Surveillance to Combat Terrorist Financing in Europe: Whose Liberty,Whose Security?

Abstract

This article analyses recent developments in the campaign to combat terrorist financing in Europe and questions the utility of financial surveillance as a method to counter terrorism. A background presentation of surveillance in modern society is followed by an overview of earlier international initiatives to interdict money laundering. The measures used to combat terrorist finance are built upon this foundation of surveillance and criminal investigation. Applying these measures in the ‘war on terror’ has unintended consequences for the financial transactions of citizens and non-citizens alike. The article concludes by considering these problems and their impact on society within the context of a larger concern for the impact to individual liberty from these surveillance practices in pursuit of security in the early twenty-first century.     

Explaining lustration in Central Europe: a ‘post-communist politics’ approach

Lustration, the vetting of public officials in Central Europe for links to the communist-era security services, has been pursued most systematically in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. Prior attempts to explain the pursuit or avoidance of lustration focused on the differing experiences of communist rule or transition to democracy. A closer examination finds that although the three countries in question had very different histories, there were identical demands for lustration in the early 1990s. These demands were translated into legislation at different times and varied considerably in the range of offices affected and the sanctions imposed. This article offers an explanation of this variation by focusing on the dynamics of post-communist political competition. We find that the passage of a lustration bill depended on the ability of its most ardent advocates to persuade a heterogeneous plurality of legislators that the safeguarding of democracy required it.     

Turkey's Reform Effort Reconsidered, 1987–2004

The Helsinki Summit of the European Council in 1999 was a turning point in terms of clarifying a concrete membership perspective regarding candidate status for Turkey and accession to the European Union. Political reforms in Turkey to complete the 1993 Copenhagen criteria also gained significant momentum in the aftermath of the Summit. However, arguments stressing the influence of European Union conditionality seriously undervalue the gradual political transformation that Turkey was already undergoing in the years before 1999 and the societal pressure in Turkey that lay behind it. Basing Turkey's eligibility for membership wholly on the effects of European Union conditionality makes the democratic process extremely vulnerable to the still-delicate process of European Union–Turkey relations. The article aims to develop a more coherent explanation of the European Union's impact on Turkey's politics between 1987 and 2004, by offering an alternative framework of analysis based on Moravcsik's analysis of the European human-rights regime and Risse's theory of communicative action. The main argument is that the principal dynamics driving recent democratization in Turkey were its newfound location within the European human-rights regime and the increasing power of ‘European argument’ as an alternative way of resolving domestic conflicts.