Against supposedly ‘Islamic’ terrorism, political, economic and military action is required. A solution to the Syrian crisis can no longer be postponed, while the European phenomenon of the foreign fighters needs addressing.
Paris finds itself once again fragile in the face of the blind fury of extremist Islamic terrorists. Yet Paris in this case is not only the capital of France but also represents the whole of Europe as a symbol and point of reference: young people of 14 different nationalities were killed the evening of 13 November. After the initial days of pain and solidarity, each country seems to have gone back to focusing on its own interests. As always, what interests us most is providing an account of the facts.
In less than two years, the men of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of Islamic State (IS), have created a well-oiled organisational and propaganda machine. To understand the terrorist phenomenon currently afflicting our lives, we must now realise that we are no longer up against lone wolves but a pseudostate structure that does much more than just exploit the wayward and marginalised.
The ranks of IS are full of people from all corners of the globe. In just three years, according to official US estimates, they have increased nearly tenfold, from 3,000 to 25,000 fighters. Of these, more than 1,550 are French (France’s Islamic community of six million is the largest in Europe), 1,400 are split evenly between the United Kingdom and Germany, while Belgium has the highest rate of foreign fighters per capita (40 per million). In other words, thousands of European citizens can return to Europe trained, radicalised – and poised to strike.
The leading source of funds for the caliphate – which opened its own bank in Mosul – is the contraband of crude oil (nearly one million euros daily); the second is donations from some of the Sunni countries in the Gulf (principally Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which have also joined the fight against IS); and the third, according to Newsweek, comes from Islamic and private charities to the tune of at least 40 million US dollars (over €38m), virtually untraceable, over the past two years. Then there is the looting of institutions and the smuggling of archaeological treasures, plus a mix of taxation and extortion imposed on retailers, businesspeople and truck drivers (€7.5 million per month in taxes alone in the controlled territories), all of which make IS the most well-funded terrorist group in the world. It uses these revenues to pay fighters’ wages ($500-$650 monthly, equivalent to €467-€608) and to provide daily meals for the people it has subjugated. We all agree that some kind of reaction against the bloody formation of a state that butchers and decapitates in the name of God is called for, but what might it be? This is where the distinctions begin. Before the Paris attacks, each country put off confronting the problem under the mistaken belief that fighting would continue to be restricted to the Middle Eastern region. Each country except for France, which has engaged in military operations in Mali and was already involved in the low-intensity conflict against IS.
Today, two types of measures seem essential: some urgent, others for the medium- term.
Military intervention is extremely urgent in Syria and Iraq: not just air strikes, which can even be counterproductive (and kill civilians), but ground troops as well. None among us are warmongers, but it is clear now that we must eradicate the caliphate’s symbolic ascendancy and its ‘non-values’ with military action that experts say would take no longer than a few weeks, given the lack of preparation of IS’ non-professional army and the scarce support they could expect from local populations.
For the first time in history, France has invoked Article 42 of the Lisbon Treaty – the common security and defence clause. It requires EU member states to come to the aid of a European nation that has been a victim of armed aggression on its own territory. However, we must also involve the Middle Eastern Arab powers in defence of moderate Islam. And all flows of financing must be drastically interrupted.
We must also have a post-war plan ready (that should include Libya) in order to avoid the mistakes committed by the United States in these very lands, which ultimately led to a power vacuum filled by the rantings and ravings of Islamic State. But we have to hurry if we don’t want the deaths of more of our young people on our conscience. As long as the caliphate continues to serve as a propaganda bullhorn and a training camp for aspiring jihadists, we will be unable to stem the tide.
We must draft a Marshall Plan to help the populations overrun by IS and civil war to be carried out by professional politicians and diplomats. And Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime must be removed (in Syria it has killed more people than IS), with a time frame and approach that Brussels should first wisely negotiate with Moscow and Tehran.
The second urgent measure is to create a European intelligence agency. Clearly, IS’ strategy of using sleeper cells and foreign fighters in one European country and exporting them to a neighbouring nation allows them to circumvent national secret services. Add to that the fact that a whopping 80% of intelligence on our country comes from the US and only a small fraction from France, the UK, Israel and Italy itself, it becomes even more obvious that we Europeans need to band together if we are to adequately prevent attacks in our backyard.
Recently, the European Commission stressed that only a small percentage of the €740 million earmarked for creating a European anti-terrorism strategy has been applied for so far due to member states’ reticence to share their databanks and collaborate with the SitCen (Situation Centre), an embryo of a European intelligence organisation set back by the fact that it must still operate on voluntary national contributions.
We must also implement medium-term measures that address the roots of the problems tied to terrorism:
a)Organise a peace conference that reviews Middle Eastern borders with all 19 anti-IS coalition members at the table and the Arab nations taking pride of place;
b)Confront the socio-economic-cultural crisis of minorities confined to the fringes of Europe’s metropolises, which have clearly been unable to endure the cost of the long economic and financial depression of recent years;
c) Accelerate the process towards European Union foreign affairs and defence policies without which member states – be they France or Germany, the UK or Spain – will no longer be able to manage processes and crises, or influence negotiations or strategic decisions. If our national leaders are prepared to sacrifice re-election for these goals, for the creation of a federal Europe, we may be able to offer a visionary allure for many of today’s young lost souls, even for those enduring marginalisation and ideological manipulation.
Against supposedly ‘Islamic’ terrorism, political, economic and military action is required. A solution to the Syrian crisis can no longer be postponed, while the European phenomenon of the foreign fighters needs addressing.
