Taking too long? Close loading screen.



The issue of the prevention of terrorism has become absolutely a priority from a legal point of view, in relation to the area of public security, both in terms of international collaboration and in the effective establishment of legal instruments specifically predetermined ex ante.

In this specific sector, the United Nations Organization, on a global scale, the European Community within a regional scale and finally Italy have made innumerable efforts in such a way as to be able to comply in spite of the innumerable difficulties, a legislation which can adapt to the composite levels of territorial competence.

The theoretical definition of terrorism is particularly complex and controversial. Over the various decades the term terrorism had been used with a precise reference to the modus operandi of the different Governments in order to obtain a forced consent of the population; later he referred to the systematic and continuous use of violence against state apparatuses by organizations with political purposes, but which positioned themselves outside the traditional political chessboard.

Terrorism, from the point of view of the semantic meaning, has always been a phenomenon characterized by a composite as well as wide hybrid polyvalence, with the consequent need for a multiplicity of interpretations and hermeneutic interpretations, and by a continuous evolution, the which concerns, among other things, numerous phenomena: from the supranational dimension to the endemic roots in specific ethnic-religious cultural “humus”, which are interconnected with an intense combination of legal and illegal economic activities.

In light of this broad and various picture, in order to obtain real contrasting results, a technical and in-depth analysis of pre-understanding of the phenomenon from a social and anthropological point of view is absolutely necessary.

Initially, numerous scholars argued that terrorism is an extremely complex phenomenon given that it is directly attributable to the psychological and criminological sphere as well as to the political one tout court and connected to the concepts: war, propaganda and religious radicalization.

On the other hand, other geopolitical analysts and sociologists have theorized that it is necessary to look at the teleological aim, at the intrinsic motivations, at the personality and at the strategy of the terrorist, such as for example as regards the terrorist groups of a separatist matrix, (ETA, IRA) which were and are motivated by political reasons, such as the desire for the independence of their own territorial portion of belonging with respect to a nation to which they do not feel they belong.

In addition, those that aim at changing the social order and to conclude the radicalized component of a religious nature which appears more socially dangerous as in many cases totally lacking a strategic vision.

Consequently, the term terrorism can be declined in totally dissimilar ways, and for this technical reason terrorism has never been defined in a totally satisfactory and univocal way.

In addition, those who aim at changing the social order and to conclude the radicalized component of a religious nature which appears more socially dangerous as in many cases totally lacking a strategic vision.

Consequently, the term terrorism can be declined in totally dissimilar ways, and for this technical reason terrorism has never been defined in a totally satisfactory and univocal way.

Strategic interests at stake

From a historical point of view, it is possible to identify the first manifestation of this phenomenon in September 1972, within the European continent when the terrorist group “Black September” attacked the Israeli delegation during the Olympic Games located in Germany in Munich.

This episode represented the “milestone” of a long “escalation” which was expressed in extremely multifaceted ways.

The technical analysis of the reasons for the emergence of these new ways of international terrorism, which have gone to exacerbate the process of decolonization and the new Western invasion declined with the new flywheel of homo oeconomicus.

Subsequently, terrorism has always manifested itself in different forms, adapting to technological evolution in relation to the methods and tools used.

In particular, with the possibility of being able to use increasingly effective “tools” in such a way as to be able to inflict damage on civil society, also for these reasons the impact of terrorism has been materially increasingly devastating.

In any case, the real “turning point” was characterized by the attacks of 11 September 2001, a devastating shock for the international community, which resulted in multiple consequences from a legal and military point of view.

In fact, the various terrorist groups of Islamic extremist origin have managed to create an extremely multifaceted kaleidoscope of strategic alliances with other cells involved in transnational crime, using a modus agendi in order to develop synergies and to be able to optimize their respective organizational capacities.

The main purpose of the new extremist terrorism is to carry out a selection of its precise objectives with the desire to exasperate and encourage at the same time a collective fear within society in such a way as to be able to demonstrate the vulnerability of central government power and his inability to be able to provide for public security and the safety of society.

In particular, it has been argued that terrorism expresses a totally irrational endemic teleological aim of succeeding in obtaining the annihilation of fundamental values: freedom, democracy, the rule of law by pursuing this result in the most impeccable, destructive and violent way, without the slightest respect for life.

From this point of view, the figure of the suicide terrorist par excellence, which emerged in Palestine, in response to the birth of the state of Israel in 1948, could be analysed as the emblematic expression of total irrationality, fanaticism and nihilism in its most aberrant in that the life of the kamikaze is totally impoverished of its fundamental purpose, on the basis of the fact that it is conceived in a purely instrumental way.

Finally, it appears necessary to draw attention to the fact that some of the latest terrorist attacks are perpetrated by citizens, mostly from the former colonies, of the same nation affected, based on a composite series of factors such as the lack of integration and acceptance. within the social context of reference.

Within the European Union, with the adoption of the Amsterdam Treaty, which was signed in 1997 and subsequently entered into force in 1999, the “communitarisation” of the third pillar was implemented.

It concerned cooperation in the police and judicial sector in criminal matters, and, in this way, they had taken a decisive step towards the adoption of common and concerted strategies in the fight against terrorism and giving a truly important role to Europol.

During the same year, the Tampere Council, located in Finland, proposed the establishment of Eurojust (which will actually be created in 2001), which was represented by a composite unit of prosecutors, magistrates or police officers of the same competence, who were seconded by each Member State in accordance with its legal system.

This legal institution should have had the task of facilitating coordination and consultation between the composite national authorities in charge of prosecuting, in order to provide technical assistance in investigations, relating to organized crime cases.

In particular, based on the analysis of Europol and cooperation with the European judicial network.

Subsequently, with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force in 2009, changes were introduced in those areas relevant to the fight against terrorism.

About the operational profile “on the ground” it is possible to say that the fight against terrorism in a European context was significantly strengthened in an organic way

only after the 2001 attack on the Twin Towers in New York.

Immediately afterwards, the European Council established that the fight against terrorism had to become an absolutely priority objective of the European Union. In this sense, the European Council proceeded to adopt an “Action Plan” through which it intended to face the threat of international terrorism.

This vademecum in question consisted of 5 essential points: strengthening judicial and police cooperation, adopting measures established at the Tampere Council, setting up joint investigation teams and also closer and more intense collaboration with the US institutions, through the development of some legal instruments of international significance, coordinating the global action of the European Union.

This 2001 plan was extensively revised and subsequently updated in 2004 after the Madrid attacks.

In 2005, following the London attacks, the European Union strategy against terrorism was defined in such a way that it could be faced in a preventive manner.

The European Union’s counter-terrorism program was divided precisely into 4 points: prevention, protection, prosecution and response.

With regard to prevention, the EU’s Fundamental Strategy aimed to counter the phenomenon of radicalization and the recruitment of new generations at continental and international level through the use of new IT “tools”.

Finally, it is absolutely necessary to emphasize the cooperation between the EU and NATO, which was established over 15 years ago, and has led to the technical development of a wide range of tools which guarantee greater security not only for citizens of the EU.

On 10 July 2018, the EU and NATO signed a new joint declaration which illustrates the shared vision of the vademecum of the two organizations that will jointly combat threats to common security.

The two previously named institutional bodies will concentrate their cooperation in a composite number of sectors such as: military mobility, cyber-security, hybrid threats, fight against terrorism and, finally, women and security.

The new joint declaration places a decisive emphasis on how recent EU efforts are aimed at intensifying defence and security cooperation and have strengthened transatlantic security in the fight against terrorism.

Future Scenarios

After the attacks in Paris in 2015, Brussels in 2016 and Strasbourg within the beating heart of the European institutions, they set themselves the concrete will to remove the conditions that favour radicalization and ghettoization, with the casus belli par excellence of neighbourhood of the Belgian capital Molenbeek, such as: government anomalies and integration gaps, in addition to the lack of economic and employment prospects, the rapid and uncontrolled modernization which could have led to a form of post-modern Fordian alienation.

For the concrete implementation of a protection, Europe intends to intensify the controls of air, land and sea transport, to increase the degree of security, especially when the transport involves the presence of travellers, through the introduction of biometric information in the identity cards, in order to verify the actual authenticity of the documents.

Finally, with regard to the recent attacks in New Zealand against Islamic places of worship and the allegedly recent counter-offensive in Sri Lanka, we can only underline how the multicultural policies of Anglo-Saxon and continental origin are now obsolete in the face of such a polarization and need a revision in the light of these new dramatic events.