A comprehensive view of criminal behaviour.

The assailant that yesterday attacked the police officers on duty at the Champs Elysées had a long past of criminal behaviour. He spent many years in jail. And all those who knew him a bit agree he was a deeply deranged fellow.

 As we take these facts into account, we must raise a number of questions about the workings of the penitentiary system, the failures – or at least, the limitations – of the re-education programmes, the inefficiency of the back-to-society policies and also the way our institutional arrangements miss the target when it comes to deal with extremely violent people. 

All these matters need to be seriously thought through, and challenged, if we are indeed committed to making our environment safer.

It´s not enough just to speak about terrorism.  

The political leaders and the police work

The fight against terrorism is above all the work of the specialised police services. They should be able to carry out their duties with a great degree of independence. This basically means that the political leaders should not get involved in the technical tasks of the police. They must be advised to do so, to keep a healthy distance from the police and not to fall in the temptation of becoming super police chiefs. That´s not their role.

The politicians should deal with the public dimensions issues and above all, they ought to bring the security feelings back. That´s about promoting a climate of serenity and fighting the propagation of alarmist views. It´s about explaining the security strategies that are being put in place.

Furthermore, their relationship with the police should be about creating the critical conditions for the services to be able to perform in a coordinated and efficient manner.

But police decisions have to remain the prerogative of the police forces. If the politicians try to meddle in such interference will cause confusion in the ranks of the police bosses and will compromise the professional approaches that the challenge of fighting terrorism requires. 

Terrorism: the narrative matters

Tomorrow I should spend some time on the relationship between terrorism and media. Basically, the question is about the way our European media is reporting about the terrorist incidents that have recently caused serious despair in our societies. More specifically, the concern is about the media as amplifiers of the terror atmosphere the criminals want to create among us. How is our serious media telling the stories? The narratives, including the exaggerations, have a major impact on people. And terrorism is about impacting and destabilising as many as possible. We should not be naïve and allow ourselves to serve their objectives.

Furthermore, a crisis psychosis is the ideal ground for the growth of all kinds of opportunistic politicians. They know how to take advantage of our fears. Are we unwillingly helping them?

These are some of the questions on the table. 

Trump is a dangerous candidate

I watched Donal Trump´s speech on Orlando´s tragedy. That was the day after the heart-breaking act of extreme folly. He had hence time to organise his thoughts and decide on the messages. And what came out should be seen as a very dangerous approach to peaceful relations between diverse communities, at the domestic level, and also to international affairs. Dangerous because the speech was well delivered and could be easily understood by those who have a primary approach to life in America. And seen as convincing. Dangerous because it put across the absurd belief that Muslims in the US know about terrorist intentions and radical people but keep quiet. Dangerous because it was about open confrontation and stigmatisation. Dangerous again because it was about lies, including about the President, who has been very active in the fight against terrorism in many parts of the world, including through the controversial drone killing programme. And above all, it was a excellent reminder that Trump is a danger himself, and should not be allowed to get going without being seriously challenged, particularly by those within the leadership of his own party. 

No fear

Brussels was a special place today. The government decided to increase the security level to high alert, to the maximum degree. And the city went into a lockdown. 

It was a strange, sad day. It could be seen as a victory for those who want to disturb our way of living. 

Fortunately, it happened during the week end. I am sure on Monday we will be back to our daily routines. We cannot succumb to any menaces coming from some crazy young fellows. Our institutions are certainly stronger that those deranged fellows that hide behind radical ideas and criminal plots. 

Soldiers on the streets is no effective response to terrorist threats

Yesterday I wrote about my concern to see inappropriate, excessive security measures being adopted as a follow-up to the dramatic events in France. Unfortunately, the politicians seem to prove me right. They have now decided to put something like 10,000 soldiers on the French streets. This increases the security paranoia, it sends the message that people should live in fear, and gives the military a role that it is not theirs, for which they are not prepared. Furthermore, it makes them an easy target for all kinds of crazies that hate military uniforms.

The politicians know that this is not the right approach but might think that the citizens appreciate this action. I am not even sure of that.

And let´s be clear. When there is a real problem – and the terrorist threat is real – the responsibility of the political leaders is to organise the right response. Not to engage in spectacular actions that have very little impact on the solution of the problem. 

After Charlie, many rays of hope

Impressive rally in Paris. Impressive popular demonstrations all over France. This should bring back hope and tolerance. And one should make sure that the security responses that will follow the Charlie drama are proportionate and unobtrusive.

Security cooperation

In the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo drama, there will be a high-level meeting in Paris on Sunday on internal security in Europe. I have not seen its agenda. But I believe it will have to discuss two basic things: improve intelligence and expand the exchange of information among the different police services of the EU countries. This means, in different words, more resources for prevention and a more cooperative approach among States. Both seem quite obvious. But they have not been very easy to implement. And I am afraid they will continue to face the same type of challenges. 

Charlie Hebdo and our tolerance level

On this day, when barbarians attacked the weekly Charlie Hebdo, in the heart of the city of Paris, one should just say two things. First, to express sadness. And second, to say that this type of criminal actions aims at the core of our values and tries to destroy our tolerance, our acceptance of the difference. And that cannot be accepted. We certainly come out of this in pain but at the same time strengthened in our capacity to accept the difference. What we cannot accept is terrorism, extremism, ideas of centuries ago, or any dog of God. And we have to be prepared to fight them. There is no place in our society, in 2015, for any group of mad, hallucinated terrorists.  

Uprooted and lost as a young man

In Western Europe, there are thousands of young men like the one that has been captured in Boston or his dead brother.

They are the children of immigrant families that came from afar. Most of those families just ran away from poverty. But many others have left behind violent conflict experiences, be it in the Middle East, in South Asia or in Africa. Or maybe closer by, in the Balkans or the Caucasus. Their sons – it’s indeed a boy’s problem – might have been born in Europe and raised in a peaceful and democratic context but some of them feel uprooted and excluded. They end up by aligning themselves with those who express extremist views about the West. For some, the war in Syria has been an opportunity to join what they believe to be a Cause. Others have been elsewhere, including in Pakistan. These fronts have made them harder and more willing to take action. As such, they represent a major security challenge to the Western European societies. And the experience has shown that this is a challenge that is difficult to match. 

Confidence in the security institutions

The response of the FBI and other police forces to the aftermath of the Boston bombings has been exemplary. The coordination among the services, the mobilization of an extraordinary amount of resources, both human and material, the relations with the citizens and the management of the media will be looked at in many police academies, in different parts of the world, as cases of best practices and models to be followed.  

Among the many lessons, they remind us that celerity in the resolution of these major threats to public life is key to recapturing people’s confidence in the security institutions and on national political leadership. 

On terrorism

Terrorism remains a major threat in some corners of the world. Our duty is to condemn all forms of terrorism anywhere and remember that the fight against terrorism is above all a police task. The role of politicians and intellectuals is to advocate for the police to be given the means to do their job, within the law and with full respect for the rights of the citizens. .

Then, after the police work, it is a matter of effective administration of justice.

My experience, sometimes in difficult conditions, has taught me that those who try to fight it through military means or by ways of political concessions are taking the issue from the wrong end.