The Nordic Countries and the European Security and Defence Policy

278 THE BROADER DIMENSIONS OF SECURITYextraordinarily dangerous situations when the police lack the competence orequipment needed. In such situations, the police can request help in order tosearch and arrest dangerous criminals or mentally deranged persons ‘when it isnecessary to avert an immediate danger to lives or health’ or in order ‘to preventimmediate, widespread danger . . . to society’s key interests and forcountering and combating such threats’. 57The task of special units of the defence forces is to assist the police incombating terrorism and sabotage against oil installations and ships at open seaand sabotage on land. The Ministry of Justice and the Police has elaborated anumber of scenarios for military assistance in cases of offshore terrorist attacks.In hypothetical cases of ‘massive attacks’ against oil installations and whenthere is uncertainty as to whether the country faces a peacetime crisis, securitypolicy crisis or war the government will give the armed forces the mainresponsibility for meeting the threat. 58In summary, the emerging new internal role of the Nordic armed forces is asignificant example of the closer interface of internal and external nationalsecurity that constitutes the basis of the EU security field. Sections V and VIbelow illustrate how the interface of internal and external EU security and thefeasibility and strength of the EU’s policies depend to a large extent on thisnational interface. The ability of the EU member states to provide for capacitiessuch as military assistance to civil crisis management will be decisive for theEU’s possibilities to transcend the internal–external Union security boundarythrough the ESDP and the solidarity clause against terrorism.V. The September 2001 attacks and the EU’s response as‘functional’ securityThe EU’s security answer to the September 2001 attacks on the USA was nonmilitaryin nature. The focus was put on the crisis management capacities thatexist in all three EU pillars. In practice, this made the EU responsible for theparadox of ‘internal’ and ‘external’ non-territorial security and contributed tothe widening of the EU security field. In general, the events of September 2001started a process which has led the EU to rethink its previous demarcation linesbetween trade, aid, diplomacy and the new crisis management capacitiescreated under the ESDP. Discussions on whether or not to employ the capacitiesof the EU’s third pillar, Justice and Home Affairs—for example, in theareas of personnel and threat identification—signalled a development towards abroad trans-boundary security approach to the ESDP. For internal as well asexternal security reasons, many argued that there was an urgent need for better57 Norwegian Ministry of Defence (note 56), chapter 3, paragraph 11, p. 6 (author’s translation).58 Norwegian Ministry of Justice and the Police, ‘Samfunnssikkerhet og sivilt–militaert samarbeid’[Societal security and civil–military cooperation], Storting proposition no. 39 (2003–2004), 14 May 2004,URL , pp. 6–7.