STATEMENT FOR SIXTH COMMITTEE ON UN

UNCLAS STATE 104391 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL PTER CT UNSC SUBJECT: STATEMENT FOR SIXTH COMMITTEE ON UN COUNTERTERRORISM ISSUES REF: A. USUN 840 ¶B. STATE 62265 ¶C. STATE 103127 ¶1. This is an action request. Please see paragraph 3. ¶2. SUMMARY: The Sixth Committee will address the CCIT on October 6, 7 and 23. Negotiations on the CCIT have foundered for nine years on two issues: (1) the scope of an exemption for military activities and (2) exemption of national liberation movements. USG redlines are that military activities must be exempted using standard language from previous antiterrorism conventions, and that violent acts of national liberation movements must not be exempted. By contrast, the OIC wants to exempt military activities only if they are in compliance with international law and wants national liberation movements (with the Palestinians particularly in mind) exempted by the Convention. The United States continues to support a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism that would strengthen this existing legal regime and reinforce the critical principle that no cause or grievance justifies terrorism in any form. However, we firmly believe that any successful resolution to the outstanding CCIT issues must be predicated on a shared and clear understanding that a comprehensive convention on terrorism cannot provide a pretext for terrorist groups to claim their criminal acts are excluded from the scope of the CCIT in the name of national liberation, resistance to foreign occupation, or any other justification or motivation. Furthermore, it should not reach state military action, which is subject to other international legal regimes. ¶3. ACTION REQUEST: In discussions commencing October 6 on CCIT negotiations, USUN may wish to draw on points from the following draft statement. BEGIN STATEMENT The United States reiterates both our firm condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations as well as our commitment to the common fight to end terrorism. All acts of terrorism - by whomever committed - are criminal, inhumane and unjustifiable, regardless of motivation, especially when they indiscriminately target and injure civilians. An unwavering and united effort by the international community is required if we are to succeed in preventing these heinous acts. In this respect, we recognize the United Nations, central role in coordinating the efforts by member states in countering terrorism and bolstering the ability of states to prevent terrorist acts. We express our firm support for these UN efforts. Through the UN system, 16 international legal instruments have been completed. These instruments provide a thorough legal framework for cooperation among states directed toward prevention of terrorist acts and ensuring the prosecution and punishment of offenders, wherever found. We note the ongoing efforts to further enhance this legal framework and promote full and effective implementation of the provisions of these instruments. We believe the four latest counter-terrorism instruments adopted in 2005 - the Nuclear Terrorism Convention, the Amendment to the Convention on the Protection of Physical Nuclear Material, and the two Suppression of Unlawful Acts Protocols - are valuable additions to our collective efforts to combat terrorism. (We are seeking domestic legislation so that we can become party to and fully implement these newest instruments.) We also note the recent meetings of the Legal Committee of the International Civil Aviation Organization to consider updates to the two civil aviation security Conventions - the 1970 Hague Convention and the 1971 Montreal Convention. We believe this international legal framework for countering terrorism must continue to be supported and developed, with states joining, implementing, and -- where needed -- refining these existing instruments. The United States continues to support a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism that would strengthen this existing legal regime and reinforce the critical principle that no cause or grievance justifies terrorism in any form. We firmly believe that any successful resolution to the outstanding CCIT issues must be predicated on a shared and clear understanding of two fundamental principles: -- First, a comprehensive convention on terrorism cannot provide a pretext for terrorist groups to claim their criminal acts are excluded from the scope of the CCIT in the name of national liberation, resistance to foreign occupation, or any other justification or motivation. -- Second, as with other recent counterterrorism instruments, a comprehensive convention should not reach state military action, which is subject to other international legal regimes. We continue to believe that the Coordinator's 2002 text best reflects these fundamental principles by incorporating text which 162 states have accepted in the Terrorist Bombings Convention. The text found in the Bombings Convention, as well as four other recent counterterrorism instruments, was itself the subject of careful compromise. We are not persuaded that there are deficiencies with this text that need to be remedied. While we appreciate the efforts of those who have attempted to offer proposals to finalize the CCIT text, to date those proposals have not been supported by those who object to the Coordinator,s 2002 text. We stand prepared to carefully consider any new proposal that is consistent with the fundamental principles we have outlined, and encourage other states to do likewise. END STATEMENT ¶4. (U) Department further requests USUN draw from the following points, if needed, should the case of Luis Posada Carriles be raised (likely by the Governments of Cuba and/or Venezuela) , following negotiations in the Sixth Committee on CCIT. (Background Note: The Governments of Cuba and Venezuela claim that Posada, a Cuban exile, was allegedly involved in the bombing of a Cubana airliner, which had departed Caracas before its destruction in mid-air in 1976. Posada is also alleged to have been involved in bombings of tourist facilities in 1997 in Havana, Cuba, and in a plot against Fidel Castro during the Ibero-American Summit in Panama in 2000. Posada was taken into custody May 17, 2005, by the Department of Homeland Security for entering the United States without inspection.) BEGIN REMARKS: - Contrary to the statements you have heard, the United States has taken a number of actions with respect to Luis Posada-Carriles ("Posada"). - In taking these steps, the United States has acted consistent with international law as well as our domestic legal framework that provides for due process and various constitutional safeguards. - These safeguards provide that an individual cannot be brought for trial or extradited unless sufficient evidence has been established with respect to the charges; in the United States, this standard is described as "probable cause." - Let me give you a brief overview of steps the United States has taken with respect to Posada within this legal framework: - Posada entered the United States illegally in early 2005. - Posada was detained by immigration authorities in the United States on May 17, 2005, and he was, in accordance with U.S. law, placed in removal proceedings. - The immigration judge who handled the removal proceedings ordered that Posada be removed from the United States on September 27, 2005. - This order remains in effect. The United States has been seeking ways to implement it consistent with the terms of the order and U.S. obligations under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. - Specifically, at the time the immigration judge ordered Posada removed, the immigration judge also determined that Posada could not be removed to either Cuba or Venezuela as it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he were so transferred. As a matter of U.S. immigration law, the United States is not in a position to remove Posada to either country. (For use if appropriate) - Moreover, the United States sought and obtained a criminal indictment in U.S. federal court charging Posada with violations of our immigration laws. On April 8, 2009, new criminal charges were brought against Posada in that case, accusing him of lying about his involvement in certain terrorist bombings in Havana, Cuba. The case is currently scheduled for trial early next year. - In the meantime, Posada remains subject to the order of removal issued by the immigration judge and is without legal status in the United States. - He is also subject to an Order of Supervision from the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE),which imposes certain restrictions on Posada, including reporting and monitoring requirements. - In sum, the United States continues to be engaged in an ongoing series of actions, consistent with our legal requirements and due process, with respect to Posada. END REMARKS CLINTON