A UN counter-terrorism official has lamented the General Assembly’s failure to agree on a worldwide accord to combat terrorism presented by India.
The Director of the United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT), Raffi Gregorian, told the Security Council on Monday, “Unfortunately, there has not yet been consensus at the General Assembly on the draft Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism, including in relation to how the definition of terrorism would precisely apply in situations of armed conflict.”
The Assembly also does not provide the UNOCT “the mandate to investigate or ascertain the conduct of states and other actors, nor to determine what constitutes an act of terrorism, whether committed by a state, a group, or an individual,” he adds.
This despite the Assembly setting up the UNOCT “with the clear intention of helping member states implement General Assembly and Security Council resolutions related to the fight against terrorism,” he said.
The main roadblock to adopting the convention proposed by India in 1996 is the dispute over the definition of terrorists, with some countries claiming that their favoured terrorists are “freedom fighters”.
Speaking at a Council meeting called at Russia’s request on threats to international peace and security, Gregorian identified these two impediments to the UN effectively combating terrorism.
“For these reasons, I regret that I have nothing else to contribute to the substance of today’s discussion,” he explained.
Gregorian remained mute on the Council’s failure to act against some terrorists due to China’s objections, although criticizing the Assembly and applauding the Council’s “admirable record.”
In the most recent instance of Beijing giving shelter for terrorists operating in Pakistan, China rejected the designation of Lashkar-e-Taiba commander Sajid Mir as an international terrorist in June.
Mir was a key figure in the 2008 Mumbai terror strike perpetrated from Pakistan.
Gregorian, on the other hand, stated that the “Council has a long and admirable record of consensus when it comes to the issue of terrorism.”
To support up his claim, he cited Council resolutions on al-Qaeda and the Islamic State terror organization, also known as Da’esh, as well as the establishment of the Counter-Terrorism Committee.
In a resolution passed in June, the Assembly urged its 193 members to “make every effort to conclude a comprehensive convention on international terrorism.”
However, no new efforts have been made to implement the agreement.
The Council discussion was mostly focused on the Ukraine conflict, with just passing comments of the worldwide terrorism menace by representatives of countries like Ghana and Mozambique.
Dmitry Polyanskiy, Russia’s Deputy Permanent Representative, stated that Moscow requested the conference to discuss “the terrorist essence of the Ukraine regime.”
He said that Ukraine’s destruction of the bridge connecting Crimea to the Russian mainland and use of Crimeans as “hostages” in negotiations constituted terrorism.
Only China backed Russia, while the majority of Council members condemned Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.
US Deputy Political Counsellor, Trina Saha, said that Moscow asking for the meeting was an effort “to divert the council’s attention from the core issues at hand or a transparent ploy to distract from its own aggression”.
“Russia’s complaints about the impacts of a war it began should remind us all of a simple truth,” she said.
“This war would end today if Russia withdrew its forces from Ukraine’s sovereign territory and abandoned its relentless, brutal attacks against Ukraine cities and civilian infrastructure,” she added.
Britain’s Political Coordinator Fergus Eckersley said that it was Russia that “is inflicting terror on the Ukrainian people, and in parallel, it is inflicting suffering on its own population, and millions across the world”.
