The European Approach to International Security: Counterterrorism and Digital Threats

Article written in collaboration with European Careers Association Maastricht

Authors: Emma Guastone (EG) & Federico Fo (ECA Maastricht)

In recent years, the world has witnessed a considerable increase in international tensions, becoming extremely dangerous from this point of view. In this regard, acts of terrorism have become a standardized tool to increase international instability. Thus, obliging countries to look for new solutions to support counterterrorism operations. Particularly, Europe has made considerable progress when referring to European collaboration to fight terrorist threats. While most of the competences for counterterrorism are held by individual States, the collaboration among them is supported on many levels by a series of different international organizations independent from each other. Nominally, these institutions consist of the European Union (EU), the Council of Europe and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This article aims  to explore in what way these organizations support the already mentioned collaboration.

Firstly, the EU has always supported international security through EUROPOL. This institution promotes collaboration among intelligence services and police departments of Member States and other non-EU partner States. Particularly after the attacks of Paris in 2015, EUROPOL promoted further European cooperation through the establishment of different programs and bodies. One of these is theEuropean Counter Terrorism Center (ECTC) created in 2016. This body was created to plan a common European policy for counterterrorism. Specifically, it provides operational support through sharing intelligence for investigations, consultancy to fight terrorist acts and deployment of officials to share expertise.

Secondly, the Council of Europe has a different doctrine than the EU to combat international threats. While the EU's approach focuses more on the sharing of intelligence, the Council of Europe, rather furthers the improvement of the legal systems of its member states to make them more effective against terrorist threats. The body within the Council of Europe that holds this task is known as the Council of Europe Committee on Counter Terrorism (CDCT). This body has the task to ensure the correct implementation of the legal standards suggested by the Council of Europe in order to combat possible attacks. Particularly these legal instruments consist of the Warsaw Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism and the Additional Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism. These two treaties suggest the application of legal standards within each single state  aimed at the criminalization of a series of terrorist activities, such as: receiving terrorist training, financing travel for terrorist aims and travelling abroad for terrorist aims.

Lastly, NATO’s approach shares similarities with the EU. Although the operational involvement of the alliance in counter terrorist operations is on a much higher level than the EU. Nominally, NATO focuses on the following: improvement of threat-awareness, improvement of means and capabilities for counterterrorism and promoting further cooperation among member States. Awareness is promoted through consultations for terrorist threats and the promotion of intelligence sharing among members. These tasks are for example achieved by a series of bodies within NATO through the publication and sharing of prominent analytical reports about terrorism. Capabilities are improved through the common development of innovative technology created with the exact aim to fight attacks within a context of asymmetric threats. For example, the use of unusual and unpredictable weapons like drones, explosives, and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons. Regarding the promotion of collaboration, NATO is making use of a series of bodies with the exact aim of promoting the creation of new partnerships for counter terrorism between the different States.

When it comes to its citizens' privacy and safety, in its security framework, the EU frequently targets big tech and digital services, which offer tools to illegally obtain data used by private entities and terrorist organizations alike. Notably, the European Union has approved rather strict privacy regulations and internal frameworks, promoting transparency but discouraging investment in the tech sector.

The first tool implemented by the EU to tackle digital services and online security is a solid institutional framework. In 2004, the EU established ENISA, the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity, which became a central actor in the protection and regulation against transnational threats. Further, institutionalized in 2019 with the introduction of the EU Cybersecurity Act, its goal is to enhance trust in digital services and products and to standardize common practices and reduce fragmentation across member states. Alongside the harmonization of different frameworks, data sovereignty resides at the heart of European efforts to ensure digital security, especially considering its geopolitical relevance. The Gaia-X initiative aims to create a federated, secure EU data infrastructure, significantly reducing the dependence on foreign tech providers. By including a variety of actors and ensuring compliance with EU data protection laws, it promotes interoperability and transparency as key values to develop a trusted ecosystem where businesses and institutions can securely share and store data. 

From an institutional point of view, proactive mitigation is expected to cover both private and state-sponsored cyber threats; thus, the creation of programs such as the 5G toolbox, created to address national security associated with 5G networks. The 5G toolbox actively encourages diversification of suppliers and limitation of high-risk vendors in tech deployment. Furthermore, with the AI Act, entered into force on August 1, 2024, cybersecurity has been expanded to include AI and emerging hybrid threats like biometric surveillance, classifying systems by risk and regulating those that could impact critical infrastructure, individual rights, or public safety. 

A very controversial piece of legislation is the 2022 Digital Service Act, which highlights the rigorous policy framework adopted by the EU for online content. As part of the EU’s Digital Services Package, it serves as a comprehensive internet regulation tackling pivotal issues such as safety and transparency. By emphasising user rights, it enforces accountability for very large online platforms (VLOPs) as well as limiting misinformation and combating illegal content.

This last feature of the Digital Service Act is particularly important when it comes to counterterrorism due to the critical relationship between terrorist propaganda and social media platforms. By aligning the DSA with the existing EU counterterrorism framework, the prevention of radicalisation online is implemented through expeditious removal of dangerous material and risk management obligations for third actors.

In the Europol TE-SAT 2024 Report, the Terrorim Situation and Trends in the EU published annually by Europol, it is presented a comprehensive overview of terrorist activity in all EU Member States in 2023. Even though Jihadist terrorism remains the biggest security concern in terms of fatalities and injuries, right-wing and left-wing extremism, as well as separatist movements, are becoming more radical and dangerous. Accelerationalist ideologies and solidarity with imprisoned anarchists constitute strong motivators for violent actions. However, if the ideological motivations are varied, the technological and social dynamics around terrorist groups are not. Encrypted apps and social media are the main outlets used to spread propaganda, recruit new members, and plan attacks, with extremist online communities being constantly active in shaping relevant political discourses through misinformation and biased storytelling. The demographics more operative in these terrorist cells are young adults and minors. Moreover, Europol warns about the use of emerging digital tools by extremists. Advanced artificial intelligence models such as LLMs combined with deep fake technology are frequently used to create misleading content and fake identities, while the use of 3D-printed weapons and online manuals for making explosives is on the rise.

The threats to international security are constantly multiplying, underlining existing weaknesses and new fragilities. The EU has shown a holistic and preventive aptitude towards terrorism, cybersecurity and hybrid threats, institutionalizing ad-hoc internal agencies and partnering with external actors without compromising its sovereignty and security standards. When it comes to security, collaboration and democratic values remain at the heart of EU policymaking.

Bibliography

DISA. (2024, March 4). EU Digital Services Act to integrate disinformation code of practice. https://disa.org/eu-digital-services-act-to-integrate-disinformation-code-of-practice/

European Commission. (n.d.-a). Cybersecurity Act. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/cybersecurity-act

European Commission. (n.d.-b). Strengthened EU Code of Practice on Disinformation. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/new-push-european-democracy/protecting-democracy/strengthened-eu-code-practice-disinformation_en

European Commission. (2023, December 20). Commission endorses the integration of the voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation into the Digital Services Act. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-endorses-integration-voluntary-code-practice-disinformation-digital-services-act

Europol. (2024). Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT) 2024 – Sintesi [Summary]. https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/TE-SAT%202024%20-%20Sintesi%20-%20IT.pdf

Europol. (n.d.-a). European Counter Terrorism Centre (ECTC). https://www.europol.europa.eu/about-europol/european-counter-terrorism-centre-ectc

Europol. (n.d.-b). EU Internet Referral Unit (EU IRU). https://www.europol.europa.eu/about-europol/european-counter-terrorism-centre-ectc/eu-internet-referal-unit-eu-iru

Hern, A. (2021, November 24). Europe’s dream of a sovereign cloud is shattering. WIRED. https://www.wired.com/story/europe-gaia-x-cloud-amazon-google/

Hern, A. (2021, December 30). Europe’s Big Tech crackdown is just getting started. WIRED. https://www.wired.com/story/european-commission-big-tech-regulation-outlook/

Heath, A. (2025, January 17). Google is rewriting its rules in Europe—because it has to. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/17/24345747/google-eu-dsa-fact-checks-disinformation-code-search-youtube

NATO. (n.d.). Defending against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) hazards operations and missions. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_77646.htm

Turillazzi, A., Taddeo, M., Floridi, L., & Casolari, F. (2023). The Digital Services Act: An analysis of its ethical, legal, and social implications. Law, Innovation and Technology, 15(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184136

Council of Europe. (n.d.). Counter-terrorism. https://www.coe.int/en/web/counter-terrorism

Council of the European Union. (n.d.). Sanctions against terrorism. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/fight-against-terrorism/

Council of the European Union. (n.d.). Terrorism in the EU: Facts and figures [Infographic]. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/terrorism-eu-facts-figures/

Europol. (n.d.-c). Partners & collaboration. https://www.europol.europa.eu/partners-collaboration