G-6 AND DHS SECRETARY CHERTOFF DISCUSS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 ROME 001132

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KJUS KHLS PTER CVIS PREL PGOV IT
SUBJECT: G-6 AND DHS SECRETARY CHERTOFF DISCUSS
COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGIES

REF: A. BERLIN 229


B. ROME 724


1. (SBU) Summary. Italy hosted a meeting of the six larger EU
nations in Venice May 11-12 to discuss strategies and share
experiences on ways to better cooperate in the fight against
radicalization and terrorism. Known as the "G6" meetings of
EU interior ministers, this year's meeting included DHS
Secretary Chertoff and European Commission VP Frattini as

SIPDIS
guests for the first time. The US Delegation was invited to
attend on the second day when the discussion focused on ways
to enhance the trans-atlantic dialogue on these issues. EU
Ministers agreed that radicalization poses a significant
threat in Europe, urged further attention on the root causes,
welcomed ideas to help undermine radical recruitment, and
noted that prison populations require special focus. Some
suggested that the G6 should turn its attention to
radicalization in Africa, which has a potential direct impact
on European communities because of proximity. G6 ministers
discussed the legal shortcomings that hamper aggressive
counter-terrorism strategies and suggested new conceptual
approaches on fighting terrorism. Finally, the ministers
agreed that expulsions are an effective tool to protect
national security and suggested that more emphasis should be
given to protecting the rights of citizens to live without
terrorist attacks when determining if dangerous non-citizens
should be expelled from their territories. Members welcomed
US participation at future G-6 meetings, and informally
raised the idea of having a dialogue on terrorism with other
parts of national governments beyond interior ministries.
End Summary.


2. (U) High-level participation at the May 11-12 G6 plenary
meeting in Venice included: Minister Amato (Italy); Minister
Kaczmarek (Poland); Director General, National Police Prefect
Gaudin (France) and Director of Territorial Security Pierre
de Bousquet de Florian (France); Minister Schaeuble
(Germany); Home Secretary Reid (UK); Secretary of State for
Security Camacho (Spain); European Commission VP Frattini;
DHS Secretary Chertoff.

(U) Combating Radicalization In Europe
--------------


3. (SBU) German Minister Schaeuble opened the plenary session
with a discussion on managing the effects of mass migration
in Europe. A failure of integration, he warned, stems from
isolation and leads to serious national security threats. We
must engage in an intercultural dialogue to help prevent the
problems of isolation, and focus particularly on growing
Muslim communities. Member states should also acknowledge
differences within Muslim communities and modify their
messages as necessary, realizing that a "one size fits all"
approach is not effective. Italian Minister Amato complained
that he felt "helpless" about foreigners who enter Italy and
preach anti-Western ideologies. A key focus in this regard,
he said, should be to find ways to address radical Imams who
use Mosques for nefarious purposes and as a venue to preach
hate. Italian law, he underscored, restricts the
government's ability to move against religious leaders even
under those circumstances. Amato expressed similar concern
that religious schools were springing up in Italy and seemed
to be imparting radicalism to their students. Prefect Gaudin
offered that France already has a good outreach project with
the Council of Muslim Faithful (CFCM). The French government
regulates Mosques, Imams, and religious schools to ensure
they comply with French law.


4. (SBU) Chertoff noted that home-grown Islamic
radicalization is not as serious a problem in the US as it is
in Europe, but pockets of radical Muslims exist, as the
recent arrests in New Jersey of individuals targeting
military facilities at Fort Dix show. The issue of
radicalization is one that inherently belongs to the Muslim
community, he added. Muslims have to take ownership of this
problem because government leaders do not have sufficient
credibility. We need to identify and encourage an influx of
educated Imams that have an alternative narrative of life
experiences away from violence. We should be more creative
in using the media, Chertoff explained, especially the
Internet. Polish Minister Kaczmarek said Poland maintains a
joint project with Germany to comb the Internet for potential
threats, which could be useful for other members.


5. (SBU) VP Frattini announced that the EU is already at work
on the radicalization front, saying that there are at least
three studies due out by year end analyzing the factors that
lead to radicalization. The European Commission is also

ROME 00001132 002 OF 004


working on a project to track (i.e., map out) the background,
training, and funding of Imams and mosques in Europe.
Frattini mentioned a pilot project in the Netherlands that
teaches Imams the Dutch language and culture to help in the
integration process. Another project underway in Indonesia
(funded by the EU),he said, identifies moderate Muslim
leaders and provides them opportunities to engage large
groups; the EU is interested in expanding this project.
(Note: Our sense was that this is a public diplomacy program
to give moderate leaders a platform to convey life
experiences and engage others to show that radicalism is not
the only--or best--avenue to solve problems. End note)


6. (SBU) Home Secretary Reid cautioned against over analyzing
the situation, which could distract from taking concrete
actions to stem the growth of radicalism. We should share
practical examples of how isolation translates into
indiscriminate violence against innocents. With respect to
Imams, Reid said we should institute tighter local language
requirements. We must take a holistic approach to
radicalization, Reid advised, and look for ways for the local
community to get involved to undermine its inception. One
special focus should be radicalization in the prison system,
he underscored, where radical recruitment is steadily
growing. Secretary of State Camacho agreed with Reid's
approach on prison recruitment and supported the idea of a
unified approach to tackle the general problem of
radicalization.

(SBU) Africa: A Problem Waiting To Happen
--------------


7. (SBU) Director de Bousquet asked that the group direct its
attention to the radicalization problem in Africa, which in
France's view, is generally underestimated. The area from
North Africa to the Horn and south to Tanzania, he said, is
fertile ground for fundamentalism and terrorists. The region
is importing radical Imams from Saudi Arabia, de Bousquet
asserted, and the strength of fundamentalism is a function of
ongoing radical activities in the region. The existence of
terrorist networks in East Africa and the Horn is also
worrisome, de Bousquet continued, especially the strong
threat of al-Qaida in the region stretching from Sudan to
Tanzania. Camacho noted that destabilization in North Africa
has direct repercussions for countries like Spain, which
border the Mediterranean. The Spanish intelligence services,
Camacho said, judge that al-Qaida is working to establish a
franchise in the region, if it has not already done so.

(SBU) Outdated Legal System Hampers Counter-terrorism Action
-------------- --------------


8. (SBU) Amato said that G6 members should start thinking of
themselves as a network united to fight terrorism and think
of new strategies in that regard. Reid launched a spirited
discussion on the international legal system and
counter-terrorism, declaring that there is a fundamental
mismatch between the inherited legal framework available to
fight terrorism and modern terrorist circumstances. The
fundamental human right people should enjoy is the right to
life, Reid argued, but that is under threat from modern
terrorist groups. The challenge of the new threat of
terrorism is that individuals not associated with governments
or states, pose a threat to the collective right to life, yet
are the beneficiaries of rules that prevent states from
protecting their populations.


9. (SBU) Existing laws that are nearly 60 years old were
created to protect the individual from the threat of European
Fascism, Reid continued. The current threat to people in
Europe and elsewhere comes not from the State but from
individuals who are acting on behalf of organized terrorist
groups. The current system, which is designed to protect the
individual from the State, has the effect of shielding these
individuals from efforts by the State to protect the lives of
its citizens. Outdated laws, Reid noted, do not take into
account changes in the nature of the terrorism threat, which
is defined by fundamental changes in both terrorists'
intentions and capabilities. The new wave of terrorism, he
said, is not restrained from killing indiscriminately in
large numbers; legal and social restrictions have little
influence on these terrorists. In the past, a terrorist's
capability was limited because of technology and expertise.
With the availability of weapons of mass destruction, the
capabilities today are potentially unlimited. Schaeuble
agreed with Reid's analysis and said this type of discussion
should be conducted at the European and trans-atlantic level,
rather by individual member states.

ROME 00001132 003 OF 004



(SBU) Expulsions As A Preventive Measure
--------------


10. (SBU) Reid argued that rules governing expulsions make it
operationally difficult for countries to discharge their
fundamental responsibilities to protect their citizens.
European case law, he said, compels courts to regard the
safety of individuals before deportation, making the rights
of individual dangerous aliens more compelling than the
rights of the citizenry as a whole. Because the legal regime
does not take into account the modern threat of terrorism,
countries' attempts to avoid the full implementation of human
rights rules creates a strategic problem for Western
countries. Those attempts, he continued, are interpreted as
governments failing to live up to their own democratic
standards and adherence to the rule of law. Citing his own
experience, Reid said the European Convention on Human Rights
is so restrictive that the lives of 60 million British
citizens are threatened because of the speculative risk to a
handful of foreign nationals facing the threat of
mistreatment in their home countries. Saddling a host nation
with this burden, he declared, is disproportionate and
illogical.


11. (SBU) Frattini said he has asked European Commission
President Barroso to include a statement in the draft "Future
of Europe" Council conclusion that emphasizes citizens' right
to security and protection of liberty. Frattini proposed
creating a re-entry ban for the whole EU--even a permanent
one--in cases where individuals are considered a serious
threat to all member states. The idea is to be able to expel
an individual and keep them out when the threat is not only
to the host nation but also to neighboring members.


12. (SBU) One way to make this more politically acceptable,
Frattini argued, would be to devise "security packages," much
like the mobility and migration packages currently in place.
The EU can set up agreements with third countries to
guarantee certain basic protections and treatment for
deported individuals. The EU could create a database of
information that outlines what countries guarantee certain
rights. If the EU is united on this approach, Frattini
maintained, it could have some influence with the courts and
facilitate expulsions.


13. (SBU) Schaeuble fully agreed that a state should be
able to expel suspects for national security reasons, but
cautioned that the practice not fuel radicalization. Why not
give suspects a choice, he asked rhetorically, instead of
automatically expelling them. Either the suspect agrees to
follow the host country's laws to the letter, or to face
immediate expulsion. Above all, Schaeuble insisted, we
should seek global and permanent solutions to this legal
problem; stop gap measures are not the answer. At the same
time, he said, in light of possible adverse reactions by some
sectors of European public opinion, the G6 should consider
keeping this type of discussion outside the public domain.


14. (SBU) Chertoff agreed that modifying existing laws is
only temporary. We need to brainstorm new tools to keep up
with reality, he urged; we need to think out of the box. He
also noted that this problem in the United States is somewhat
less dire, as the US abides by the obligations under the
Convention Against Torture instead of the European Convention
on Human Rights. Camacho and Gaudin supported further
dialogue on this issue and echoed Schaeuble's caution, saying
that, although punitive measures are an acceptable part of
law enforcement, we should be careful not to undermine
fundamental rights.

Gradual Next Steps
--------------


15. (SBU) Amato concluded the G6 meeting saying that updating
legal tools to incorporate the notion of networks threatening
our way of life will take time. In the realm of
counter-terrorism, he said, the G6 should consider
establishing a solidarity clause much like exists in NATO.
Members should adopt common principles (not a treaty) that
demonstrate a unified front against terrorists. Amato issued
a general invitation to include US participation in future
discussions on these topics and suggested that there might be
a benefit to opening up the dialogue to other departments,
including ministries of foreign affairs. Camacho suggested
that the G6 set up working groups to further analyze the
situation in Africa and discuss the legal aspects of
expulsions.

ROME 00001132 004 OF 004



Comment
--------------


16. (SBU) G6 ministers warmly welcomed Secretary Chertoff and
the US delegation as guests to their G6 meeting. The
Europeans consistently pointed out that a common approach
with the US in fighting terrorism is the logical way ahead.
We found European arguments on the nature of the terrorist
threat and legal hurdles to be the most lucid and concise we
have heard recently. Clearly, the Europeans want to maintain
a strong trans-atlantic partnership to tackle these issues.
We may have some differences in approach, and our legal goals
and means may not match up exactly, but we share similar
views on a variety of points. The final G6 communique can be
found in English at the Italian Interior Ministry website
www.interno.it.


17. (U) DHS did not have an opportunity to clear this message.
Spogli