenting views, mainly critiquing the Directive’s potential negative impact on fundamental rights and freedoms – possibly heightened by the criminalization of preparatory actions – and the challenges that the Directive’s approach may pose to the principles of non-discrimination and the right to privacy. The report particularly criticized the broad scope of the terminology used in the Directive, which could lead to its disproportionate and unjust implementation when transposed into the legal systems of member states.

Additionally, despite the EU recognizing the importance of evaluating its counterterrorism legislation and measures, no further publicly available assessments have been conducted by the EC. Considering the concerns identified above and the changes that have occurred over the past years, additional evaluations are important.

Policy recommendations

All policies, particularly those related to counterterrorism, benefit from being built on respect for human rights and terminology that leaves no room for broad interpretations that could be misused in their practical implementation. Therefore, if EU documents do not adequately reflect these principles, member states should exercise special care when transposing these EU policies into national legislation and aim to mitigate potential risks to fundamental rights and freedoms through relevant national provisions.

Besides, as recognized by the EC, the continuous and frequent assessment of policies and legislation at the EU and member states’ levels can be used to preemptively counter emerging challenges, address remaining or emerging gaps, and ensure the respect for fundamental rights at all stages of a given intervention. Regular evaluations are an appropriate tool to limit the unintended side effects mentioned above and to develop effective mitigation measures should they occur.