People are easily worried especially travel

Five years after the attacks to Al-Qaeda in the United States on 11 September is no longer one date like any other. It marks the beginning of a new era, or at least a turn. The terrorist attacks in Madrid, London and elsewhere will remain in memory, but September 11 will remain a date symbol, as on August 4, 1914. But is it really a war which began that day A war would have meant that the terrorists were legitimate enemies. This is an accurate description or terminology appropriate for terrorist acts that could be described more precisely of criminals. As acts of war and their authors of opponents, the United States Government justifies restrictions of freedoms which would have been unacceptable before September 11 in any free country.

Most of these reforms are in what is called the Patriot Act, which erodes the pillars of the protection of freedoms, such as habeas corpus or the right of recourse to an independent tribunal when the State deprives a person of his liberty. The Guantanamo Bay prison symbolises a radical novelty: the arrest without trial of "unlawful combatants" who do not benefit from the protection of human rights. The world wondered how these sub-human there are and where they are. For the rest, a kind of State of emergency was declared, authorizing the State interference in essential liberties. For many travellers, the border control has become a test. A climate of fear makes life more difficult for anyone who has an appearance or a suspicious behaviour, particularly among Muslims.

At the time of their adoption, these restrictions have hardly met with opposition. Their critics instead found themselves in a difficult situation. In Britain, where the Prime Minister is aligned on the American policy, the Government adopted similar measures in advancing a new theory. Blair was the first to say that safety is the first freedoms. In other words, the freedom is not the right of every person to define his own life, but it is one of the State to restrict individual liberties on behalf of a security that it is the only one to define. This is the beginning of a new authoritarianism.

The problem exists in all countries under the threat of terrorism. There is even a debate on the question of whether the commitment in the "war on terror" has increased the threat of terrorism. The Germans use this argument to engage the least possible. But this position did not prevent spread something defined even in other languages by the German word "Angst". People are easily worried, especially travel. Any train or airplane accident raises suspicion of bombing. September 11 was a psychological blow and a tremor which shook our political systems. While the fight against terrorism is conducted on behalf of democracy, it has weakened it because of new laws and the concern of the population. Democracy and the rule of law have taken a much harder blow on the part of their own supporters than their enemies.

Affected by the shock wave democracies, there are two crucial things to be done to restore confidence in freedom. The first is to ensure that the laws adopted to cope with the challenge of terrorism are temporary. Some of the texts that now restrict civil liberties and the use of habeas corpus contain clauses which limit their application in time, they will have to be re-examined by the parliaments. The second is to try to allay the concern of the population, rather than exploit it. The terrorists against whom we are "at war" may not win, because their dark ambition will never have the popular support. It is one more reason for Democrats without concession defend our values, in accordance with in their actions.