‘We should remain calm’

German Interior Minister Otto Schily finds his country faced with an escalating terrorist threat. In the following interview, he discusses the meaning of the March 11 bombings in Madrid for Germany and Europe.

Mr. Schily, can our democratic society meet the challenge posed by terrorism?

I warn people from getting panicked. But, at the same time, it would be wrong to think that we won't be struck by the sword dangling over our heads. As a result of the Madrid bombings, in particular, we Germans, we Europeans know that we are living in a threatened community. But we should remain calm and collected. After all, the Europeans have overcome threats before - national socialism, fascism or Stalinism. Democracies overcome major challenges when they stick to their values.

You are talking about threats of epochal dimensions. Does terrorism also pose such a threat?

Yes, the type of terrorism that we face is an epochal threat. We have to expect it to last for a long time.

Have people really grasped that fact yet?

Not completely. People have a tendency to say soon after a terrorist attack that this is the end of it and that it's history. And some actions that lawmakers and security officials take in reaction to the attacks are considered to be going overboard. People quickly get back to their everyday lives. I don't want people to lead lives filled with fear and worry, and to lose their zest for life. But it would be good if we recognized the magnitude of the threat.

The attack in Madrid has shown that Spanish authorities were acquainted with some of the suspects for a long time. But they didn't have enough information to do something to stop them. Can something like that happen in Germany?

Unfortunately, you cannot completely rule out this possibility. That is why it's particularly important to make use of the intelligence work performed by police. That also must be done when it is ... a matter of preventing a crime. When I have my eye on somebody, our investigation must be guided by the principles that apply when the police are trying to thwart a threat. Unlike a criminal investigation, the guiding principle is not "innocent until proven guilty." In such cases, security is the decisive issue.

And then somebody can be deported?

When a person appears to be a threat as a result of a concrete situation, he or she must be removed from the country. When we know, for example, that someone was at a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, then we have to be able to deport him - even if we can't prove that he was planning an attack.

Last week, the interior ministers of European Union countries met in Brussels and decided to improve the coordination of the fight against terror. What will be worked on?

The most important change is the improvement of information exchanges. Even though you shouldn't underestimate what officials have already done, the cooperative efforts still must be considerably intensified. We have to coordinate our sources - international and domestic intelligence agencies and police - in a way that gives us a clear picture within the EU of the threat situation. That's because the decisive factor in the fight against terrorism is early intelligence. We have to act before a possible attack. That's what makes the use of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution so important. It can conduct surveillance of people and groups even if they aren't suspected of crimes.

Can you describe in concrete terms how that will be done?

In Germany, we already have set up the joint "Information Board,” where information collected by authorities can be discussed and examined. We also need to create information groups in the EU. In each country, we already have databases for fingerprints and DNA. It must be possible to exchange such information.

Have the Europeans reached an agreement here?

As far as the goal goes, yes. That is the good news from the special conference in Brussels. But some colleagues have a constitutional issue to contend with. You can't just snap your fingers and solve this problem. That's why we should begin with a group of countries that are ready to act - like the Schengen Agreement on ending border controls.

Who would be part of this effort?

Besides Germany, it could be Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Austria.

In Germany, shouldn't we also take another approach to Islam?

Yes. Naturally, most of the Muslims living in Germany are law-abiding citizens. Nonetheless, the Muslims living in Germany also need to ask themselves a question: Why does their religious community produce enraged fanatics who say, "You love life, we love death"? This is a challenge to the civilized world. We demand that the Muslims living in Germany think seriously about this question and make an active contribution to eliminating such sources of fanatical and violence-prone ideology. The Muslim community has to immunize itself against such efforts. There remain certain elements in Islam that aren't in accord with the Renaissance and the universality of human rights.