The world of today is unfortunately increasingly developing into a venue for crises and terrorism. Next to organised crime, international terrorism has become the highest priority security threat in Europe. Many terrorist organisations have an active presence in Europe. Some are active against certain European states, while others act against non-European states, using Europe as a logistical base. Terrorist attacks such as the simultaneous bomb attacks in Madrid in 2004, the taking of hostages in a Moscow theatre, the simultaneous bomb attacks in London in 2005, the attempts to do something similar in 2006 etc. are sobering examples of the terrorist threat in Europe. According to EUROPOL, altogether 498 terrorist incidents occurred in EU states in 2006. The vast majority of them merely resulted in limited material damage and were not intended to kill. The key weapon used was the Improvised Explosive Device. In the past few years we have been witness to major arrests of terrorist suspects every month by the security services of various European states. In 2006, a total of 706 individuals were arrested for being suspects involved in terrorism. Half of those arrests were related to Islamist terrorism. In this case, the process of radicalisation (which also includes a growing number of militant converts into Islam) has become an extremely problematic and sensitive topic for Europe. However, most attacks in 2006 were carried out by ethnonationalist and separatist terrorist organisations, whereas a trend analysis shows that left-wing and anarchist terrorism currently remains at a relatively low level. Al-Qaeda's declaration of war against all infidels, its increasing propaganda involving video statements in the English language and its quest to acquire weapons of mass destruction do not create a reassuring context.

Accordingly, anti-terrorism and counter-terrorism have become the key focus of national security policies and international organisations. Countries have been paying ever more attention to the proper criminalisation of terrorist activities in their legislation, implying that not only direct terrorist activities but also many indirect terrorist activities have been criminalised, while improving security preparedness, establishing new organisational units within the relevant ministries, establishing new interministerial and interagency counter-terrorist bodies responsible for related coordination, establishing new information systems, increasing the frequency of counter-terrorism exercises, reinforcing the foundations for effective international co-operation as regards the prevention and response to terrorism, expanding budgets for counter-terrorism etc. Such changes have been of a functional and system or institutional nature, incorporating new missions, strategies, doctrines, laws, structures etc. Naturally, not all countries share the same threat level. More threatened European countries include the United Kingdom, Spain, France, Italy and Germany. Certain other countries surely do not face such a high threat and yet they are co-operating intensively with the more threatened countries.

The Western Balkans is historically the least stable region of Europe. The security situation in this region is gradually improving and the potential for armed inter-ethnic or interstate conflict has been reduced. However, the indicators of security threats and risks are still the highest in this part of Europe. Let me point out some of today's complex problems.

• The future status of Kosovo is uncertain – it seems that any kind of solution could potentially lead to a further escalation of the crisis and even terrorism. Fears exist that, if Kosovo is given complete independence, a bad example will be made for those involved in many similar ethnic situations in Europe (e.g. a domino effect starting from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Macedonia through to Spain and Russia). An unchanged status to the “legal limbo” could, on the other hand, spark a wave of violent protests, political instability and chaos. Other negotiated solutions (the partition of Kosovo and controlled independence) also hold crisis potential.

• Bosnia and Herzegovina has to resolve some important political and structural problems vis-à-vis creating a unified country. The central state institutions are weak and the Republika Srpska and the Bosnian-Croat Federation have been assigned a high degree of self-governance. The ethnically-based division used in resolving many national problems still frequently occurs. A consensus on the central issues is very difficult to achieve without pressure from the international community.

• Macedonia is, despite the introduction of an innovative national inter-ethnic integration model, still struggling with inter-ethnic dialogue at the political level. The solution of the Kosovo problem will heavily affect Macedonia. Fears of the country breaking up have been not allayed.

• Corruption and organised crime levels are still unreasonably high in most countries of the region. The situation is even more complex due to the heavily corrupt political and bureaucratic structures with links to the criminal underground found in some countries.

• The organised smuggling of people, drugs and weapons is a key transnational problem. A network of criminal groups has evolved along the Balkan route that cannot be eradicated despite intensive national and regional co-operative efforts. Smuggling has become one of the most profitable businesses in the region.

• The economic situation in the region is critical, exemplified by high levels of unemployment, national debt, low GDP per capita etc. In addition, the region faces a negative migration trend. The majority of youth in Kosovo and Bosnia, for example, sees its future abroad and not at home.

• Political extremism is still present in most of these countries and religious radicalisation in the form of Wahhabism is growing stronger. Local extremism has gradually become enriched by links with global radical Islamist movements.

The combination of all the abovementioned factors has always created fertile ground for all forms of terrorism. Terrorism is of course not new to the Western Balkans region. Weapons have been smuggled out of the region to support terrorist groups, international terrorists have trespassed this region (with illegal documents and identities or as illegal immigrants), and Islamist fighters have arrived from Afghanistan and elsewhere to fight in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia. Some of them were before, during or after their Balkan adventure clearly involved in terrorism. In fact, the wars in the region were exploited by some extreme Islamic terrorist groups to test their battle skills and acquire knowledge of weapons. We are still facing bomb attacks in the region (e.g. the UNMIK office in Kosovo, the Macedonian governmental building etc.) that might also be interpreted as terrorist acts. The region has also been facing several political murders or attempted murders. The killing of Zoran Djindjic, the Serbian Prime Minister, in 2003 was a clear example of the connection between the criminal and terrorist threats in the region. To all of these, we can add that Al-Qaeda understands the Western Balkan as a logistical centre for spreading terrorism into Western Europe (Plan Balkan 2020). Perhaps this does not mean attacks so much as many support activities. In this respect, the region should be very cautious about terrorist support activities such as financing, training and supplying.

Terrorism is not the only threat that causes the emergence of crises. The so-called ‘crisification’ of our security environment also seems to be rising due to many other factors. Such an environment is generating many crises related to politico-military conflicts, natural disasters, infectious diseases, information disruptions, ethnic or religious violence and others. Many of these crises are completely or nearly completely unexpected and have a strong effect on the security of individual people, states and the international community. ‘Crisis’ has become the key word instead of ‘war’. The awareness of this is partially driven by the growing role of electronic media, bringing negative news and reports to nearly all homes, and partially by objective technical factors that allow the fast escalation of local crises to the international level. Globalisation therefore has a strong subjective and objective impact on our understanding of security.

Crisis management refers to managing and eliminating a surprising threat under significant time pressure and amidst great uncertainty. Crisis management can also be defined as the organisation, arrangements and measures relative to the above goals. The term embraces more or less organised activities for resolving and responding to any kind of crisis at: (a) a specific level; (b) within a specific dimension or field; and (c) in periods before, during or after a crisis. The key focus of crisis management is the response during the crisis; however, the pre-crisis preparation or planning phase and post-crisis phase are also important factors that contribute to the success of the response phase. The ultimate general goal of crisis management is to eliminate the crisis factors, restore the normal situation and regain control over events from the perspective of the affected or responsible actors.

Crisis management represents a specific challenge to all states and international organisations (e.g. NATO, EU, UN, OSCE etc.) that demands a specific response. The question is how to efficiently address an unexpected and extraordinary threat, whether we need preventive and response systems in place, if so then what kinds of systems, how much this would cost etc. In this regard, all European states are struggling with the complexities and problems of shaping responsive, robust and flexible national security systems. They are going through difficult security sector reforms involving the restructuring, downsizing and acquiring of new missions by the police, military, civil protection forces, intelligence services, border security services and others. Especially important in this process is how the states develop national crisis management mechanisms.

The existing experience of NATO and EU countries in the field of national crisis management is quite mixed; however, some common denominators can be identified. We can observe that countries have started to develop crisis-oriented national security systems instead of war-oriented national security systems. The shift in the threat spectrum has caused shifts in national security systems. This implies functional and system or institutional changes such as new missions, strategies, doctrines, laws, structures etc. More significant and radical reforms of existing crisis management mechanisms have started to take place in many cases after bigger crises, terrorist attacks and comprehensive studies carried out by governmental or non-governmental actors. The common finding of many developed European countries was that the existing security mechanisms and institutions did not reflect the changed requirements stemming from the security environment. Reforms in developed European countries have stressed the need for:

• a formal definition of crisis and crisis management in strategic documents or even laws;

• shaping the mechanisms needed for comprehensive threat assessments;

• rethinking the mechanisms for declaring national crises or emergencies;

• forming comprehensive multidisciplinary, multi-ministerial and multi-agency crisis planning mechanisms;

• carrying out multi-ministerial and multi-agency crisis management exercises;

• reshaping and improving the structure of national interagency crisis decisionmaking bodies (such as National Security Councils and other governmental or inter-ministerial bodies);

• developing efficient information support mechanisms for crisis management;

• elaborating mechanisms for crisis communication with publics; and

• devoting special attention to preventive strategies etc.

Simultaneously with changes at the national level, international organisations (e.g. NATO, the EU, the OSCE and the UN) have also begun to formulate new crisis management policies, procedures, mechanisms and systems, and to test the new types of crisis management operations in practice.

The combination of threats and risks in and from the region, along with the need for formulating efficient national and international crisis management and counter-terrorism policies, led to the organisation of the Advanced Research Workshop under the title Crisis Management and Counter-Terrorism in the Western Balkans which took place in Ljubljana in 2007. Around 50 experts from universities and governments participated in the workshop and the result of it is this book. The primary objective of the book is to assess the existing and past processes, policies, structures, mechanisms, reforms and challenges in the interconnected fields of crisis management and counter-terrorism in countries of the Western Balkans and South-east Europe. In creating this overview, experts from many institutions have contributed articles: University of Sarajevo – Faculty of Criminal Justice Sciences, University of Belgrade – Faculty of Security Studies, University of Prishtina – Faculty of Law, University of Skopje – Faculty of Philosophy, University of Ljubljana – Faculty of Social Sciences, Polytechnic College from Velika Gorica, University of Zagreb – Faculty of Political Science, University of Leiden from the Netherlands, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Police Academy from Macedonia, College University Victory from Kosovo etc.

This book is divided into three parts. The first part addresses the concepts, policies and dilemmas arising in the fight against terrorism in a more general way. The important yet difficult roles of the EU and NATO are addressed in depth, national and regional strategies against terrorism are discussed at the conceptual level, several reasons why the fight against terrorism is difficult to win are identified, a regional risk assessment in the Balkans is elaborated in relation to former or ongoing conflicts, the roles of public information, education and human resources in fight against terrorism are studied etc. The second part of this book addresses the individual approaches of countries in the fight against terrorism. The authors focus on national policies, mechanisms, dilemmas and perspectives. The specific case of Kosovo is also addressed, the radicalisation process in Bosnia is carefully analysed and elaborated and the Croatian historical experience with terrorism is studied. Part three of the book addresses countries' particular approaches to crisis management. Some countries in the region are introducing quite deep reforms of their national security systems leading in the direction of crisis management, while others are retaining a relatively unchanged concept of civil protection as a universal and umbrella concept. The case of Kosovo again shows that just managing and running this protectorate represents a unique crisis management endeavour. Readers will by reading this book gain insights into the lively and relatively unstudied mixture of national experiences, approaches, policies and dilemmas in counter-terrorism and crisis management in the Western Balkans. This book is recommended reading for all those who want to know the region better as regards the fields of counter-terrorism and crisis management.

Iztok Prezelj