VZCZCXRO6767
OO RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
DE RUEHRO #1132/01 1451220
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 251220Z MAY 07
FM AMEMBASSY ROME
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8129
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RHMCSUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE

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