How did EU institutions react to the most recent terrorist attacks?
The most recent terrorist attacks in France and Austria reminded Europe how much remains to be done in order to eradicate terrorism. The response of EU institutions was immediate and similar: EU representatives showed their symbolic support and suggested a new agenda for fighting terrorism. However, it is interesting to notice the different roles that were played by EU institutions in proposing this new agenda. This blogpost will help to identify these differences, therefore better understand the functioning of EU institutions.
One of the bonding ideas of the European Union is solidarity. After the attacks in France and Austria, the representatives of EU institutions, together with the heads of European states and governments, were among the first officials who expressed their condolences and full support to the two countries and their people. Charles Michel, President of the European Council, visited Austria 7 days after the attack and said: “My presence here is first and foremost a demonstration of friendship, to express Europe’s affection for the people of Austria”.
Solidarity also requires an immediate response to the common threat. After Charles Michel’s visit, a series of meetings and conferences of different EU bodies were held and some are lying ahead. For example, there was a video conference between Charles Michel, Ursula von der Leyen, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, and Sebastian Kurz on the fight against terrorism and also a meeting of EU home affairs ministers on the recent terrorist attacks in Europe.
The European institutions also have another thing in common: their commitment towards the idea of European values and joint actions against common issues. This was emphasised by all institutions and their representatives in every meeting on these terrorist attacks. Charles Michel, President of the European Council, said that “a terrorist act … aims to subvert the fundamental values that underpin the European project”. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, underlined the importance of joint actions: “We have been reminded very clearly once again of how important it is for us to act jointly to be able to fight these attacks, this terror”. Finally, the EU home affairs ministers in their joint statement pointed out that “we will continue to pursue our joint efforts against terrorism with determination and will in no way compromise on our shared belief in human dignity, tolerance, democracy, justice and freedom, including freedom of speech”.
Following the ideas of solidarity, responsiveness, and institutional commitment towards common values, it is not surprising that the EU does not represent a rigid separation-of-powers principle: different legislative, executive, and judiciary roles and duties are shared between its institutions because different institutions represent different interests, and there is a constant need to reconcile them. For this reason, it is possible to expect that many ideas and proposals of the EU institutions aimed at fighting terrorism will be similar in their essence, especially because of their pro-European orientation.
However, as the Treaty of the European Union suggests, it is possible to identify significant differences in the roles of institutions. For example, the European Council shall provide the Union with an impetus for development and general political directions and priorities for the Union. The President of the European Council shall ensure the work of the European Council, facilitate cohesion and consensus within it, and ensure the external representation of the Union. The European Commission shall also promote the interests of the Union and take initiatives to achieve it, while it shall also ensure the application of the Treaties, exercise its power of legislative initiation, execute budget and manage programmes. The President of the European Commission lays down guidelines for the Commission’s work and decides on its internal organisation. Finally, the Council of the European Union together with the European Parliament exercise legislative and budgetary functioning, and at the same time shall act with the European Commission ensuring consistency and cooperation between policies.
Charles Michel, as the main Union’s representative who sets a Union’s agenda, in his statement formulated several policy proposals. He emphasised the importance of adopting formal decisions to ensure that terrorist content on internet platforms would be removed quickly, a need for special training for imams in Europe, and a need for international dialogue which includes the explanation of the European values for the rest of the world. In his following statements, Charles Michel mentioned the importance of a smooth exchange of information between the European intelligence and security services, and said that the European foreign funding must not feed organisations which support violent extremism and hatred. Charles Michel also referred to the upcoming meeting of the EU interior ministers for scrutinising the implementation of the already adopted anti-terrorist decisions, showing that EU institutions work together.
Ursula von der Leyen, as a Union’s notional head of government who guides policy formulation and implementation, in her statement focused on the Commission’s contribution. First, she mentioned that at the beginning of December, the European Commission was going to present a new European agenda on combating terrorism. Second, she mentioned three levels which demand urgent progress: prevention, protection of the external borders, and action. On the prevention’s dimension, she listed measures such as a new European action plan for integration and inclusion, a European anti-radicalisation network, proposals on preventing terrorist content on the Internet and making major Internet platforms more accountable. On the protection of the external borders, the Commission is going to present a new Schengen Strategy and empower Europol to strengthen cross-border European action. On the action’s dimension, the Commission is going to propose a European agenda on combating terrorism, which will include empowering Europol and addressing gaps in the Schengen Information System.
The most detailed agenda on fighting terrorism was formulated after a meeting of the EU home affairs ministers — representatives of Member States in the Council of the European Union who ensure cooperation with the Commission and formally exercise legislative power. They proposed various measures, some of them were more elaborated ideas of Charles Michel and Ursula von der Leyen, some were unique, for example, measures on preventing foreign terrorist fighters from entering the Schengen area undetected and better protection of public spaces. During the meeting, home affairs ministers invited the European Commission to actively support initiatives to better understand the root causes and the spread of extremist ideologies in Europe, to submit a proposal revising the Europol mandate with a strong legal basis for the handling of large datasets, and to present an ambitious Digital Service Act along with an EU Security Union Strategy. They also promised to examine the Commission’s proposal to designate hate speech and hate crime as criminal offences.
The ideas and proposals presented in the statements of different EU institutions’ representatives appear to be similar, and institutions periodically refer to each other and to upcoming European conferences and presentations. Their initiatives focus on security issues, the importance of quick information exchange, better social integration and inclusion, and the promotion of international dialogue. These suggestions have a clear neofunctionalist nature: proposed solutions are coming from the idea of greater cooperation at the European level, and integration along with a larger power of supranational institutions are considered as the main problem-solving tool. It can also be the reason why there is a lack of a rigid separation of power: it is important to ensure broad cooperation between different bodies and groups they represent, such as institutions at different levels, public and private actors.
At the same time, it is also possible to identify important differences in roles played by EU institutions. The President of the European Council, as a voice and a face of the European Union, was setting the agenda while commemorating the victims of the attacks in Vienna, and proposed his vision of the main steps in the fight against terrorism. The President of the European Commission, as an important actor in shaping the Commission’s policy and determining the future direction of the EU, presented a more coherent approach of what should be done by the Commission. The Council of the European Union (represented here by the EU home affairs ministers) provided a most detailed agenda which has clearly summarised and reviewed different proposals, presented its own initiatives, and invited the European Commission for broader cooperation in some particular areas.
In this common framework, we can see that EU institutions reacted to the most recent terrorist attacks in a similar manner, because of their common understanding of shared values and guiding principles. Even though they responded similarly, we are still able to identify different contributions made by EU institutions and roles they played in the processes of agenda-setting and policy formulation: from Charles Michel’s symbolic visit in Austria, his personal meeting with the head of the Austrian government and sharing a broad vision of necessary measures with heads of states, to working Commission’s guidelines provided by Ursula von der Leyen, and to the more detailed description of measures and initiatives aimed at tackling terrorism presented after the meeting of the EU home affairs ministers. The other question that should be addressed in the future is whether this existing institutional framework is sufficient enough for providing effective solutions to the urgent and challenging issues at the European level.
Academic blogpost for Jean Monnet Module (JMM) I on European integration.