A NEWSLETTER CIRCULATED after the Islamic State’s November massacre in Paris sheds light on what the group believes yesterday’s deadly attacks in Brussels will accomplish, including weakening unity on the continent and exhausting European states economically. An issue of the Islamic State newsletter al Naba, published weeks after the Paris attacks, boasted in one section that “the Paris raid has caused the creation of a state of instability in European countries which will have long-term effects.” It listed these as “the weakening of European cohesion, including demands to repeal the Schengen Agreement … which permits free traveling in Europe without checkpoints”; “security measures [that] will cost them tens of millions of dollars”; and “mutual accusations between France and Belgium” over security failings. The same newsletter section also stated that a “general state of unease” created by terrorism would lead to decreases in tourism and new restrictions on travel, costing already cash-strapped EU countries “tens of billions of dollars” in revenue.

In the list, the newsletter mingled facts from the aftermath of the Paris attacks with predictions about the future. At least some of the predictions have since held up. Earlier this year, several European nations announced major increases in their defense budgets, with analysts expecting an increase of up to 50 billion euros in spending across the continent through 2019. Indications that European borders were closing, already available before the Paris attacks, proliferated in the months afterward. The Islamic State’s post-Paris propaganda attacks on the European Union appear particularly relevant after this week’s attack in Brussels, which is the EU’s capital and the site of NATO headquarters. Although local authorities have said they have yet to directly connect the two attacks, the Islamic State yesterday claimed responsibility for the Brussels massacre in a statement that U.S. officials said appears to be genuine. “Because ISIL recognizes that they can’t compete militarily, they employ a strategy that seeks to bleed stronger powers economically and politically,” says Amarnath Amarasingam, a fellow at George Washington University’s Program on Extremism. A similar strategy was famously outlined in 2004 by al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, who claimed that the goal of the 9/11 attacks was to draw the United States into costly wars abroad that would drain its resources and political will, while engendering backlash from Muslim communities worldwide.

“Sadly, in responses to terrorism, we often fall right into the trap set by these groups by overspending, over-policing, and sacrificing our civil liberties. Its an endless cycle,” says Amarasingam.