Countering Terrorism. US vs EU Strategies and their Implications for Human Rights

Today, we hear several discourses on terrorism, both at the media level and from experts. However, these discourses often risk slipping into some banalities that do not allow us to analyse the phenomenon from an objective point of view or that, even, risk feeding stereotypes based on religion or ethnicity without having solid foundations and leading to discrimination. Hence, the purpose of my thesis is that of deeply investigate and clearly illustrate what terrorism is, which acts can be considered as such and which are its causes, in order to be able to define which counterterrorism policies states should adopt to prevent and deal with this type of phenomenon. My dissertation is composed of five chapters. In the first chapter I will analyse what terrorism is – starting from different possible definitions – how many and what type of terrorism exist, and which are the root and trigger causes of this phenomenon. This will be essential to understand the second chapter of my work, that will try to define which are the five possible goals of terrorism and which are the five possible strategies of terrorism that can be obtained by crossing the target of persuasion and the subject of uncertainty. The third chapter of the thesis, instead, is the most important one because it represents the central point of my research; this chapter is dedicated to the study of counterterrorism strategies and it essential to understand which are the most efficient policies that a targeted government should adopt. Here I will explain why, in my opinion, military interventions are not resolutive against terrorism, and this is connected to costs, to popular support and to the lessons that history has taught us. Then, I will illustrate which eight major classes of cases of end of terrorism have been individuated. I will also argue that adopting measures aimed at reducing the support of population for terrorist organizations is the best answer to terrorism, because in this way terrorism is hit at the “hearts” and at the “minds” and therefore this breaks that vicious circle of violence created by those who claim that attack is the best form of defense. In the last two chapters, I have decided to examine more specifically the counterterrorism
policies adopted by two political entities: the United States of America and the European Union. Their antiterrorism strategies, indeed, have always been very different according to me. Especially after the 9/11 attacks – which represent a turning point in the study of terrorism – their reactions have been opposite: in the case of the US, experts talk about military reactions and a repression strategy, while in the case of the EU, they talk about civil reactions and a prevention strategy. Despite this, in both cases I have highlighted the negative implications of some decisions on the international legal framework, with due regard to the respect of human rights, in particular with reference to the Global War on Terrorism that was started by President George W. Bush and that I think is never really ended.