Structural Drivers of Extremism in Europe (I.)

The European integration is a great and unparalleled endeavour, but the real life implementation of very positive ideals (freedom of movement) bore side-effects. The domestic extremist “industry” thrives on the structural tension generated by this ever-changing environment.  Therefore, the EU must face these challenges and it has to be loud and clear about the importance of dealing with the aforementioned problems on a European level, drawing up European initiatives, policies and programmes. Otherwise the domestic extremism problem of Europe will grow more and more sombre and dangerous.

Source: The Telegraph

Europe has had a domestic extremism problem – now mostly of the far-right blend – for more than a decade now. Presiding on top of the 'extremist pyramid', local far-right parties sitting in local and national parliaments and the European parliament are critical or hostile to the mainstream democratic processes and the EU, still they mostly accept the basic rules of party politics – thus they can be dealt with politically. The worst part of the problem, therefore, is posed by second tier of the pyramid: Europe’s ever-growing non-party organized extremist group scene that is glimmering on the fringes of the bourgeoning far-right scene of the Old Continent. (The 'bottom' layer of the pyramid is the broad, loosely-tied 'movement' with the counter-cultural, etc. aspects.)

The process as the new threat emerged from the irrelevance of obscurity was marked by deadly incidents: the racist shooting in Florence, Italy and the attacks of the far-left Nuove Brigate Rosse, the National Socialist Underground in Germany, the Malmö sniper in Sweden, Breivik in Norway, the Roma Death Squad in Hungary, the plot to bomb the Sejm in Poland, the lynching-like actions of the Golden Dawn and the commonplace fire bombings carried out by far-left groups in Greece all occurred in the past few years. At the same time, since the 2005 London bombings, one single international terrorist incident took place on the continent (the Burgas attack against Israeli tourists).

While some alarm bells were rung, still European political elites mostly keep acting as if the new emerging threat had nothing to do with the deep systemic vulnerabilities – ranging from immigration to the economy, social mobility and education – that plague every country in the EU. As a consequence, the same political elites seem to ignore the fact that the aforementioned national problems have become EU-wide issues – politicians keep acting as if they were still governing the same nation states as in the 1950s and not multicultural, multi-ethnic, poly-religious, demographically heterogenic countries that have become organic parts of a supranational organisation.

The European integration – enhanced by the Schengen Agreement - is far from being over or from being perfect. Thus it is paramount for everybody to understand that problems like immigration, integration, racism, multiculturalism, etc. that used to be seen as national issues have become common European problems that must be dealt with by the EU as a whole, because the situation right now is a hotbed for extremism that thrives on the insecurities and prejudices of people.

The past twenty years have brought immense positive changes on the continent, but they have also brought new challenges. The European integration carries side effects that were not foreseen. Fundamental changes occurred in the structural environment that made globalisation very real on a local level. Besides immigration, the situation of the European Roma community is probably the best example of how fast European ideas and values can be ignored when issues, choices and solutions become too complex to be addressed only by repeating easily perceivable one-liners.

France and Italy were fast to “repatriate” the Romanian and Bulgarian Roma, accusing the said two countries with “exporting” their issues to Western countries. Canada has drawn up a list of safe countries from where they would not accept asylum seekers, because of the rush of Hungarian Roma at their doors (while also launching an advertisement campaign in Miskolc, Hungary to inform the Roma community that they will not be warmly welcome). Switzerland, Germany and Norway have also had their fair share of problems with the wave of Romani immigrants from newly joined EU countries and the Balkans.

These recently emerged tendencies should not be met by mere populism, since that only fuels extremism further. Populist reactions by centrist politicians give ammunition to far-right/left parties and domestic extremist groups. They can also lead to the process of securitisation, i.e. a process through which politics or extremists reify this highly complex, continent-wide socioeconomic issue as a security problem ('immigrants' or the 'Roma' are 'threatening 'us'). Such reactions in the target countries can also stir up extremist reactions in the immigrants’ countries of origin. The amalgamation of these phenomena then can lead to the development of an enabling environment, in which the process of radicalisation becomes much easier and much more rapid.

The European Integration is a great and unparalleled endeavour. However, the devil lies in the details, i.e. the implementation of very positive ideals (freedom of movement). The extremist “industry” thrives on the structural tension that is generated by this ever-changing environment. Therefore, the EU must face these challenges and it has to be loud and clear about the importance of dealing with the aforementioned problems on a European level, drawing up European initiatives, policies and programmes that apply a holistic approach. Otherwise the domestic extremism problem of Europe will grow more and more sombre and dangerous.