Referenced but Not Linear?

Abstract

This article contextualizes the seemingly robust Central-Eastern European reactions to terrorist events in Western Europe, whilst examining the difference between how counterterrorism (CT) in Central-Eastern Europe looks in theory and how it works in practice. It constitutes the first comparative study, across eight case studies, focusing solely on CT-related issues of the post-2004 EU entrants, and one of the very first assessing CT developments in post-communist Europe available in English. The article addresses a serious gap in terrorism studies that are oriented towards works on terrorism or CT in Western Europe. It sets out five distinguishing features of CT routines in Central-Eastern Europe and consequently argues that Central-Eastern Europeans “reference” their CT arrangements from Western Europe in a copy and paste manner. Moreover, the Central-Eastern European CT, unlike that of their CT “referees” from Western Europe, is not linear in nature and does not stem from the local threat perception being filtered through CT legacies (developed norms, practices, and routines). By thematically analysing the haphazard manner in which the Central-Eastern Europeans develop their CT legacies, and depicting how eager they are in adopting the Western European rationale for countering a threat that is hardly present in their region, the article provides new empirical basis (derived from qualitative data, including sixty interviews with Central-Eastern European CT experts and officials) for a far-reaching argument about a West-East (old EU–new EU) divide on CT in Europe.