Information about my new ebook.
Terrorism cannot be referred to as a conventional, symmetric threat, nor can the measures to deal with this phenomenon remain trapped in a singularly militaristic framework. The problem is multifaceted and starts from home. The European Union is ill prepared to wage war against an elusive enemy, while European integration has yet to develop the necessary instruments for coping with the internal implications of warfare.
The constitutional and international legal order, as well as the democratic conception of sovereignty are instances of practical morality that were developed over the ages in opposition to various kinds of theocracy. The struggle against the jihad of the self-styled Islamic State must remain aware of the history of secular political organisation. The argument against terrorism is to remain committed to the practical reason of democracy, constitutionalism, and international law.
War is not an appealing proposition, nor is the singular use of military force the longer-term solution to the problem. Any effort against the self-styled Islamic State has to be multifaceted and anchored in international law. Action starts from home and involves civilian means.
A partially integrated system has shortcomings in the harmonisation of areas of policy that remain firmly national. Member States bind themselves with supranational rules, thus establishing a framework of “shared responsibility”. Cross-border vulnerabilities arise that point to the need for “more Europe”, manifesting as greater and more systematised coordination between national authorities and the European level.
To respond to terrorism we must remain true to our own values and avoid sweeping generalisations that stigmatise entire groups of people.
Yves Mersch has raised some very interesting points concerning the euro as a currency beyond the nation state. He is however trying to defend the original idea behind the Maastricht architecture for the single currency: the statelessness of the euro.