The evolution of the European Union’s ‘fight against terrorism’ discourse: Constructing the terrorist ‘other’

Abstract

Abstract:The purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which the EU's counterterrorism discourse, the 'fight against terrorism', is constructed, and the ways in which it functions both rhetorically and in practice. It argues that that 'EU identity' is constituted through and is central to the constitution of EU counter-terrorism policy. The approach taken is constructivist in nature drawing on a discourse analysis of primarily European Council policy documents, as well as the reports and speeches of the EU CounterTerrorism Co-ordinator. In particular, it identifies three strands of the discourse that it is argued play a key role in the construction of a terrorist 'other'. These three strands include: terrorism as crime and as an emotive act of violence; terrorism as an act perpetrated solely by non-state actors;http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cac Cooperation and Conflict F o r P e e r R e v i e w and terrorism as a 'new' and 'evolving' threat. The article proceeds in three steps. First, it outlines the theoretical considerations that underpin this research, including its empirical application. Second, it demonstrates how each strand of the discourse is constructed. Third, it discusses the functioning of the discourse, including the contested nature of the 'terrorism knowledge' that underpins the EU's counter-terrorism approach. The article concludes by reflecting on what this case study contributes to our understanding of EU counter-terrorism policy. AbstractThe purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which the EU's counter-terrorism discourse, the 'fight against terrorism', is constructed, and the ways in which it functions both rhetorically and in practice. It argues that that 'EU identity' is constituted through and is central to the constitution of EU counter-terrorism policy. The approach taken is constructivist in nature drawing on a discourse analysis of primarily European Council policy documents, as well as the reports and speeches of the EU Counter-Terrorism Co-ordinator. In particular, it identifies three strands of the discourse that it is argued play a key role in the construction of a terrorist 'other'. These three strands include: terrorism as crime and as an emotive act of violence; terrorism as an act perpetrated solely by non-state actors; and terrorism as a 'new' and 'evolving' threat. The article proceeds in three steps. First, it outlines the theoretical considerations that underpin this research, including its empirical application. Second, it demonstrates how each strand of the discourse is constructed. Third, it discusses the functioning of the discourse, including the contested nature of the 'terrorism knowledge' that underpins the EU's counter-terrorism approach. The article concludes by reflecting on what this case study contributes to our understanding of EU counter-terrorism policy, as well as explaining how the notion of the terrorist 'other' could provide the basis for a future research agenda that deepens our understanding of how the identity of the EU is consti...

The war on meaninglessness: A counter-terrorist self through an absent terrorist other

“…This specific other is imagined in a context of widespread post-9/11 Islamophobia that targets especially members from Muslim minorities living in the global West (Eid and Karim, 2014). They are the 'suitable enemies' for post-9/11 security legislation and governance (Baker-Beall, 2014), such as the ISPS Code. In a War on Terror context, the stories and (lack of) experiences of the participants with the terrorist other reveal (hidden) narratives of their occupational self (re)configured in the port securityscape that seem to confront them with intrinsic meaninglessness.…”

“…Still, as the second narrative revolves around, their occupational, counter-terrorist self has to survive in the War on Meaninglessness, for which the terrorist other must be imagined (Baker-Beall, 2014). This is done primarily through mediatised political rhetoric and imagery (Eid and Karim, 2014), leading to stereotypes of terrorists being brainwashed with Islamic fundamentalist ideology whose sole purpose is to bring about death and destruction for publicity.…”

Are Muslims in the Netherlands constructed as a ‘suspect community’? An analysis of Dutch political discourse on terrorism in 2004-2015

“…The second reason for exclusion pertains to documents in which the mentioning of terrorism is often accompanied by Bcrime^, Borganized crime^, Bpiracy^or some other criminal behavior (see Baker-Beall [2] for similar observations on discourse in the EU). This is comparable to the first exclusion criteria in which terrorism is discussed, albeit in documents meeting this exclusion criterion 'the crime' of terrorism is often the focal point, amongst other crimes, most commonly Borganized crime^.…”

Unpacking ‘International Terrorism’: Discourse, the European Community and Counter‐Terrorism, 1975–86

“…The aim is to break with the idea of counter-terrorism as an obvious response to what is known as terrorism by pointing out that the making and justification of the response is contingent upon the interpretation of the problem. This research therefore joins a growing body of literature that critically examines the concepts and terms through which EU counter-terrorism is made meaningful (Guittet, 2004;Tsoukala, 2004;Jackson, 2007;De Goede, 2008;Hassan, 2010;Baker-Beall, 2014). The article testifies to the emergence of what is now widely understood as counter-terrorism, a distinct policy field and set of practices devoted solely to targeting those identified as terrorists.…”