“The UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy”
Statement by H.E. Ambassador Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry, Acting Permanent Representative of Pakistan, on the Draft Resolution prepared by the Co-Chairs of the Informal Consultations on (28 June 2006)
Mr. Co-Chairman,
I thank the Co-Chairs for their sincere efforts to find a common ground in the
development of a United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
-
At the outset I would also like to point out that the pace of developing the
Counter-Terrorism Strategy is too fast. In a short span of about a month the Co-Chairs
have presented two documents of “strategic nature” on an important and sensitive issue
of lasting implications for the Member States. This could lead to mistakes; and “strategic
mistakes” have substantial consequences.
-
An overview of the latest paper reveals we are in a “one step forward two steps
back” situation. We find that against the suggestions of a number of countries the second
formulation of the Co-Chairs is more aligned with the Secretary General’s five Ds as
compared to the first one, while proposals of a number of states about other important
issues of the strategy have either been ignored or partially accommodated.
- The September Outcome document was a good starting point. However, it got
selected attention in the Co-Chairs’ papers. In paragraph 82 of the document three
parameters were identified for a Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Those parameters
are: One, development of the elements proposed by the Secretary Generals; Two,
promotion of comprehensive, coordinated and consistent responses; and Three, “taking
into account” conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism. We find the Co-Chairs’
papers have persistently focused on the first parameter and have avoided the other two.
- In this backdrop we find the proposed strategy is neither comprehensive and nor it
“takes into account” some very important conditions conducive to the spread of
terrorism, including, foreign occupation, state terrorism and denial of self determination
to the people in the situation of occupation. These conditions are major concerns of our
times. The strategy has also failed to distinguish between terrorism and the right of
people to struggle against foreign occupation. A few scattered references to some of these
issues have been made which lack commitment and implementation guidelines. These
issues should be clearly identified and addressed in the Resolution as well as in the Plan
of Action. A strategy which ignores the major concerns of our time and does not
subscribe to the parameters set out for its development could never become a
comprehensive and effective strategy. Therefore we ask for addition of “state terrorism”;
“foreign occupation”; and “the denial of right of self determination” in the preamble
paragraph of the First Section as conditions conducive to spread of terrorism.
- In our earlier statements and bilateral consultations with the Co-Chairs we had
suggested that a possibly useful structure of the strategy document could be to group its