VZCZCXYZ0005
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0942/01 2901226
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 161226Z OCT 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5121

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000942 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PTER UNGA
SUBJECT: UNGA/C-6: UNGA'S 6TH COMMITTEE DISCUSSES TERRORISM 
 
REF: 07 USUN NY 880 
 
¶1.  Summary: The Sixth Committee held its debate on agenda 
item 99, "Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism," 
from October 8-9.  The majority of speakers called for the 
conclusion of the draft Comprehensive Convention for 
Combating International Terrorism.  Some called for it to 
include a definition of terrorism which should exclude acts 
in exercise of a people's right to self-determination and in 
order to oppose occupying forces.  As in last year's debate 
(Ref A), Trinidad and Tobago (speaking for the Caribbean 
Community) referred to the terrorist bombing of an airliner 
that occured in the Caribbean region 32 years ago and has not 
been resolved. Cuba and Venezuela reproached the United 
States handling of the Luis Posada Carriles case.  They 
allege that he was responsible for that incident.  USUN 
responded using the Department's instructions.  The 
Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) called U.S. 
activity in Iraq and Afghanistan an example of "state 
terrorism."  In an impassioned address, Sudan highlighted 
"creative" new forms of terrorism, calling the International 
Criminal Court (ICC) a terrorist organization.  Paragraph 8 
lists all the delegations that gave statements.  End Summary. 
 
 
SUPPORT FOR UN COUNTER TERRORISM EFFORTS 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶2.  Many Delegations condemned terrorism and agreed that such 
acts can never be justified.  A majority of delegates 
expressed support for the first review of the 2006 UN Global 
Counter Terrorism Strategy (UNGCTS) as an important step in 
furthering the work of the United Nations against terrorism. 
Speakers lauded the UN General Assembly as the best place to 
coordinate an international response to the threat of 
terrorism.  Additionally, delegations called for the UNGCTS 
to be a living document, reviewed regularly.  Most speakers 
emphasized that the Member States themselves are responsible 
for the implementation of the strategy.  Many interventions 
argued that the United Nations must work to prevent terrorism 
and not simply respond.  Representatives argued that the 
United Nations should address the causes of terrorism through 
economic and social development, and should provide 
international justice that will facilitate dialogue between 
different cultures and religions, fight the trafficking of 
drugs and persons, and counter organized crime. 
 
¶3.  Fifty of the sixty-seven interventions expressed support 
for the draft Comprehensive Convention for Combating 
International Terrorism (CCCIT).  Several praised the Ad Hoc 
Committee coordinator's compromise proposal.  Speakers 
identified the key obstacles to consensus as first, the need 
for exceptions in describing terrorist acts and second, a 
distinction between acts of terrorism and acts of defense 
against occupying forces.  The Arab Group members emphasized 
that terrorism cannot be linked to a particular religion, 
race, or culture.  Several members supported, in the words of 
Pakistan's intervention, the "legitimate right of peoples to 
resist foreign occupation" as they claimed is recognized in 
International Law, International Humanitarian Law and General 
Assembly resolution 46/51.  However, Israel argued, 
"Terrorism has sought legitimacy in the form of recognition 
of a distinction between so called permissible and 
impermissible forms of terror."  The Israeli representative 
cautioned that agreement on a definition of terrorism 
requires "legal precision and moral clarity."  She continued 
that consensus on the CCCIT should not come at the cost of 
those principles if Members States want an effective tool 
against terrorism. 
 
SECURITY COUNCIL TRANSPARENCY & OTHER PROPOSALS 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶4.  Many speakers acknowledged the importance of the UN 
Security Council (UNSC) and its subsidiary bodies in fighting 
terrorism.  However, a few, including Cuba and Iceland, 
argued that the UNSC's work should be more transparent. Cuba 
specifically asked the UNSC to streamline the procedure for 
listing and de-listing countries in regard to sanctions to 
address due process and transparency.  A large number of the 
non-aligned movement (NAM) members called for a high level 
conference to define terrorism, although France said that 
this conference should not come until after consensus is 
achieved on a CCCIT.  The Arab Group members and NAM 
advocated for King Abudullah Bin Abdul-Aziz Al-Saud's (Saudia 
Arabia) proposal to establish an International Center under 
the United Nations to combat international terrorism. 
Several countries called for a conference to create an 
International Code of Conduct to coordinate multilateral 
efforts to prevent terrorism in conformity with international 
law. 
 
SUDAN 
----- 
 
 
¶5.  Sudan condemned not only terrorism but state terrorism. 
Listing examples of Sudan's moderation, tolerance and 
progress toward countering terrorism, Sudan highlighted its 
role in negotiating the release of European Hostages on the 
Sudanese-Chad border.  Sudan also argued that the 
international community's efforts to combat terrorism were 
unbalanced.  He listed ways that some groups, including the 
ICC, committed state terrorism.  At one point, he called 
occupying forces a "disgusting charicature" and "the second 
face on the coin of terrorism."  He specifically condemned 
the ICC for its decision against Sudan, saying it is 
"political extortion" and a "tool for blackmail, a tool for 
coercion.  Isn't this terrorism?" 
 
ACCUSING THE UNITED STATES OF TERRORISM 
--------------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  After delivering an intervention on behalf of NAM, Cuba 
took the floor separately on its own behalf and conveyed a 
detailed account of the United States' actions regarding Luis 
Posada Carillas.  Chiefly, Cuba complained that Posada had 
neither been tried for terrorism, nor extradited and has been 
free in the United States since May 8, 2008.   Further, Cuba 
argued that the United States had tried five Cuban "heroes" 
and sentenced them to 10 years in prison, although these men 
were simply "fighting against terrorism in Miami."  Venezuela 
also  accused the United States of hypocrisy in its dealings 
with Posada, stating that Venezuela is still "waiting for a 
response" on Posada's extradition.  Cuba and Venezuela 
repeated their positions while exercising rights-of-reply to 
the U.S. intervention.  The representative from DPRK accused 
the United States of "state terrorism" in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. DPRK said that no state should be able to use 
counter terroism to accomplish its own political objectives. 
 
¶7.  In its intervention, USUN rebutted the Cuban and 
Venezuelan statements on Posada.  Drawing on Department 
guidance, USUN stated that Posada entered the United States 
illegally, was detained, and then was placed in removal 
proceedings and that he is currently in the United States 
without official status and is under observation by DHS.  The 
intervention also clarified the facts of the case of the five 
men in Miami who were tried in an open and public trial for 
espionage.  USUN detailed the rights and due process under 
U.S. law that these men were afforded. 
 
LIST OF SPEAKERS 
---------------- 
 
¶8.  Sixty-seven delegations gave statements: Russia (on 
behalf of the Shanghai Cooperative Organization), Mexico (on 
behalf of the Rio Group), Cuba (on behalf of the NAM), 
Australia (on behalf of CANZ), Vietnam (on behalf of ASEAN), 
Trinidad & Tobago (on behalf of the Caribbean Community), 
Kenya (on behalf of the Africa Group), France (on behalf of 
the EU), Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of the 
Islamic Conference), Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, 
Sudan, UAE, Turkey, Nigeria, Algeria, Israel, DRC, Tunisia, 
Guatemala, Indonesia, Columbia, India, Lesotho, Cuba, Yemen, 
Uganda, Belarus, Iceland, Tanzania, Republic of Korea, Syria, 
Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Mozambique, Oman, Morocco, Egypt, 
Japan, Myanmar, Cote d'Ivoire, DPRK, Singapore, Iran, 
Senegal, Qatar, Venezuela, Iraq, Norway, Sri Lanka, Angola, 
Libya, Malaysia, Cameroon, Afghanistan, Mongolia, Ecuador, 
Mali, Bahrain, Burkina Faso, Nicaragua, Kuwait, China, 
Maldives, United States.  Cuba and Venezuela exercized 
rights-of-reply to the United States. 
Wolff