TERRORISM - CO-CHAIRMEN DISCUSS UN

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001350 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL PTER UNGA SUBJECT: TERRORISM - CO-CHAIRMEN DISCUSS UN COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY REF: USUN 01297 ¶1. Action request para 6. ¶2. Summary. The Co-Chairmen of the informal consultations on the UN Counter-Terrorism Strategy plan to produce a third draft of the strategy before the end of July and convene the next round of discussions during the week of August 21. Prior to completing the next draft they are meeting bilaterally with delegations to gauge the viability of compromise language that might be included in the text. The Co-Chairmen suggested inclusion of references from the 1994 UN Declaration on Terrorism which they hoped would make the text more acceptable to some delegations. They also presented new language on the Egyptian conference proposal and on the process for reviewing the strategy. End Summary. ¶3. USUN Legal Adviser met, July 11, with the Co-Chairmen, Ambassadors Yanez-Barnueva (Spain) and Menon (Singapore) to discuss the state of negotiations of the counter-terrorism strategy. The Co-Chairmen expressed surprise that the second draft of the strategy, which had been discussed during informal consultations on July 28 and 30 (reftel),drew more criticism than the first draft. They said they were considering various ways to respond to objections expressed during discussions, specifically points by Organization of the Islamic Conference members regarding state-terrorism and Egypt's call for a high level conference. They also focused on follow-up at UNGA subsequent sessions. Yanez expressed the hope that if the strategy is by the end of August completed, it might be adopted at a high level segment during "ministerial week" of the upcoming General Assembly. ¶4. Having outlined the Co-Chairmen's plan, Yanez presented the following specific proposals and asked that the US provide reactions within the next week: - Amend preambular paragraph 7 to add a specific reference to UNGA resolution 46/51. The paragraph would read: "Recalling further all General Assembly resolutions on measures to eliminate international terrorism, including resolution 46/51, and Security Council resolutions on threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts, as well as relevant resolutions of the General Assembly on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism". (Resolution 46/51, adopted without a vote in 1991 contains language (op 15) that indicates that nothing in the resolution could prejudice the right of peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination to struggle for self-determination and independence. The Co-Chairmen point out that resolution 46/51 was also recalled in preambular para 1 of Resolution 49/60, the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism.) - State Terrorism. The Co-Chairmen would also like to borrow language from the 1994 Declaration to deal with the issue of state terrorism. They point to preambular paragraph 4 of the Declaration, adopted by consensus, which says: "Deeply disturbed by the world-wide persistence of acts of international terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, including those in which States are directly or indirectly involved, which endanger or take innocent lives, have a deleterious effect on international relations and may jeopardize the security of States." - High Level Conference - The Co-Chairmen are seeking to win over the Egyptians (highly vocal in their criticism of the text) by showing movement toward convening the high level conference that the Egyptians have proposed. They are suggesting: "Having considered the question of a high level conference on terrorism and acknowledging that such a conference, at an appropriate time, could contribute...". (USUN/Legal Adviser noted that consideration of the conference proposal had produced no agreement in the Sixth Committee and many delegations, including the US, link the conference issue to completion of the Comprehensive Convention Against International Terrorism (CCIT). That linkage is not apparent in the proposal which implies that the issue of convening a conference is not if, but when.) - Strategy review - Noting U.S. concerns about the proposed review, Yanez suggested softening the language in the current op 3 (a) to read, "to examine in two years progress made and to consider updating it to respond to evolving changes". In response to the question of whether this examination would take place in the Sixth Committee under the existing item on terrorism or under a new item as envisioned in op 4 of the draft, the Co-Chairmen said they planned to retain op 4. ¶5. USUN Legal Adviser noted that the issues discussed did not cover all of our fundamental concerns and reminded the Co-Chairmen to refer to the written comments previously passed to them by the U.S. delegation. ¶6. Action request: Post requests Washington guidance on Co-Chairmen's proposals by COB. July 17. BOLTON