UNGA: JUNE 28-30 INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS ON THE UN

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001297

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: UNGA PTER
SUBJECT: UNGA: JUNE 28-30 INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS ON THE UN
COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY

REF: A. (A) STATE 108132


B. (B) STATE 100481

C. (C) STATE 76209

D. (D) 6/23/06 UNGA CT STRATEGY WORKING PAPER


1. Summary: General Assembly members gathered for informal
consultations on the draft UN Global Counter-Terrorism
strategy from June 28-30. Many had detailed line-in,
line-out comments while reserving the right to provide
additional comments separately to the co-chairs of the
discussion. The most contentious issues include the lack of
a definition for terrorism, the exclusion of references to
state terrorism, self-determination, and struggle against
foreign occupation, the appropriate role of the Security
Council with regard to counter-terrorism oversight, the
implications of codes of conduct for journalists,
counter-terrorism capacity building for developing nations,
and the time-crunched pace of the strategy-negotiating
process. End Summary.


2. General Assembly members gathered for discussion of the
draft UN Global Counter-Terrorism strategy from June 28-30 in
accordance with the mandate set out in the World Summit
Outcome document of September 2005. Algeria, Japan,
Pakistan, South Africa, Sudan, Guatemala, Austria (on behalf
of the EU),Cuba, Columbia, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Egypt,
Canada, Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Switzerland,
Turkey, Libya, Indonesia, Venezuela, Kuwait, Iran, the
Philippines, Lebanon, India, Syria, and Palau were among the
delegations that spoke in addition to the United States.
Given the short time with which the delegations had to
prepare for the discussions only a few have distributed
written proposals to date. (Those have been forwarded to
Dept.)

-------------- --------------
State-Terrorism, Self-Determination, and Foreign Occupation
-------------- --------------


3. Algeria, Mexico, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Syria and, most
adamantly, Venezuela, noted that the document still lacks
reference to the right of people to fight for
self-determination, struggle against foreign occupation and
state terrorism. Many of these delegations argued that these
concepts are protected under the right of self-defense in the
UN Charter. Venezuela accused the co-chairs of ignoring "the
voice of the majority and truth" to include such references
and stated its unwillingness to negotiate if state-terrorism
is excluded.


4. Most of these delegations called for greater
acknowledgment of the conditions that lead to terrorism. The
strategy of combating terrorism without attention to the root
causes of terrorism, Iran argued, exacerbates the problem by
allowing countries to breach international law, often
resulting in high collateral damage, under the pretext of
countering terrorism. Iran noted that previous
counter-terrorism bodies had stated the need for a solution
to root causes of terrorism while recognizing a right to
self-determination. As early as 1972, the General Assembly
adopted Resolution 30/34, "Measures to Prevent International
Terrorism," stating the need to address root causes of
terrorism in the wake of the Munich hostage crisis.
Indonesia supported the forming of a non-exhaustive list of
conditions leading to terrorism as a basis for the global
strategy.


5. Venezuela continued that the current text is written from
a contemporary Western point of view, and Egypt, Libya, and
Iran stated that the overemphasis on religious links to
terrorist acts in the document implies that the global
strategy is to target Islamic fanaticism. (Comment: The
co-chairs had included such references at the request of the
OIC. End Comment.)

--------------
Content
--------------


6. Egypt labeled the current draft a "Christmas Tree" on
which delegations are hanging ornaments unrelated to
terrorism, most specifically disarmament, debate over which
is stalling adoption of the strategy and fracturing the
possibility of a unified front against terrorism. Iran and
Lebanon were among the delegations that supported removing
disarmament language from the strategy. Syria also supported
its removal, stating that any non-proliferation language that
does not call for full disarmament by all members does
nothing to guarantee non-use by terrorists. Canada, however,
proposed strengthening the document's support for the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to counter
proliferation and Sri Lanka welcomed language concerning
weapons of mass destruction. India favored the creation of a


concise, simple consensus document steering clear of
controversial topics, which can be addressed later in the
General Assembly.

--------------
General Assembly Primacy
--------------


7. Canada supported the EU position that the document use
stronger language in calling for full compliance with
Security Council resolutions, most notably 1373. Egypt,
Cuba, and several other delegations insisted on language
asserting the primacy of the General Assembly in combating
terrorism and criticized the strategy document for focusing
too heavily on the Security Council's role. Egypt in
particular, with the support of Iran, Indonesia, Lebanon, and
Brazil, stated that the current text encourages the Security
Council to encroach on the GA, and called for the removal of
all sections that reference the SC. Iran condemned the
categorization of terrorist states and listing and delisting
procedures by SC committees through non-transparent
mechanisms and called for the transfer of this power to the
GA to be exercised in a transparent manner.


8. In terms of monitoring compliance, the EU said the draft
should replace language from earlier versions, calling on the
three committees to develop standards for measuring states'
compliance with their obligations under the relevant
resolutions. Algeria said the language concerning the
Financial Action Task Force (FATF) should be strengthened to
require compliance with FATF standards for all UN member
states, and said the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) should
give particular importance to those standards. Indonesia
stated that an ongoing process of review by a
counter-terrorism body would be much more effective and
involved than annual or bi-annual review meetings.


9. Syria called for the creation of an international
counter-terrorism center in Riyadh, and reiterated its
support for the OIC's strategy from the Ten Year Program of
Action adopted by the Third Extraordinary Summit, held in
Makkah Al-Mukarammah last December.

--------------
Capacity Building
--------------


10. The EU requested changing the language on technical
assistance to indicate that capacity building should be the
central aspect of the UN's counter-terrorism efforts. Japan
questioned the language on funding technical assistance,
saying first that the strategy should be mindful of existing
mechanisms like the G-8 Counter-Terrorism Action Group (CTAG)
that provide technical assistance and then arguing that
language to suggest that technical assistance efforts would
be funded through assessed contributions was inappropriate.
Palau called for the creation of a fund to assist developing
nations who have the desire but not the resources to combat
terrorism. UN partner agencies, such as Interpol, are not
universal to developing nations because of the expensive cost
of membership.

--------------
Codes of Conduct for Journalists
--------------


11. Several delegations, including Pakistan, the
Philippines, and Sri Lanka, cautioned against language
concerning codes of conduct for journalists, warning that
this could stifle free expression. The EU sought to expand
on a section of the draft to include stronger language
concerning combating terrorist propaganda.

--------------
Victims' Compensation
--------------


12. Sri Lanka supported an assistance system for victims of
terrorism, but did not address concerns from delegations,
such as Columbia, that such compensation seems to support
reparations. Syria raised the need for further explanation
of such a compensation scheme, asking its supporters how
financial responsibility would be apportioned following an
act of terrorism and how victims and amounts would be
established in the absence of a terrorism definition.

--------------
International Law
--------------


13. Many delegations commented on the need for references to
the rule of law, due process, human rights law, refugee law,
and international law. Some emphasized that the Human Rights


Council (HRC) should play a preeminent role in monitoring
human rights and terrorism. Others, including Cuba, said the
strategy should refer to the GA's central role and past
resolutions on human rights and terrorism. The EU suggested
new language to indicate that governments must not use
counter-terrorism as a justification for political repression.

--------------
Drafting Process
--------------


14. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria noted the need for
bilateral and multilateral negotiations between states as
opposed to the current flood of competing suggestions to the
co-chairs and texts produced by the facilitators. Egypt also
suggested that a negotiated counter-terrorism strategy should
be ready for adoption via a high-level meeting at the start
of the 61st Session of the General Assembly.


15. Pakistan, South Africa, Syria, and several other NAM
delegations said the negotiations on the draft strategy had
been too rushed and called for delays. Turkey called the
discussion sessions a "waste of time," since no delegations
had time to submit their changes in writing and no one could
possibly take notes fast enough to record the many line item
suggestions. Saudi Arabia called for at least one month for
delegations to review drafts and consult their capitals
unless there was an emergency.
BOLTON