Capability Gap
[2.CGF.20]
Lack of a Common Prefrontier Intelligence picture
Background
A solution that will offer the desired prefrontier intelligence picture for various border types is required. This involves intelligence from land borders, maritime borders, and intelligence sharing among practitioners from different discipline organisations in the same country (initially) and subsequent cooperation between multidiscipline organisations across the borders (from different EU MS). Since its establishment in 2013 (Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013), the European Border Surveillance system (EUROSUR) is a framework for information exchange and cooperation between Member States and Frontex to improve situational awareness and increase reaction capability at the external borders. The EUROSUR’s vision to “help detect and fight criminal networks’ activities and will be a crucial tool for saving migrants who put their lives at risk trying to reach EU shores” is challenged for its effective implementation after the 2015 migration crisis. The capability gap no 2.CGF.20 refers to better situational awareness (monitoring, detection, identification, tracking) while the subsequent gaps 2.CGF.21, 2.CGF.22, and 2.CGF.23 refer to better reaction (prevention and interception of unauthorised border crossings) capabilities. (Ref. to EUROSUR Fusion Services).
Situational picture is a three (3) layer picture composed with information on events (events layer) patrolling assets (operational layer) and findings from Analysis processes (analysis layer). Each EU MS manages its own National Situational Picture while Frontex manages the European Situational Picture, which is covering Member States’ territory and the Common Pre-frontier intelligence picture (CPIP) which is covering the area beyond the external borders (land, sea, and air). As such, the Common Pre-frontier intelligence picture is a gap mostly applicable to Europe’s Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) tasked to provide the National Coordination Centres (NCC) with effective, accurate, and timely information and analysis on the pre-frontier area. The risk indicators complement CPIP needs to be improved, enriched with the findings of OSINT and IMINT (at minimum).
