A Eurobarometer survey conducted last spring had found that 40 per cent ofMaltese respondents consider terrorism as the biggest global problem. This was a 30 per cent rise on 2013 findings, a figure that would certainly be higher if the study was conducted today in the wake of the Paris attacks.
Public sensitivity to terrorism threats is good but it is a double-edged sword. Public alertness and vigilance helps keep the country safe, so long as it does not verge on paranoia. On the other hand, increased public sensitivity to terror threats automatically pushes terrorism into the political arena, exposing this national security issue to partisanship debate. This is what we have been witnessing in the past weeks.
Practically on the morrow of the Valletta Migration Summit came the shocking Paris attacks, raising the spectre of a terror attack during CHOGM in Malta. The fears have thankfully not materialised, although alarm bells were raised when the Malta-bound Syrians were arrested in Italy with false documents.
The Prime Minister was quick to assure the country that the Syrians apprehended had no ulterior motives and when the leader of the Opposition shed doubtson that statement, he was accused of fearmongering. The government said it had uncovered a racket involving illegaltrafficking of workers or asylum seekers to Malta though one of the Malta-bound Syrians is now facing terrorism chargesin Bergamo.
The extension of the Schengen suspension was the next point of controversy with the Opposition leader firstdisagreeing with the decision and later softening his stand, saying he wasready to agree if the government showed some justification.
The ‘racket’ involving foreigners coming to Malta using false passports has nothing to do with terrorism or the Schengen suspension. What really raises the alarm in this regard would be fake passport holders being caught in Italy, as witnessed only last weekend when two Libyans in possession of such documents and Maltese residence permits were arrested in Pozzallo.
When Simon Busuttil called for cooperation in national security, the government’s official reply was condescending, saying the Prime Minister had shouldered the responsibility for security during two international summits and, seeing his success, the Opposition now wanted to jump on the bandwagon.
A more scathing and partisan attack came from Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Abela in Parliament when he repeatedly accused Dr Busuttil of trying to sow “terror and fear”.
He said he was prepared to cooperate with the Opposition but expected the PN media to stop trying to create “instability”. Muzzling the media, as against appealing for prudence, is a preposterous precondition for security cooperation but cooperation there must be. This especially now that the Security Service is saying that the threat of IS has moved closer to Malta and quicker than expected, in part due to the security vacuum in Libya.
In its annual report, the Security Service warns that the largest threat facing Europe in the near future would be the return of foreign fighters from conflicts in Syria and Iraq as well as sleeper cells in Europe receiving orders from abroad.
It is wake-up call to all members of Parliament. True, there are times when political controversy is good for our democracy because it generates debate and also provides some entertainment for the more cynical.
There is, however, one area above all others where partisanship and political point-scoring should stay out and that is national security issues. The danger is too close to home to take risks.