UN COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY - WORKING GROUP

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000347 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS C O R R E C T E D COPY CAPTION E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PTER UN PREL SUBJECT: UN COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY - WORKING GROUP PROGRESS ¶1. (U) Summary. A call for more information on implementation of the General Assembly Counter-Terrorism Strategy dominated a meeting hosted by the Egyptian Mission at which UN Assistant Secretary-General Robert Orr briefed on the activities of the Counter-Terrorism Task Force Working Groups. Participants urged Orr to increase communication between the members of the Task Force and member states. Orr said the President of the General Assembly will host a more detailed briefing for all UN members in May. Participants also asked why, almost two years after adoption of the Strategy, the Task Force Office has not been set up? End Summary. ¶2. (SBU) At an April 11 meeting, hosted by the Egyptian Permanent Representative, members of the Missions of Chile, India, Japan, Norway, Switzerland, Pakistan, Singapore, Slovenia and the U.S. heard a briefing by Counter-terrorism Task Force Chairman Bob Orr on its progress in implementing the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Orr began by touting the Strategy as one of the UN's greatest achievements in recent years. He said that it constitutes a set of general principals to be implemented by member states. He then reviewed the activities that have been undertaken by the Task Force's Working Groups (8 active, 2 inactive). Orr reported that the President of the General Assembly plans to hold a briefing in May for all member states to update on the progress of the Task Force Working Groups. Orr described difficulties in moving UN offices toward "system wide coherence" on CT issues as called for by the Strategy. Of the 24 members of the CT Task Force, only five represent counter-terrorism entities and, he said, some have resisted active participation. UNDP, for example, was a reluctant participant responding "we do development, not counter-terrorism." ¶3. (U) Orr described the activities of the Task Force Working Groups. The Working Group on Preventing and Resolving Conflicts has been studying the link between such conflicts and terrorism and is drafting an information note for the Secretary General's Special Representatives and others concerned describing their findings. The Working Group on Radicalization is preparing a composite of what has been tried to counter this phenomenon and an analysis of its effectiveness. The Victims Working Group is organizing a meeting in September which will bring victims together to discuss what can be done to assist victims. The group which focuses on Terrorist Financing has convened participants from UNODC, World Bank and the Counter-terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) to discuss how to strengthen counter-terrorism efforts in this area. The group on countering the use of the internet for terrorist purposes has not taken action. The group to facilitate integrated implementation of the Strategy is working to develop a central point that states can contact with a specific problem. That focal point would direct the state to those within the UN system who can provide assistance. INTERPOL has been the most active participant in the group on "vulnerable targets". "Vulnerable targets" are those that would adversely impact a large number of civilians (ex. shopping centers). The working group on human rights has started a dialogue between the human rights and CT elements within the system. The group on preventing and responding to attacks by weapons of mass destruction and nuclear and biological attacks has been inactive. ¶4. (SBU) Among the participants, almost all asked for a short fact sheet/report on these working group activities and asked how member states can help? Several representatives expressed concern that Task Force does its work independently and does not involve member states. Pakistani Permanent Representative Akram said that he had suggested an inter-governmental process be set up to track Task Force progress but if the idea of a GA Working Group was not widely accepted, an alternative could be to convene the Sixth Committee from time to time throughout the year to receive reports from the Task Force and plan action. This would give states the opportunity to guide the Secretariat. ¶5. (SBU) The need for communication within the UN system was another theme. All supported greater participation by CTED in the Task Force's work and the Japanese Permanent Representative noted that this had been included in the recent CTED renewal resolution. Both the Chilean and Pakistani Permanent Representatives remarked about the duplication of effort and lack of coordination between CTED and the 1267 Monitoring Team. Ambassador Munoz (Chile) recounted experiences from his Chairmanship of the 1267 Committee to underscore the problem. ¶6. (SBU) There was a lengthy discussion of the CT Task Force office, which according to the Strategy was to be set up "within existing resources". Why hasn't the Task Force Office been established? Most accepted that it could be accomplished within existing resources, but asked why it had not been done? Orr said that it was because his office is within the Secretary General's and the Secretary General didn't want to pull staff from other offices to set up an operational office within his own. Member states present were not convinced. Several of the Permanent Representatives (led by Singapore) said that they would talk with the Secretary General, if necessary, to ensure that there is no SIPDIS further delay. They expressed concern that this could be perceived as an indication that the Secretary General doesn't regard CT as a high priority. Khalilzad