Network Politics in Transatlantic Homeland Security Cooperation

Abstract

This article explores the development of the EU border security policies through the prism of the EU–US homeland security cooperation in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks. As the case of the EU-US homeland security illustrates, international developments provide the context for the European policies to take shape. The case of the Passenger Name Record negotiations elucidates the evolution of the transatlantic networks universe – from the one based on geographical and political criteria (i.e. EU versus US, European institutions versus US institutions) towards functionally based networks (i.e. ‘transatlantic diplomats’ versus ‘transatlantic security specialists’, ‘transatlantic executives’ versus ‘transatlantic legislatives’). It also shows that this shift takes place within a highly political process whereby actions and decisions evolve around network membership, centrality of actors and a particular role of bureaucrats. Finally, this article shows how the European approach to the use of personal data for security purposes emerges from interactions between the geographical and functional networks and allegiances that membership in those networks imply. This allows for certain ambivalence and ambiguity in the interpretation of actors' position. The article demonstrates that the European security debate is developing beyond the control of any single actor.

Key Words:

• Transatlantic relations
• homeland security
• border protection
• networks
• network politics
• data protection
• bureaucrats

Notes

¹ For a more in-depth policy analysis of the EU border package and its implications, see Guild et al. (2008).

² The plural form is used because the EU and the USA have negotiated and signed three PNR Agreements: in 2004, 2006 and 2007. They are further referred to as PNR I, PNR II and PNR III.

³ Interview RELEX4 with a European Commission official, March 2007, Brussels.

⁴ Interview CON4 with a Council official, March 2007, Brussels.

⁵ Interview CON4.

⁶ Interview DHS14 with a former official in the Department of Homeland Security, May 2007, Washington, DC.

⁷ Interview DHS14.

⁸ Interview DoS2 with an official in the Department of State, June 2007, Washington, DC.

⁹ Interview DHS4 with a former official in the Department of Homeland Security, March 2007, Washington, DC.

¹⁰ Interview DHS11 with an official in the Department of Homeland Security, April 2007, Washington, DC.

¹¹ Interview DHS6 with a former official in the Department of Homeland Security, May 2007, Washington, DC.

¹² Interview EUD1 with a European Commission official, February 2007, Washington, DC.

¹³ Interview CON4 and Interview DHS6.

¹⁴ Interview EUD3 with a European Commission official, June 2007, Washington, DC.

¹⁵ Observation made during the internship at the European Commission, March–July 2004.

¹⁶ Ibid.

¹⁷ Interview DHS6.

¹⁸ Interview with a former US official, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, May 2007.

¹⁹ Interview EDPS2 with an official in the Office of the European Data Protection Supervisor, March 2007, Brussels.

²⁰ Interview JLS6 with an official in DG Justice, Liberty and Security, October 2006, Brussels.

²¹ Ibid.

²² Ibid.

²³ Ibid.

²⁴ See Pawlak (2009) for a discussion about the role of DG JLS in the adoption of the EU Strategy for the External Dimension of the AFSJ.

²⁵ See Provan and Kenis (2007) for a purely managerial approach to modes of network management.