|
|
|
|
Map of Africa Map of Asia |
CIAO DATE: 04/03
Responding to Terrorism: What Role for the United Nations?
William G. O'Neill
October 2002
Executive Summary
The International Peace Academy held a conference on "Responding to Terrorism: What Role for the United Nations?" on Oct. 25-26, 2002 in New York. In addition to the focus on possible UN initiatives, the conference specifically sought the insights and recommendations of experts from Latin America, Africa and Asia, parts of the world that have suffered greatly from terrorism but whose views and prescriptions are often overlooked or omitted from the debate.
The presentations made by the various panelists provoked lively exchanges. Participants offered incisive comments on the nature of modern terrorism, the links between religion and terrorism and the economic, social and cultural components of the appeal of terrorism to those who feel the system, both local and international, is rigged against them. The conference also considered how international laws on armed conflict and human rights could help combat terrorism; at the same time many affirmed that this struggle could not be at the expense of fundamental rights and freedoms. This would only help the terrorists who frequently take advantage of rights violations to heighten their appeal. The role of international banking and financial channels was seen as essential to choking off funds to terrorists but again had to be handled with care to avoid stifling legitimate investments, trade and charities which would only fuel resentments and grievances. The conference identified several challenges where the UN needs to direct its resources and energies to fight terrorism.
First, the UN should exert its moral authority and send an unequivocal message that terrorism is never acceptable, even for the worthiest of causes. The Secretary-General should take a lead role in propagating this message.
Second, the UN's failure to define terrorism has hurt the organization and the fight against terror. This lack of a definition is much more than a battle over semantics and has real consequences. The lack of agreement on what constitutes "terrorism" exposes the UN to charges that it uses double-standards which undermines the very legitimacy and universality that are among the UN's most precious assets. Several participants concluded that the General Assembly should forge a definition as an urgent priority.
Third, the Department of Public Information should design a campaign promoting tolerance and understanding among all cultures and religions. The well-intentioned "dialogue among civilizations" has had little discernible impact and a more concerted, focused and publicized effort is needed, one that reaches grass-roots societies beyond the narrow elites in the capitals. Again, the Secretary-General occupies a unique position to lead and sustain such an initiative and his role should be carefully planned.
Fourth, the UN should enhance its work in sustainable development, poverty reduction, improved governance and strengthening the rule of law. These are valuable programs in their own right but their role in reducing the appeal of terrorists and in addressing the lack of opportunities and grievances that terrorists exploit to gain recruits, financing and support needs to be recognized. An even more explicit appeal to governments to rule fairly, to represent all parts of the population and to give people hope in a future will diminish the attraction of extremist views and thus of terrorists.
Fifth, the UN needs to reassess its relationship with religions. The UN needs to become more comfortable dealing with religious issues and sponsoring and engaging in discussions about the role of religion in international affairs. Secularism does not have to mean being anti-religious, so that while the UN should remain a secular organization, it should not be seen as indifferent to religion.
Sixth, the fight against terrorism provides an opportunity to reconsider the boundaries of sovereignty, between the "essentially domestic matters" and those that are legitimately the concern of the UN. This boundary has shifted quite a bit since the UN's founding; issues like human rights and the environment have led the way. Now questions like the HIV/AIDS pandemic, the illegal arms trade and trafficking in humans require concerted efforts by the UN and the international community, including "intrusions" into how a state is addressing these questions within its borders. The state's role in education, whether the curriculum promotes tolerance and respect for other cultures and religions is a sensitive issue but one that is no longer purely in the domain of the state but is of concern to the entire world. Terrorism raises such new questions that in turn alter long-held assumptions about the relations among the UN, its agencies, its member-states and the principle of sovereignty as enshrined in the Charter. The Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee could be a crucial instrument to improve domestic capacity in the areas of governance, rule of law and respect for human rights while at the same time affirming these issues as legitimate concerns for the UN.
Seventh and last, terrorism challenges the fundamental principles of the United Nations. Will the UN rise to the challenge? Part of the answer depends on whether the UN can forge effective policies as a system, beyond the sum of its member-states parts and the national interests of its most powerful members. The fight against terrorism presents opportunities and the challenges for creative change within the entire UN system. It was the participants' hope that the UN would embrace both.
Email this citation