The European Union (EU) is a community of different nations with different perceptions, ideologies, cultures, way of life and way of maintaining balance between domestic and international policies. They are committed to protect the union without a common counterterrorism mechanism, intelligence sharing, and foreign policy. More than two decades after the introduction of its common security policy, the EU failed to move forward in this field by planning and implementing the full integration of intelligence into the core of its global power design. To fix the window of intelligence-sharing, the EU member states also failed to plan the adoption of professional measures to reduce security risk and challenges of domestic radicalisation and extremism. The exponentially growing power of Russia and its advance towards Europe, Middle East and Central Asia, war in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, military developments in China, Pakistan, and the turbulence of North Africa— all these factors mean that the demand for a well-established professional intelligence agency within the EU parameter clearly exists. The establishment of such a common agency will improve the process of intelligence sharing among all member states. As we read in newspapers and books, the current European societies face numerous challenges including radicalisation, extremism, international terrorism and racism, the lack of coordination among their policing institutions, and the inattention of governments to adopt an effective security measures, vulnerability and insecurity have badly affected their daily lives and businesses. Security experts suggest that a smooth and secure cross border intelligence information exchange between the law enforcement agencies of all EU member states can be very effective in fixing these challenges. When we read stories about the cross-border cooperation mechanism of EU states, we find intelligence cooperation on law enforcement level has less developed, and a range of obstacles have made cooperation cumbersome and still pose challenges. In fact, the reality of EU intelligence cooperation is still a mystery as all member states are not willing to share their national secrets with each other due to hostile environment where every state views the others with deep suspicion. Thing are getting worse since Britain is threatening to leave the Union if professional reforms are not introduced. Denmark, Spain, Greece and Sweden are in a deep crisis due to growing jihadism and internal security threats challenging the authority of their states. They also complain that they received no intelligence sharing package from the EU agencies. The US also wants Britain in to protect the partnership of the EU in global war on terrorism. The return of Taliban and their exponentially growing networks across Afghanistan, the emergence of Islamic State (IS), and the unending war in Middle East and Persian Gulf regions, raised serious questions about the credibility and professional intelligence approach of EU intelligence agencies. The same question is asked by Afghan civil society about the role of AIVD, MI6, CIA, German and French agencies in countering terrorism and insurgency through unprofessional intelligence mechanism. The intelligence war among NATO and EU intelligence agencies, and their monitoring campaign against Chinese, Russian, Pakistani, Iranian and Indian agencies, make things worse as they are blaming each other for the failure of state and government in Afghanistan and Iraq. The mistrust between large and small states’ intelligence expertise is a bigger problem. Strong and large states with their professional intelligence agencies oppose radical changes in the current intelligence sharing mechanism. However, small and weak states without professional agencies are unable to provide vital information to the large states. Now large states want to establish a joint mechanism on intelligence sharing, without the inclusion of small states. Disagreement between small and large states over the strategic relationship with the US has left a negative impact on the effectiveness of the EU. The US views terrorism as an external threat, while the EU member states view it as an internal threat. Intelligence cooperation within the EU is of greater importance in fighting the threat of terrorism and radicalisation, but the EU intelligence analysis centre (INTCEN) has nothing to offer as majority of member states intelligence agencies are competing for resources and attention from policy makers. Moreover, INTCEN has no formal mandate to collect intelligence as traditionally understood, because the centre mostly depends on open source intelligence (OSINT). In 2012, INTCEN tried to improve its intelligence analysis capabilities and focus on analysis with two divisions; analysis division, and general and external relations divisions, but the case still remains weak. The issue of electronic intelligence generated numerous controversies within the member states. Privacy international and other organisations deeply criticised the way EU member states spy on their citizens. The EU confirms that The Charter of Foundation Rights and the European Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms guarantee the right of privacy and personnel data protection to everyone within the parameters of the union, but if we look at the rising voices in European capitals against the offensive surveillance and violation of privacy, we come to the conclusion, that all claims of the EU members state about the protection of privacy are just an ostentation. During the operation of large scale electronic surveillance, EU member states seemingly violate the right of privacy, and there is no balance between the need of law enforcement and fundamental rights and privacy, personal data protection and family life. The Netherlands, Britain, Sweden, France and Germany are deeply involved in mass surveillance operation against their citizens. On 18 December 2015, during the EU summit, all leaders promised to improve the process of intelligence sharing and fight against terrorism, but experts still wait to experiment a good reform package. The speed in which the EU intelligence sharing process developed meant that it has not yet a smooth ride. In summation, as the UK has become a semi-detached member of the EU, outside the euro, the Schengen, and eurosceptic, if the country decides to relinquish the union, it will need to negotiate for a new relationship. The writer is author of The Prospect of Nuclear Jihad in Pakistan can be reached at zai.musakhan222@gmail.com