'The Threat of Terrorism in the EU: An overview of the trend and situation in the EU between

2008 & 2010.'

Abstract

Terrorism remains a top problem in the different parts of the world because of the massive

destruction it brings. As a response to terrorism, governments have developed the concept of

countering terrorism. In spite of the effort of the government to combat the growing threat of

terrorism, terrorist attacks had been consistent in the region. It is important to note also that

terrorism in EU does not solely come from one terrorist group rather several groups. Each group

has its own reason and ways of attacking. This research aims to show a comparative study

regarding the trends and patterns of terrorist attacks carried by different terrorist groups during

the last few years. Hence, it aims to show the differences between terrorist groups (in terms of

attacks) and the changes of patterns of attack of each group during the last few years. The unit of

analysis of this research is the terrorist group present in the European Union which can be

categorized as follows: 1.) Islamist; 2.) Ethno nationalist and Separatist; 3.) Left wing and

anarchist; and 4.) right wing and 5.) single issue terrorism. The aim of the research is to describe

the trends and patterns of attacks carried by different terrorist groups in the years between 2008

and 2010. These years have been very crucial because there were many terrorist incidents that

have been recorded coinciding with the world economic problem aside from the fact that these

are the recent published works of TE-SAT. Using the timeline of the research, this can be a great

help in order to assess the recent status of terrorism in the region. Aside from the review of

related literature in the broader topic of terrorism, this research utilized both qualitative and

quantitative data provided by the Member States in their contribution to Europol for the TE-SAT
covering 2008-2010. These resources offer statistical data and figures reporting the diversifying

scope and impact of terrorism in the EU. The proposed methodology is to treat each terrorist

group and the kind of terrorist attacks they make as variables. This research also utilized a

triangulation method by using the open-source data base Global Terrorism Database (GTD) in

order to back-up information regarding attack type in the years 2008-2010 in the EU. This

method helps to visualize the readers the trends and patterns of terrorist attacks by providing

charts and figures. It shows that during these periods there were significant differences in line

with the trends and patterns of attacks by different terrorist groups. These differences show the

difference of their objectives, ideology, structure and motivation.

Introduction

Terrorism remains the top problem of countries all over the world; and European Union

is not an exemption. However, unlike the case of other regions like South Asia, terrorism in the

European Union is a hodge-podge of different terrorist groups. This study aims to describe the

trends and situation of terrorism in the European Union (2008-2010). For the sake of this study,

it should be noted that terrorism here does not only pertain to the mainstream notion of Islamist

group performing the holy war. The unit of analysis of the study covers the different terrorist

groups present in the EU. These are Islamist terrorist group, separatist terrorist group, left-wing

or anarchist, ring-wing terrorist group and the single-issue terrorist group. These groups will be

treated as the independent variables of the study. They will be analyzed in order to see which

group dominates the region between the year 2008 and 2010. In order to show the trends and

patterns of terrorist attacks that happened in the European Union between the years 2008 and

2010, this study utilized the European Union (EU) Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-
SAT) database. The study particularly chose the recently published two reports (TE-SAT 2010

and TE-SAT 2011).

European Union is a vast region to study. Hence, the study picked fifteen major European

Union members to represent the whole population. These countries are Austria, Belgium,

Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania,

Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. Each country will be examined to show the

number of instances where different types of terrorist group occurred. The particular timeframe

used by the research is between the years 2008 to 2010. This period is particularly chosen

because it marked a big difference; terrorism incidents generally declined. Between the years

2007 and 2008, there was a drastic decrease while during the year 2009 there was again an

increase and in 2010 decreased again. According to report, the fluctuation can be accounted to

different factors such as the effort of the government to combat terrorism as well as the different

responses of terrorist groups.

There are certain reasons why terrorism varies in terms of groups. One reason is the fact that

terrorism “results from different context-specific factors such as historical preconditions, the type

of political regime, socio-economic conditions”1Needless to say; terrorist groups were born out

of different context, ideology and motivation. European Union is a home for five different

terrorist groups. There are at least three categories of terrorism from which different terrorist

groups arise. These are political geographical, political ideological and political religious

forms.2Applying this classification to specific terrorist groups in the EU, political geographical

includes the separatist terrorist groups, political ideological includes the right-wing, left-wing

1
The Evolving Threat of Terrorism in Policymaking and Media Discourse. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law. 2008. p. 10.
2
The Evolving Threat of Terrorism in Policymaking and Media Discourse. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law. 2008. p. 12.
and single-issue related terrorist groups and political religious includes the largest group, Islamist

terrorists. The first type of terrorist groups seen in EU is the Islamist terrorist group. Islamist is

defined as “a Muslim who follows one of the very conservative branches of Islam, often the

Salafi or Wahabi creed, and who has turned Islam into a self-contained lifestyle.”3Drawing from

this definition Islamist terrorist group is a terrorist group born out of Muslim ideology. Islamist

terrorist group is responsible for creating “megaterrorism” – a kind of terrorism creating a large-

scale devastation.4 The political ideological terrorist groups such as the left wing, right wing and

sing-issue terrorist groups in EU basically fight for political ideology. It seems also that the

Islamist terrorist groups in EU do not act as radical as the case of other continents, say for

example in South Asia.

The number of Islamist terrorist attacks actually carried out in the EU was
limited to three attacks in 2010. They caused minimal damage to the intended
targets. Potentially, however, at least two of these attacks could have caused
mass casualties and multiple fatalities. The attacks shared some characteristics
of motive, location and, fortunately, lack of familiarity with explosives. 5

Literature Review

The most widely used definition of terrorism is the one offered by the US Department of

State. Terrorism is a “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against

noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence

an audience.”6In other words, regardless of motivation and group, terrorism is always politically

driven. Unlike other scholars, Worden developed his own definition of terrorist attack by

embedding it to psychological drives and motives. Hence he defines terrorist action as “the

3
Taarnby, Michael. Recruitment of Islamist Terrorist in Europe: Trends and Perspectives. Danish Ministry of
Justice. 2005. p. 6.
4
Casale, Davide. EU Institutional and Legal Counterterrorism Framework. Defense Against Terrorism Review.
2008. p. 51.
5
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2011. p.15.
6
US Department of State as cited from Worden, Robert. The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who
becomes a terrorist and why? The Library of Congress. 1999. p. 12.
calculated use of unexpected, shocking, and unlawful violence against noncombatants

(including, in addition to civilians, off-duty military and security personnel in peaceful

situations) and other symbolic targets perpetrated by a clandestine member(s) of a subnational

group or a clandestine agent(s) for the psychological purpose of publicizing a political or

religious cause and/or intimidating or coercing a government(s) or civilian population into

accepting demands on behalf of the cause.”7This long definition offers another lens in trying to

understand the causes of terrorist activities; at least this is a more pragmatic definition. We can

also define terrorism by looking at its aims and inevitable impact in a society. Terrorism creates

“a high-profile impact on the public of their targeted enemy or enemies with their act of

violence, despite the limited material resources that are usually at their disposal.”8

There are certain problems that may arise in an attempt to define terrorism. Terrorism is

always intertwined and confused with violence, ordinary crime or wartime military action simply

because they almost have same manifestations. Another problem in studying terrorism is the

varying perceptions from country to country of what constitutes terrorism.

For example, the Nicaraguan elite regarded the Sandinista National Liberation
Front (FSLN) as a terrorist group, while much of the rest of the country regarded
the FSLN as freedom fighters. A foreign extremist group labeled as terrorist by
the Department of State may be regarded in heroic terms by some sectors of the
population in another country. Likewise, an action that would be regarded as
indisputably terrorist in the United States might not be regarded as a terrorist act
in another country’s law court.9

According to Council of the European Union, terrorist groups aim to intimidate the population,

compelling the government or any international organization to either abstain or perform a

7
Worden, Robert. The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who becomes a terrorist and why? The Library of
Congress. 1999. p. 12.
8
Worden, Robert. The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who becomes a terrorist and why? The Library of
Congress. 1999. p. 11.
9
Worden, Robert. The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who becomes a terrorist and why? The Library of
Congress. 1999. p. 14.
certain action and destabilizing the social, political and international organization.10 There are

certain stands that the EU adopted in order to consider whether a certain action or activity can be

considered as terrorist attack. These are the following criteria: the attack can be a cause of death

for a particular person; it can also be considered as an attack with a potential to destroy the

physical integrity of a person; kidnapping or hostage taking; attack can cause a massive

destruction or result in major economic turmoil; seizure of any public transports; the

manufacture and possession of any weapons such as nuclear weapons or explosives; endangering

human life by releasing dangerous substances; endangering human life by interfering or

disrupting any fundamental natural resource and; threatening to commit any of these acts.11

There seems to be a positive association between terrorism and democracy under the

theory of “public choice dilemma.” The most common example is the problem with mass media

where information are publicize which makes it more favorable to terrorists. He also compare

autocratic as opposed to democratic as less favorable to terrorists. He claims that “If a terrorist

group in an autocracy wants to publicize its cause, then it may stage incidents in democracies

where news coverage is more complete and the environment is more supportive.”12

The analysis showed terrorism to be systematically related to measures of

freedom and democracy, with a tendency for low levels of freedom, human
rights and democracy to be associated with high levels of terrorism. It should be
noted that this pattern is particularly strong for ideological terrorism, and that
this may suggest a less important role for political factors like freedom, human
rights and democracy in producing ethnic terrorism. 13

Specific example of the problem with democracy was cited by Wilkinson in which he said that

democracy protects liberty and human rights. Following from this assumption, there were

10
The Evolving Threat of Terrorism in Policymaking and Media Discourse. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law. 2008. pp. 11-12.
11
The Evolving Threat of Terrorism in Policymaking and Media Discourse. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law. 2008. p. 11.
12
Sandler, Todd. Collective Versus Unilateral Responses to Terrorism. Public Choice 124: 75–93. 2005. p. 89.
13
Engene, 2004 as cited from Terrorism and Democracy
instances that these two core concepts of democracy actually helped in tolerating the presence of

terrorism. For example, when one suspected terrorist is caught, under Anti-Terrorism Crime

Security Act, he is entitled to undergo detention even without trial.14This is opposed to the core

value of democracy and terrorist groups used this as a justification to continue and even reinforce

their activities.

It is also challenging to think that albeit the presence of counterterrorist attacks carried

by different states, terrorist attacks remain relatively high. Sandler points out that though nations

have their defensive actions, this can give inevitable problems that are more or less favorable

with the terrorist groups. Defensive actions deflect attacks to weaker targets. This eventually

gives rise to “external benefits to protected foreign residents and external costs to venues

abroad.”15On the other hand, proactive measures also post a problem because it likely to show

that a prime-target country is anticipated to act. This makes favorable to the terrorist groups

because it provoke a terrorist backlash.

It is important to create patterns and trends in line with terrorist activities in order to

establish a strong conclusion whether or not terrorism remains a threat in the region. This has

been the trend used by scholars in order to see and interpret the level of terrorist threats in a

particular region or area. For example, in a study conducted by Gagel and Cordesman, they

successfully showed the patterns of terrorism in North Africa, Middle East, Central Asia and

South Asia from 2007-2010. Trying to consider these trends and patterns outside EU is a good

start whether or not the situation in EU coincides with the other regions around the world.

14
Wilkinson, P. (2006). Terrorism Versus Democracy; The Liberal State Response.London; Routledge. Chapter 5.
15
Sandler, Todd. Collective Versus Unilateral Responses to Terrorism. Public Choice 124: 75–93. 2005. p. 75.
 In North Africa, it shows that terrorist activities were mainly carried out by Islamist

terrorist groups particularly the al-Qaeda. Extremist activities were evident with the creation of

al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). The condition in Middle East proves that this is still

the region which records the major center of global terrorism. The main threat comes particularly

from different religious terrorist groups such as semi-secular movements, Sunni and Shiite

extremist groups and Jewish extremist groups.16 The same is true in the case of Central and

South Asia where according to the study between the years 2007 and 2010, there were high rates

of terrorism especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Radicalization is much evident in this region

with high rate incidents of killing, wounding, kidnapping and bombing throughout the region.17

Methodology

This study utilized qualitative and quantitative means of explaining and describing the trends and

attacks made by different terrorist groups in EU. Data collected and analyzed in this research was

gathered from TESAT 2009 and 2011. TESAT is an annual publication of EU that offers trends,

facts and figures regarding terrorism in the said region. To make a substantial claim, this study

further used triangulation method by utilizing the GTD (Global Terrorism Database

http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/).

16
Gagel Andrew and Anthony Cordesman. Patterns in Terrorism in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia and
South Asia: 2007-2010. Washington DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies. 2011.p. 9.
17
Gagel Andrew and Anthony Cordesman. Patterns in Terrorism in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia and
South Asia: 2007-2010. Washington DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies. 2011.p. 29.
Attack Type:

The following chapter looks at the different attack types in the world that happened in the last

three years (2008, 2009 and 2010) based from the National Counterterrorism Center. This

section has been included in order to see the general trends of attack all over the world. This will

be a good start to compare and contrast the general trends of attack types in the world and in the

EU.

Attack Type 2008

Bombing

Suicide

Assault

Arson/Firebombing

Kidnapping

Barricade/Hostage

Other

Armed Attack

Figure 1. Graph showing primary attacks done by the terrorist groups all over the world in the

year 2008.18

18
National Counterterrorism Center. 2008 Report on Terrorism. April 2009. p. 21.
 Attack Type 2009
Suicide
Unknown
Assault
Kidnapping
Arson/Firebombing
Other
Bombing
Armed Attack

Figure 2. The pie graph above shows the different attacks in the year 2009.19

Attack Type 2010

Other Types
Suicide
Assault
Arson/Firebombing
Unknown
Kidnapping
Bombing
Armed Attack

Figure 3. Graph showing primary attacks done by the terrorist groups all over the world

in the year 201020

19
National, Counterterrorism Center: 2009 Report on Terrorism. 2010. p. 15.
20
National Counterterrorism Center. 2010 Report on Terrorism. April 2011. p. 13.
 European Union

Bombing/Explosion
Facility/Infrastructure
Armed Assault
Other

Figure 4. Pie graph showing the primary attack types of terrorism in the EU during the last few

years.21

Discussion

The pie graph shows the different types of attacks utilized by terrorist groups in the last few

years. It is subdivided into eight quarters representing different types of attacks: other type of

attacks, suicide, assault, arson or firebombing, unknown, kidnapping, bombing and armed attack

respectively. During the last three years, it shows that the top four most occurring attack types

were: armed assault (18,946 incidents), bombing (18,755 incidents), suicide (6728 incidents) and

kidnapping (3076 incidents). All eight attack types were visible during the years 2008, 2009 and

2010. On the other hand, the pie chart above (figure 4) shows the general trend of attack types in

the European Union during the last three years (2008, 2009, and 2010) based from the Global

Terrorism Database.

21
Global Terrorism Database.
As opposed to the general trend of terrorist attacks across the world, terrorist attacks in EU

shows that the most frequent occurring attacks include bombing or explosion. The second most

occurring attack type includes facility/infrastructure. Armed assault shows a lower incident

compared to the general terrorist attack trend in the world. There are also other terrorist attack

incidents that have been included in the GTD. In general, looking at the record of European

Union, since 1970 there was a remarkable decrease of terrorist attacks. The last three years

(2008, 2009 and 2010) overall showed a good result; decreased number of terrorist attacks in the

region.
Tables:

Member Islamist Separatist Left- Right- Single Not Total

State wing wing issue Specified 2008

Austria 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Belgium 17 1 4 0 0 0 22

Denmark 3 0 1 0 0 0 4

France 78 315 37 0 3 3 436

Germany 8 8 3 0 0 0 19

Greece 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ireland 3 49 0 0 0 0 52

Italy 9 35 7 0 0 0 51

The 4 0 0 0 0 0 4

Netherlands

Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Romania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Spain 61 129 6 0 0 1 197

Sweden 3 0 0 0 0 0 3

United _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Kingdom

Total 186 537 58 0 3 4 788

Table 1.0 Arrests in 2008 per member state and per affiliation.
 Member Islamist Separatist Left- Right- Single Not Total

State wing wing issue Specified 2009

Austria 2 0 0 0 0 6 8

Belgium 4 0 0 0 0 0 4

Denmark 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

France 37 255 11 6 1 5 315

Germany 4 0 1 0 0 0 5

Greece 0 0 5 0 0 0 5

Ireland 0 31 0 0 0 0 31

Italy 20 0 9 0 0 0 29

The 2 0 0 0 0 0 2

Netherlands

Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Romania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

Spain 40 127 2 0 0 0 168

Sweden 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

United _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Kingdom

Total 109 413 28 6 2 11 568

Table 2.0. Arrests in 2009 per member state and per affiliation
 Member Islamist Separatist Left- Right- Single Not Total

State wing wing issue Specified 2010

Austria 1 1 3 0 0 0 5

Belgium 11 9 0 0 0 0 20

Denmark 6 0 0 0 0 0 6

France 94 123 0 0 0 2 219

Germany 9 14 2 0 0 0 25

Greece 0 0 18 0 0 0 18

Ireland 5 57 0 0 0 0 62

Italy 4 16 8 1 0 0 29

The 19 19 0 0 0 1 39

Netherlands

Portugal 0 3 0 0 0 0 3

Romania 14 2 0 0 0 0 16

Slovenia 2 0 0 0 0 0 2

Spain 11 104 3 0 0 0 118

Sweden 3 1 0 0 0 0 4

United - - - - - 45 45

Kingdom

Total 179 349 34 1 0 48 611

Table 3.0. Arrests in 2010 per member state and per affiliation
Results as seen from the database

The most common form of terrorist attack is bombing (suicide bombing). It was said that suicide

bombing is accountable for the 70% recorded death in the year 2010.Meanwhile kidnapping

incidents declined worldwide.22There is also a significant decrease in attacks between 2008 and

2009. From 788, terrorism attacks dropped to 568 in the year 2009.

The number of attacks decreased by 33 % in comparison to 2008 and is almost

half the number of attacks carried out in 2007. In 2009, there was only one
Islamist terrorist attack, directed at a military target in Italy. Separatist terrorist
organisations were responsible for 237 attacks; all of which were carried out in
France and Spain. The decreasing trend in the number of separatist attacks,
already noticeable in 2008, continued in 2009.23

However, even if there is a drastic decrease in terms of the number of arrested suspects,

terrorism in the region is still considered as real and serious among EU members. The threat of

Islamist terrorism is increasing more in self-operated and self-oriented attacks rather in operating

with other terrorism. Simply saying that terrorism done by the Islamist terrorist groups, they are

not cooperating with other groups in order to avoid conflicts with; ideas, instructions and plans,

thus, they make terrorism attacks alone. Moreover, the increase in Islamist groups of terrorism is

affected by the weak states with conflicts in social and economic problems and, large population

of Muslims which served as their breeding countries. Example of these weak states, so to say, are

Yemen and Somalia whom matched this profile and now are destabilizing because of Islamist

terrorism issue thrown to these countries.24

To give more information in traditional means, terrorist and extremist organizations

acquire all new high-tech equipments such as computers, internet-equipped cell phones and other

available gadgets to facilitate their activities. Computers are used in accessing networked data

22
National Counterterrorism Center. 2010 Report on Terrorism. April 2011. p. 7.
23
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2010. p. 11.
24
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2010. p. 47.
throughout the globe wherever they planned to do terrorist attacks. Internet-equipped cell phones

are used by these terrorists to have faster communication like accessing their e-mails, instant

messaging and even transferring money from unknown account to their own account. They also

create their own online accounts to stress more of their message. These are identities for their

propaganda output like “production companies” with unique logos and designs. For their

propagandas and in recruiting their members, western converts are increasingly used by Islamist

terrorist groups. They make native speakers to appear on certain videos and scatter it on the

internet. By this method, they can broadcast messages to potential recruits in EU member states

using their own languages. With the security services and law enforcement organizations

increasing throughout countries, terrorists and extremist groups are forced to make home-made

explosives to carry out attacks rather explosives that are known to explosive experts.25

EU gives more significant to attacks carried out by Islamist and separatist terrorists

compared to terrorist activities by left-wing and anarchist, right-wing and single-issue terrorist

and extremist organizations. But the attacks made by the latter is rapidly increasing and giving

more serious threats public. Islamist terrorist groups focus their eyes on the presence of military

in conflict areas in particular Member State. These groups are known to go to places with

conflict areas to visit training camps or to be involved in armed struggles. Their acquired skills

and experiences in such travels imposed a risk in EU upon their return because of the fact that

they might still under the influence of terrorist organizations and are still ready to obey orders to

initiate terrorist attacks.26

25
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2010. p. 46.
26
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2010. p. 48.
 In 2010, there was a significant increase in the number of single-issue terrorist related

activities. A 12% increase in the terrorist attacks was made by the separatist groups. There were

about more than 200 cases and most of these belonged to the advocates of animal rights groups.

Right wing group also showed an almost zero arrest in the year 2010. This can be accounted to

the lack of cohesion and coordination between and among right-wing groups.27This is

complemented with the result showed by the National Counterterrorism Center 2010 Report.

According to its report, there was a drastic downfall of attacks and deaths in Europe. Attacks

dropped from 737 in 2009 to 706 in 2010 while death fell from 377 in the year 2009 to 279 in

2010.28Separatist group recorded the highest number of incidents in EU. This implies that most

victims were government officials. High rate of separatist groups were recorded in France, Spain

and in Ireland. Governments continue to design and improve protocol in line with convictions

and penalties of terrorism. This reflects the strong commitment of each state in EU to combat

terrorism.

Not all individuals arrested in one reporting period will be brought to trial in the
same or following year. Many of the cases reported are linked to events of
previous years. In 2009 there was a significant decrease in the number of arrests
compared to previous years. Equally, the number of individuals brought to trial
in 2010 declined by almost a quarter..29

27
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2011. p. 29.
28
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2011. p.6.
29
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2011. p.12.
Discussion and Analysis

Generally, terrorism in 2010 dropped not only in EU but all over the world. From previous year’s

1,345 attacks, terrorism in 2010 recorded 798 attacks only. This implies that there is also a

decrease in terms of number of casualties and fatalities.30 The decline of terrorist attacks can be

accounted to two reasons. The first reason is the decrease of the attack itself and second is the

attack causing no death. It is quite ironic to think that though Islamist terrorist group’s main

target is the West as a whole, EU maintains its relatively low terrorist attack status.

As a response to terrorism, European Union formed Terrorism, Radicalism, Extremism

and International Violence Group (TREVI) which primarily composed of police officials. Aside

from this organized group, the region organized the Police Working Group on Terrorism and the

Counter Terrorist Group.31 The success of EU to combat terrorism is a result of different effort

by the government and organizations. EU is very strategic in adopting an Action Plan geared

towards eliminating, or at the very least minimizing, terrorism in the region. This Action Plan

includes the deepening and enhancing international effort to combat terrorism, blocking the

terrorist groups to access financial and other economic resources in financing their activities,

maximizing the capacities of each EU member to investigate and combat terrorism in their

respective areas, dwelling in improving the borders control, enhancing the ability of each EU

member to deal with the possible consequences of terrorist activities, looking and giving proper

response to the factors contributing to recruitment of terrorism and effective provisions on

counter-terrorist actions.32As a matter of fact, scholars believed that the production of

30
2010 Annual Summary: Data and Trends in Terrorism. Israeli Security Agency. 2010. n.p.
31
Casale, Davide. EU Institutional and Legal Counterterrorism Framework. Defense Against Terrorism Review.
2008. p. 50.
32
Casale, Davide. EU Institutional and Legal Counterterrorism Framework. Defense Against Terrorism Review.
2008. p. 52.
EUROPOL (like the TESAT) is an effective tool in combating terrorism.33This is because

TESAT became a mirror for the government as well as EU members to look at the strengths and

weaknesses of their strategies in line with their counterterrorism protocols.

The most relevant institutions in EU counter-terrorism are the European

Commission, Europol and Eurojust. In fact these three institutions play a major
role at a legislative level (the Commission) and at the operational level (Europol
and Eurojust), these two latter having as top priority in their mandate the fight
against terrorism.

Generally, the trend of terrorist attacks in EU between the years 2008-2010 is

decreasing. There are myriad of ways by which one can understand the reason for this

occurrence. Two reasons, either external or internal of the terrorist group, can be accounted to

the demise or decrease of a terrorist attack. The research will dwell in this section in order to see

and apply what accounts for the trends and patterns of terrorist attacks in EU for the past few

years. External factors include preemption and deterrence. Preemption means killing or capturing

the terrorist groups’ leaders or making their potential targets harder to hit. On the other hand

deterrence includes “elevating the potential costs and lowering the potential rewards for active

terrorists as well as potential supporters.”34In line with internal reasons, burnout and backlash

can be accounted. Burnout pertains to the loss of active members and commitment by losing

their commitment while backlash means the decline of public support and sympathy by the

terrorist group.35

Over 11,500 terrorist attacks occurred in 72 countries in 2010, resulting in

approximately 50,000 victims, including almost 13,200 deaths. Although the
number of attacks rose by almost 5 percent over the previous year, the number
of deaths declined for a third consecutive year, dropping 12 percent from
2009...The number of attacks and deaths in Europe and Eurasia declined slightly

33
Casale, Davide. EU Institutional and Legal Counterterrorism Framework. Defense Against Terrorism Review.
2008. p. 53.
34
Concepts of Terrorism: Analysis of the Rise, Decline, Trends and Risk. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law, 2008. p.23.
35
Concepts of Terrorism: Analysis of the Rise, Decline, Trends and Risk. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law, 2008. p.23.
 in 2010, with the vast majority again occurring in Russia. Attacks fell from 737
in 2009 to 706 in 2010, and deaths fell from 367 in 2009 to 355 in 2010. 36

The decline of terrorist attacks in EU can be accounted to the demilitarization and peace

talks between the government and the terrorist group.37For example, the right-wing terrorist

group in EU is becoming more professional detaching itself from any extremist activities these

past few years. It has been perceived that the friendly approach of the government to address

their issues contribute to the decline and total demise of terrorist attacks made by the right-wing

group. As opposed to extremist activities such as bombing and extortion, the terrorist group now

diverted its attention in reaching and influencing the younger generations by its social

networking sites as well as programs.38On the other hand, demilitarization is very much visible

in the Northern Ireland.

The largest terrorist attacks and activities largely came from the Islamist terrorist group

particularly the Sunni extremist group. In 2010, this group is accountable for almost 60% of all

worldwide terrorist attacks. The rest terrorist groups accounted 16% of terrorist groups.39Given

that Europe continues to experience terrorist attacks, it is still safe to say that it is relatively low

compared to other situations outside EU. This is because major chunk of terrorist attacks in EU

came from separatist terrorist groups as opposed to 60% Islamist attacks.

EU has relatively low terrorist attacks simply because terrorist attacks and targets mainly are

Muslim countries.

36
2010 NCTC Report on Terrorism. 2011. p. 5.
37
Concepts of Terrorism: Analysis of the Rise, Decline, Trends and Risk. European Commission: Transnational
Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law, 2008. p.35.
38
Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2011. p. 29.
39
2010 NCTC Report on Terrorism. 2011. pp. 6-7.
Conclusion

Terrorism is always seen as a bad experience because we always connect derogatory

terms such as bombings, mass killings, hijacking and the like. However, this study flipped

another lens to look at terrorism. It clearly shows that terrorism does not only happen because of

the US attempt to spread its Western values or as a religious response to globalization. The case

of terrorism in the European Union shows that it could also arise as a means to counterattack a

certain policy, like the case of single-issue terrorism presented above. Perhaps, people resorted to

a more violent way of expressing their advocacies, thus lead to creating terror among the

population.

This study also reveals one thing – terrorism in the European Union does not reflect the

terrorism that usually happened in the United States. Based from the discussion above, the cause

of terrorism in EU mainly comes from the separatist groups. Why so? Separatist groups usually

advocate for a total separation of territory. These secessionist movements in the region only

reflect that the region is still on the process of building one and common identity. During the last

few years, government’s continuous effort to combat terrorism gives a positive response. Some

terrorist groups, like the right-wing group, are becoming more professional. Improvements in

terms of lobbying their issues were evidently seen. It should also be noted here that this response

does not necessarily mean against terrorism. Governments take advantage to look at their pitfalls

and shortcomings in their constituents in order to address the issues being lobbied by different

groups.
References

2010 Annual Summary: Data and Trends in Terrorism. Israeli Security Agency. 2010 <Web> 24

March 2012.

2008 Report on Terrorism. 2011. <Web> 31, March 2012.

2009 Report on Terrorism. 2011. <Web> 31, March 2012.

2010 NCTC Report on Terrorism. 2011. <Web> 24, March 2012.

Casale, Davide. EU Institutional and Legal Counterterrorism Framework. Defense Against

Terrorism Review. 2008

Concepts of Terrorism: Analysis of the Rise, Decline, Trends and Risk. European Commission:

Transnational Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law, 2008.

Engene, 2004 as cited from Terrorism and Democracy

Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2010.

Europol. EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TESAT) 2011.

Gagel Andrew and Anthony Cordesman. Patterns in Terrorism in North Africa, the Middle East,

Central Asia and South Asia: 2007-2010. Washington DC: Center for Strategic and

International Studies. 2011

Global Terrorism Database. Retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/ on March 9, 2012.

National Counterterrorism Center. 2010 Report on Terrorism. April 2011.
Sandler, Todd. Collective Versus Unilateral Responses to Terrorism. Public Choice 124: 75–93.

2005.

Taarnby, Michael. Recruitment of Islamist Terrorist in Europe: Trends and Perspectives. Danish

Ministry of Justice. 2005.

The Evolving Threat of Terrorism in Policymaking and Media Discourse. European

Commission: Transnational Terrorism, Security and the Rule of Law. 2008.

US Department of State as cited from Worden, Robert. The Sociology and Psychology of

Terrorism: Who becomes a terrorist and why? The Library of Congress. 1999.

Wilkinson, P. (2006). Terrorism Versus Democracy; The Liberal State Response.London;

Routledge. Chapter 5.

Worden, Robert. The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who becomes a terrorist and

why? The Library of Congress. 1999.