Breivik’s terrorist attack posed a significant challenge to countries and their law enforcement authorities. How can we prevent terrorist acts that are carried out by groups or individuals that initially appear non-threatening, and how can this be done without infringing on human rights? While modern society encourages the free flow of persons, capital, goods and services, this makes it more vulnerable from the security point of view. After each terrorist attack, both experts and the general public rightly question the efficiency of national security systems and indirectly, also of the broader international security community.
The terrorist attack by Anders Breivik was followed by the realization that there is a greater diversity of terrorist threats than previously believed. Until then, Islamic radicalism and fundamentalism had received most of the attention in counterterrorism activities. Although European right-wing radicalism and extremism was constantly present, it was underestimated, which meant that national authorities and the international community paid too little attention to them. The social and political frustrations characteristic of the economic and social crisis in Europe at the time was an ideal environment for the spreading of extremist ideas.
The world witnessed yet another wave of Islamic violence in the years following the terrorist attack in Norway. The protracted armed conflicts in the Middle East have produced periodic waves of terrorist activities, most recently and most dramatically, the ones committed since 2014 by the fighters belonging to ISIS/Daesh, the self-proclaimed “Islamic Caliphate”. While the political and territorial base of ISIS was practically destroyed by 2019, the danger of their terrorist attacks, committed by individual members or the remnants of ISIS, continues.
It is important to understand that security is not a given, and that a state of complete security can never be achieved. Terrorism has a complex history and it would not be realistic to expect it to be eliminated. Terrorism requires constant attention and caution. National security services must be efficient enough to successfully identify terrorist plans and prevent terrorist acts. But security can be strengthened without reducing human rights standards.
Experience has taught us that in a period of global interdependence, it is impossible for any country to avoid the terrorist threat. The Norwegian example is an important warning to all countries. It is difficult to estimate with certainty in which direction future security risks and threats associated with violent extremism and terrorism will develop.
Violent extremism is destroying the hopes of men and women across many countries. Although 82 percent of these acts of violent extremism take place in ←37 | 38→just five countries, the effects are felt the world over. In our globalized world and instant communication era, the effects of terrorist crimes and violent extremism in general are our common, global concern.
Governments, civil society, thought leaders and, indeed, all concerned citizens in the world need to strengthen their efforts. Some of the building blocks of effective counterterrorist activity are not new. In fact, there is no better protection against chaos and human tragedies than maintaining social cohesion, good governance, territorial integrity and political independence in sovereign states. In our era, the protection of these basic conditions of statehood must be earned. It involves good governance, responsibly exercising state sovereignty, accountability of the government to the people, in other words, constant efforts on the part of the state to uphold its legitimacy. Preventing and countering violent extremism requires a genuine commitment to practicing the values of accountable government, respect for minority rights, as well as other values of good governance.
It is understood that there exist different and sometimes competing sources of state legitimacy. In many countries, elections based on the principle of one person one vote do not guarantee legitimate government. Respect for the rights of minorities and effective and transparent functioning of the government, as well as fairness to all citizens and their inclusion in policy-making, are the necessary ingredients of a legitimate state. And only when all these ingredients of legitimacy are taken together, can one can expect effective terrorist protection and, more generally, protection against all forms of violent extremism.
There are many aspects of policy-making, ranging from security to the development of the education system, where the legitimacy of state power represents the most important guarantee of its effectiveness. It is important to note that effectiveness in protection against terrorism and violent extremism is best achieved in a preventive mode. Governments should give priority to prevention and non-coercive means of tackling violent extremism. The main emphasis should be placed on citizens, men and women alike. The contributions of educators, thought leaders, religious leaders, community groups and the business community have to be mobilized in an effort to develop appropriate long-term prevention strategies. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure: this time-tested wisdom applies to the fight against violent extremism as much as it applies to other social ills and pathologies.
Understandably, the emphasis on prevention does not diminish the importance of repressive measures – the police, intelligence services and, sometimes, the military. However, when used, these measures must be proportionate to the actual threat and carried out in conformity with domestic and international law.
←38 | 39→
Most violent extremist acts have their roots in entrenched armed conflicts that have been ongoing for many decades. In several parts of the world, and in the Middle East in particular, fighting has turned into a way of life. The flow of refugees has created populations that can become a fertile ground for further violent extremism and for the recruitment of terrorists.
These entrenched armed conflicts must be stopped. An intensified international effort is needed to break the current political and institutional deadlocks that prevent the resolution of these conflicts. Understandably, each armed conflict has its own dynamic, its own protagonists and its own modalities of ending. However, the international community must be able to pull its strengths together. UN member states have endowed the Security Council with formidable legal powers and an unparalleled international legitimacy. At the same time, these assets imply an unparalleled level of responsibility.
The effectiveness of future activities related to counterterrorism and violent extremism will require the reestablishment of the necessary level of agreement within the UN Security Council. In fact, the deteriorating global security, of which terrorism is a part, calls for a serious effort to build a global security compact involving all the permanent members of the Security Council. Such a compact would not have to be legally binding. But it will have to include an understanding of the ways to resolve the most acute armed conflicts of our era, those in the Middle East in particular, the global security fault line.
Countering violent extremism requires action both at the national and at the international level. Individual efforts will not suffice. Collective efforts are clearly necessary. We live in a time that calls for determined multilateral action.
(Concluding Remarks at the Policy Dialogue of the Club de Madrid “Stop Violent Extremism,” held in Madrid on 28 October 2015)
←39 | 40→←40 | 41→
Notes
1. 1 See Antonio Cassese, Terrorism, Politics and Law, Polity Press, 1989.
2. 2 Andrew Tan and Kumar Ramakrishna (eds.), The New Terrorism: Anatomy, Trends and Counter-Strategies, Eastern Universities Press, 2002.
The Potential of International Law in Times of Crises