VZCZCXYZ0020
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #1136/01 3411804
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 071804Z DEC 07
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 3284

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001136 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PTER UNGA
SUBJECT: GA MEETING ON UN GLOBAL COUNTER-TERRORISM STRATEGY 
OFFERS CONSTRUCTIVE DEBATE 
 
REF: STATE 162362 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY:  The General Assembly (GA) convened an informal 
meeting to review the implementation of the United Nations 
Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy on December 4.  Member 
States expressed broad support for the Strategy and held a 
constructive debate that lacked the polemics of previous 
meetings on the Strategy.  Representatives of the 
Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF) briefed 
the GA on UN efforts to implement the strategy and said the 
CTITF would soon have a single point of contact that States 
could engage for assistance requests.  Pakistan's PermRep 
cautioned against references to radicalism as a "root cause 
of terrorism" and said the Strategy still needed a definition 
of terrorism.  Ambassador Wolff delivered the U.S. statement 
as instructed by reftel.  The GA plans to convene a formal 
review of the Strategy in September 2008.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  The General Assembly held an informal meeting on the 
implementation of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism 
Strategy on December 4, the first such meeting since the 
adoption of the Strategy in 2006 (A/RES/60/288).  (NOTE: The 
General Assembly plans to hold a formal review of the 
Strategy in September 2008.  END NOTE.)  Ambassadors Baki 
Ilkin (Turkey) and Elbio Rosselli (Uruguay) chaired the 
all-day session that began with opening remarks from the 
President of the General Assembly and Secretary-General Ban. 
 
¶3.  Member States discussed their national implementation 
efforts and listened to reports on the Strategy's 
implementation from the UN Interregional Crime and Justice 
Research Institute, the Al Qaida/Taliban Monitoring Team, the 
World Bank, the Terrorism Prevention Branch of the UN Office 
on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), INTERPOL, and the Office of the 
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.  The structure of the 
debate followed the major themes outlined in the Strategy: 
measures to address conditions conducive to the spread of 
terrorism; measures to prevent and combat terrorism; measures 
to build States' capacity to prevent and combat terrorism and 
to strengthen the role of the UN system in this regard; and 
measures to ensure respect for human rights for all and the 
rule of law as the fundamental basis of the fight against 
terrorism. 
 
¶4.  In their statements, Member States expressed broad 
support for the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and 
underscored its importance as a "historic achievement" and 
the first universal, comprehensive strategy to combat 
terrorism.  Delegations emphasized the need to closely 
monitor the Strategy's implementation and said that success 
would depend on the collective efforts of all Member States. 
Many delegations reiterated that the implementation of the 
Strategy was not the responsibility of the UN, but of the 
Members themselves. 
 
¶5.  Most delegations, including Syria, Sudan and Iran, 
delivered pro-forma, constructive interventions.  Israel and 
other delegations told USUN the atmospherics were a welcome 
change from the polemics of previous meetings.  Among the few 
naysayers, Cuba repeated its earlier criticisms of the U.S. 
with respect to Luis Posada Carriles.  In a right of reply, 
Iran accused Argentina of covering up "judicial inadequacies" 
in response to Argentina's reference to five Iranian citizens 
that were implicated in the 1994 bombing of a synagogue in 
Buenos Aires. 
 
¶5.  Commenting on the significance of the Strategy, 
Pakistan's PermRep Munir Akram said it was a "potentially 
historic" document; however, he criticized the lack of a 
definition of terrorism and the exclusion of State terrorism 
in the Strategy.  In thinking about terrorism, Akram said one 
needed to distinguish between local terrorist networks 
motivated by local grievances, and transnational networks, 
like al-Qaida, that exploit grievances genuinely felt by 
Muslims throughout the world.  Akram warned that measures 
that proposed to deal with the root causes of terrorism by 
addressing radicalization ultimately would be 
counterproductive, arguing that radicalism was not a cause of 
terrorism, but the result of oppression.  Akram said defining 
radicalism as a cause of terrorism, and referring to Islamic 
ideology within the context of radicalization as 
"Islamo-fascism", would only bolster support for groups like 
al Qaida. 
 
¶6.  Turning to the UN role in counter-terrorism, Algeria said 
the Organization needed to move away from the Chapter 7 
measures of the Security Council and toward a more inclusive 
approach that gives equal representation to all Member 
States.  Algeria suggested the establishment of a special 
counter-terrorism unit in the UN that would serve as the sole 
body responsible for combating terrorism comprised of members 
from the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Economic 
and Social Council, and the Human Rights Commission. 
 
 
 
¶7.  As to implementation monitoring and the effectiveness of 
the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF), 
Canada said the review of the Strategy mandate in 2008 should 
not create burdensome reporting requirements and also 
suggested more regular meetings among donors to coordinate 
assistance.  CTITF Chairman Robert Orr (U.S.) said the Task 
Force welcomed the opportunity to assist States with 
implementation and said that States would eventually be able 
to engage the CTITF with a single request. 
Khalilzad