This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/25/richard-dearlove-leaving-eu-british-security-open-borders

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Richard Dearlove is very wrong: leaving the EU would weaken British security Richard Dearlove is very wrong: leaving the EU would weaken British security
(5 months later)
Tuesday’s attacks in Brussels are further evidence of Islamic State’s determination to bring murder and mayhem to our cities and communities. The choice of such soft targets displays the sickening ideology of these extremists – people who rejoice in killing families about to go on holiday and commuters on their way to work. Brussels, like Paris, Madrid and London, will recover. The people of that great city will refuse to be cowed and we should stand with them.Tuesday’s attacks in Brussels are further evidence of Islamic State’s determination to bring murder and mayhem to our cities and communities. The choice of such soft targets displays the sickening ideology of these extremists – people who rejoice in killing families about to go on holiday and commuters on their way to work. Brussels, like Paris, Madrid and London, will recover. The people of that great city will refuse to be cowed and we should stand with them.
Related: To leave the EU over Brussels would be a huge victory for terror | Owen Jones
After the first bomb exploded, only a few minutes elapsed before campaigners began to speculate on the implications for Britain’s referendum on staying in the EU, some arguing that this terrorism was proof that we needed to leave. Human tragedy should not be turned into political football. The security issues are so important, however, that the arguments merit examination – which I shall make as fair-mindedly as I can.After the first bomb exploded, only a few minutes elapsed before campaigners began to speculate on the implications for Britain’s referendum on staying in the EU, some arguing that this terrorism was proof that we needed to leave. Human tragedy should not be turned into political football. The security issues are so important, however, that the arguments merit examination – which I shall make as fair-mindedly as I can.
I do not join those who argue that were the UK to leave the EU, we would be completely unable to continue to operate many of the channels of security cooperation that exist today, including intelligence cooperation founded on trusted bilateral relationships between national agencies.I do not join those who argue that were the UK to leave the EU, we would be completely unable to continue to operate many of the channels of security cooperation that exist today, including intelligence cooperation founded on trusted bilateral relationships between national agencies.
Our growing intelligence cooperation with France is of particular importance and it would surely continue, though it is hard not to imagine that it would take a hit. It is notable that despite the huge advantage the UK possesses in its “Five Eyes” intelligence relationship with the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, our agencies attach a high importance to increased cooperation with European counterparts. Sir Richard Dearlove, a former head of the Secret Intelligence Service, takes a different view – but is presumably unaware of the huge strides made in this respect since he left office in 2004.Our growing intelligence cooperation with France is of particular importance and it would surely continue, though it is hard not to imagine that it would take a hit. It is notable that despite the huge advantage the UK possesses in its “Five Eyes” intelligence relationship with the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, our agencies attach a high importance to increased cooperation with European counterparts. Sir Richard Dearlove, a former head of the Secret Intelligence Service, takes a different view – but is presumably unaware of the huge strides made in this respect since he left office in 2004.
Where I think those who want us to leave the EU get it seriously wrong is on border control and police cooperation. As regards borders, the central claim is that if we left the EU we would be better able to keep terrorists out of Britain. Even senior politicians make this argument, claiming that we have an “open border” with Europe. Just last month Iain Duncan Smith asserted that our “lack of borders leaves the door open” for any would-be terrorist to wander into Britain.Where I think those who want us to leave the EU get it seriously wrong is on border control and police cooperation. As regards borders, the central claim is that if we left the EU we would be better able to keep terrorists out of Britain. Even senior politicians make this argument, claiming that we have an “open border” with Europe. Just last month Iain Duncan Smith asserted that our “lack of borders leaves the door open” for any would-be terrorist to wander into Britain.
This really is nonsense. “Free movement” actually means the ability of EU citizens to work in Britain, not to enter Britain unchecked. In fact the UK operates full border controls for all entrants into the UK, irrespective of nationality or point of entry. The UK conducts security-related checks on the passports of every single individual, including all EU citizens, entering the UK from continental Europe or elsewhere.This really is nonsense. “Free movement” actually means the ability of EU citizens to work in Britain, not to enter Britain unchecked. In fact the UK operates full border controls for all entrants into the UK, irrespective of nationality or point of entry. The UK conducts security-related checks on the passports of every single individual, including all EU citizens, entering the UK from continental Europe or elsewhere.
Related: Would Brexit damage British intelligence?
We are entitled to ensure that they pose no security risk to this country. And because we will not join the passport-free Schengen area, the control of our borders will remain in national hands. Since 2010 the UK has turned away about 6,000 European nationals from entering our country on security grounds. Hardly unguarded border control allowing people to wander in.We are entitled to ensure that they pose no security risk to this country. And because we will not join the passport-free Schengen area, the control of our borders will remain in national hands. Since 2010 the UK has turned away about 6,000 European nationals from entering our country on security grounds. Hardly unguarded border control allowing people to wander in.
The irony is that if we left the EU, our border control could well actually deteriorate. The control we conduct in Calais or Paris, in relation to the Channel tunnel and the Eurostar, would be at severe risk following Brexit, with the likely result that the Calais migrant camp would establish itself in Kent.The irony is that if we left the EU, our border control could well actually deteriorate. The control we conduct in Calais or Paris, in relation to the Channel tunnel and the Eurostar, would be at severe risk following Brexit, with the likely result that the Calais migrant camp would establish itself in Kent.
The aim of border control policy is to push the point of control as far from a country’s physical shores as possible: for instance to foreign airports, so that we can prevent undesirable individuals ever getting on a plane to the UK. EU cooperation underpins this, and it would be a serious security mistake to create a situation where many more people were able to cross into the UK in the first place.The aim of border control policy is to push the point of control as far from a country’s physical shores as possible: for instance to foreign airports, so that we can prevent undesirable individuals ever getting on a plane to the UK. EU cooperation underpins this, and it would be a serious security mistake to create a situation where many more people were able to cross into the UK in the first place.
In the area of police cooperation – absolutely vital to the actual pursuit, arrest and bringing to justice of criminals of all kinds, including terrorists – EU legal provisions play a central role in developing capabilities. And when I say central, I do mean central. There is much complaint that cooperation is as yet by no means good enough. True. But without the underpinning of the provisions of EU mutual legal assistance, and the access to shared DNA databases – such as vehicle registration information and fingerprinting, the raw material of tracking fugitives – security in Europe, including the UK, would be weaker.In the area of police cooperation – absolutely vital to the actual pursuit, arrest and bringing to justice of criminals of all kinds, including terrorists – EU legal provisions play a central role in developing capabilities. And when I say central, I do mean central. There is much complaint that cooperation is as yet by no means good enough. True. But without the underpinning of the provisions of EU mutual legal assistance, and the access to shared DNA databases – such as vehicle registration information and fingerprinting, the raw material of tracking fugitives – security in Europe, including the UK, would be weaker.
Departure from the EU would also mean the UK would have to leave Europol, an organisation we have done so much to build up. That does not mean that we could not negotiate access, but we would lose our position at the wheel. In combatting terrorism it is hard to choose between the importance of intelligence and police cooperation. The absence of one vitiates the other. We need both.Departure from the EU would also mean the UK would have to leave Europol, an organisation we have done so much to build up. That does not mean that we could not negotiate access, but we would lose our position at the wheel. In combatting terrorism it is hard to choose between the importance of intelligence and police cooperation. The absence of one vitiates the other. We need both.
Those who want us out of the EU argue that the UK is a strong player and that we can look after ourselves outside. I agree. Where I disagree is with the contention that we would be better off. On the contrary. From the security point of view the UK is fortunate in its geography. But we are a lot safer if we have a secure continental Europe on our doorstep acting as an extra security buffer. By cooperating with European partners and contributing some of our technical strengths we serve not only their interests, but our own. We need such things as a fully functioning warnings index in Europe and we are much more likely to get it with the UK on board than standing on the sidelines.Those who want us out of the EU argue that the UK is a strong player and that we can look after ourselves outside. I agree. Where I disagree is with the contention that we would be better off. On the contrary. From the security point of view the UK is fortunate in its geography. But we are a lot safer if we have a secure continental Europe on our doorstep acting as an extra security buffer. By cooperating with European partners and contributing some of our technical strengths we serve not only their interests, but our own. We need such things as a fully functioning warnings index in Europe and we are much more likely to get it with the UK on board than standing on the sidelines.
The security situation is not static. We are in a generational struggle with terrorists in which Europe is a central target of these wicked people out to kill. We can expect some tough moments ahead. It is in the national interest for the prime minister, home secretary and senior security officials to be in the room where decisions affecting UK security are made in future. I hope we decide to remain.The security situation is not static. We are in a generational struggle with terrorists in which Europe is a central target of these wicked people out to kill. We can expect some tough moments ahead. It is in the national interest for the prime minister, home secretary and senior security officials to be in the room where decisions affecting UK security are made in future. I hope we decide to remain.