ISSUE BRIEF Form Over FuncDon? Reviewing the UN Global Counterterrorism Strategy - Form Over Function. Reviewing the UN ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ISSUE BRIEF
Form Over Func on?
Reviewing the UN Global Counterterrorism Strategy
Naureen Chowdhury Fink
February 2023
KEY FINDINGS
• A er 9/11, the UN had to iden fy its
• The forthcoming review of the UN Global
comparative advantages amidst interna onal
Counterterrorism Strategy (GCTS) provides
counterterrorism e orts. Coming on 20
an important opportunity to assess its
years of the Global Strategy, it is
impacts and revisit the process and
important to reassess the UN’s role and
purpose of the reviews, and also consider
compara ve advantages in the current
how the GCTS review contributes to
context, and ensure that its future
broader strategic priorities for the
counterterrorism e orts are responsive to
organization.
contemporary dynamics and needs.
• The consensus which underpins the
• Recommenda ons: Request a report in
Global Strategy is key to making it a
2025 from the Secretary-General on the UN’s
valuable norma ve tool; it is a rare
role in countering terrorism and proposals for
collective statement from the world body that
rationalizing the institutional architecture,
outlines an approach to counterterrorism
followed by an implementation plan in 2026
balancing security, human rights, and a focus
on the 20th anniversary of the GCTS; request
on structural conditions.
UNOCT to conduct an impact assessment of
the GCTS; review current and existing UN
• Seven reviews have resulted in a lengthy
policy tools to address emerging threats;
and repetitive document and shaped an
consider expanding the review period to four
extensive array of activity by states and UN
years, institute an ad-hoc working group or a
entities. Its length however compromises its
Group of Friends to discuss relevant issues in
value as a strategic communications tool,
the interim; revitalize the Global Compact to
and there is a need for a comprehensive
ensure its working methods and deliverables
assessment about the impacts of the Global
are aligned with the needs and resources of
Strategy.
the UN.
Naureen Chowdhury Fink is Execu ve Director of The Soufan Center. She has previously worked at think-tanks, the UN Counter-
Terrorism Execu ve Directorate, UN Women, and the UK Mission to the UN, where was Senior Policy Adviser on
counterterrorism and (Al-Qaida/ISIL) sanc ons.
1
ft
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
INTRODUCTION since the ini al adop on,4 which takes the
form of a resolu on capturing all the
content of the review discussions.5 Though
In 2006, UN Member States did something
largely re ec ve of the strategy adopted by
unusual. Despite being unable to agree on a
the European Union in 2005, which was
universal de ni on of terrorism, and having
itself re ec ve of the CONTEST Strategy
fought over whether terrorism truly had
adopted by the United Kingdom in 2003,
“root causes” or if that rhetoric was a
the Strategy’s adoption by a UN membership
perceived jus ca on for terrorism, they
constituted of diverse states with vastly
managed to agree upon an overarching
different notions of counterterrorism was no
“global counterterrorism strategy” (GCTS).
mean feat.
The Strategy is based on four pillars
outlining measures to prevent and combat
However, today the UN faces a dis nctly
terrorism for states and for the wider UN system,
di erent global security landscape from
including entities based at Headquarters (in
when it rst addressed the threat posed by
New York and Vienna) and the eld.
al-Qaida (and subsequently, Islamic State /
Adopted by consensus1 in the General
Da’esh) over two decades ago. The terrorist
Assembly, the GCTS was notable not
threat is now more di use and diverse, no
necessarily for its cons tuent elements, but
longer centered on two speci c groups.
because it established a comprehensive
More interna onal actors and organiza ons
approach that combined preven on,
are involved in counterterrorism e orts,
capacity building, and the integra on of
m o re l e g i s l a o n a n d i nte r n a o n a l
human rights as a fundamental component
frameworks are in place, and more focus is
of counterterrorism measures (pillars 1, 3,
placed on building knowledge and
and 4 respec vely; pillar 2 outlined
capaci es to counter terrorism.
measures more tradi onally associated with
countering terrorism).2
That the threat is constantly evolving is not
new, but states have sought to con nually
A biennial review by Member States built
ensure that the reviews of the GCTS re ect
into the strategy3 has taken place regularly
1 Consensus adop on indicates that, even if not unanimous, no member state voiced formal disagreement with the resolu on, though some
states have disassociated themselves from a speci c paragraph or two during the review processes.
2United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 60/288, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/RES/60/288, (20 September
2006), available from h ps://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?
FinalSymbol=A%2FRES%2F60%2F288&Language=E&DeviceType=Desktop&LangRequested=False.
3For more detailed analyses on the review processes in 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020/21, and earlier comprehensive reviews of the UN’s
counterterrorism work, see the “Blue Sky” reports produced by the Global Center on Coopera ve Security, with the most recent report
accessible at: h ps://www.globalcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/GCCS-Blue-Sky-V-2020.pdf.
4GCTS reviews have taken place in 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018 and 2021; the 2020 review was postponed for a year owing to
extraordinary circumstances brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic.
5 United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 62/272, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/RES/62/272, (15 September
2008); United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 64/297, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/RES/64/297 (13 October
2010); United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 66/282, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Review, A/RES/66/282 (12
July 2012); United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 68/276, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Review, A/RES/68/276
(24 June 2014); United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 70/291, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Review, A/RES/
70/291 (19 July 2017); General Assembly resolu on 72/284, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Review, A/RES/72/284 (2 July
2018); United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 75/291, The United Na ons Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy: seventh review, A/RES/
75/291 (2 July 2021).
2
ff
ti
ti
ti
fl
fi
fl
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
fi
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tiFigure 1: GCTS review process (approxima on)
current priori es. With states eager to mul ple and uid ideologies; and the role of
reference emerging threats and challenges some private military contractors in
and to ensure a balanced, comprehensive perpetra ng acts that can be considered
approach within the parameters set by the war crimes or terrorism. It is important to
GCTS itself, the resolu on has grown consider if and how these changes might be
consistently longer. The rst review o ered re ected in the review process, and to what
14 opera onal paragraphs; the seventh – end, especially balanced against the
and most recent – review contains 119, poten al value of a more streamlined
raising ques ons about its usability either document.
for norma ve or opera onal purposes (see
also gure 2 below). Moreover, the environments in which many
UN ac vi es – related to development,
Ensuring that the reviews of the GCTS gender equality, or peacekeeping, for
emphasize approaches that are more example – are increasingly a ected by the
inclusive of human rights, gender, and civil ac ons of designated terrorist groups. It is
society engagement has meant that many therefore important to go beyond the GCTS
of those paragraphs have been hard fought, review text and consider if, where, and how
and represent an important commitment on the UN can respond to these phenomena in
behalf of the interna onal community. As the rst place, and whether they can be
such, they have been regarded as important e ec vely addressed through the GCTS
addi ons by many states. However, the review process at all.
terrorist threat is constantly evolving. Since
the last review, there have been a number As the GCTS review resolu on con nues to
of developments shaping the counterterrorism expand in scope at a me when states also
discourse, including the emergence of an must confront extraordinary circumstances
increasingly transna onal violent far-right like the pandemic, skyrocke ng global
movement; online hate, disinforma on, and humanitarian needs, and con ict mi ga on
radicaliza on, with a focus on youth; the assistance (par cularly interstate wars that
phenomenon of self-directed individual risk nuclear confronta on), it is me to
perpetrators who may be mo vated by consider whether the current form and
3
ff
fl
ti
ti
ti
fi
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
fl
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
ticontent of the review process s ll follow the organiza on had a compara ve advantage
func on for which it was intended. In in addressing this emerging threat. They
par cular, we must ask ourselves: Does it determined that “the Organiza on’s
serve as a collec ve statement of the world ac vi es must be part of a tripar te
body on terrorism? Does it inform the work strategy suppor ng global e orts to 1)
of counterterrorism prac oners? Does it dissuade disa ected groups from embracing
serve as a priori za on exercise for terrorism; 2) deny groups or individuals the
governments and UN en es? As one civil means to carry out terrorist acts; 3) sustain
society expert recently noted, “if it says broad-based interna onal coopera on in
everything, it says nothing.” the struggle against terrorism.” In all cases,
they determined that “the ght against
This Issue Brief will consider the evolu on terrorism must be respec ul of
of the GCTS reviews and address four key interna onal human rights obliga ons.”6
ques ons to guide nego ators and experts
as the 2023 review gets underway.
In 2005, four years a er the Security
• What is the added value of the Strategy Council rst adopted Resolu on 1373
itself and the review process? (2001), which became the centerpiece of its
• What is the purpose of the GCTS review, response, then-UN Secretary-General Ko
and does it con nue to meet that Annan outlined a broader role for the
objec ve in its current form? United Na ons largely in line with the
• How does the GCTS review intersect with previous determina on. It could dissuade
wider UN priori es and goals? disa ected groups from choosing terrorism
• What gaps exist, are they best addressed as a tac c to achieve their goals; deny
in a GCTS review, and if so, how? terrorists the means to carry out their
a acks; deter states from suppor ng
terrorists; develop state capacity to prevent
WHAT IS THE KEY ADDED VALUE OF THE terrorism; and defend human rights in the
STRATEGY AND THE REVIEW PROCESS? struggle against terrorism. These “5D’s”
formed the basis of a comprehensive UN
approach to this emerging threat to
Crea ng a common message interna onal peace and security.7 The 5D’s
Soon a er the a acks of September 11, de ned counterterrorism not only in
2001, and amidst a call for greater security and military terms, but also
interna onal coopera on to counter highlighted the importance of addressing
terrorism among states and interna onal the “condi ons conducive to terrorism” and
organiza ons, senior UN experts and upholding human rights, ensuring that the
o cials considered whether and where the Strategy re ected all three core pillars of
6United Na ons General Assembly & Security Council, Iden cal le ers dated 1 August 2002 from the Secretary-General addressed to the
President of the General Assembly and President of the Security Council, A/57/273-S/2002/875 (6 August 2002), available from
h ps://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/512/97/IMG/N0251297.pdf?OpenElement.
7 “Ko Annan’s keynote address to the closing plenary of the Interna onal Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security,” (United Na ons
Secretary-General, 10 March 2005), h ps://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2005-03-10/ko -annan’s-keynote-address-closing-plenary-
interna onal-summit.
4
tt
tt
ffi
ti
fi
fi
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ft
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
fl
ff
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ft
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ff
ti
ti
tf
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
tt
ti
fi
tithe UN’s wider work – peace and security, be able to deliver a common message in the
development, and human rights. As senior end.
UN experts and o cials noted as early as
2002, “Security cannot be achieved by
sacri cing human rights.”8 Engaging the UN system
The GCTS review resolu ons also shape the
ac vi es of UN funds, agencies, and
Moreover, as states began to adopt or programs, including the UN O ce on Drugs
update their own counterterrorism and Crime (UNODC), UN Development
measures and strategies in alignment with Program (UNDP), and UN Women, for
their obliga ons under relevant Security example. The comprehensive approach of
Council resolu ons already in place,9 the the resolutions offered UN entities ways of
adop on of the Global Counter-Terrorism interacting and contributing to implemen ng
Strategy in 2006 offered an important strategic the strategy in line with their own
communications tool:10 a comprehensive mandates, which may not be directly
reference framework agreed upon by all related to security issues. Many en es
Member States as well as a common lexicon for remained wary of engaging in UN
a new area of work for the world body. One counterterrorism e orts, or even to be
senior counterterrorism o cial from Europe perceived as doing so, for fear of having
recently called it the “keystone of the their work securi zed or poli cized
mul lateral approach to counterterrorism,” (par cularly in sensi ve contexts or con ict
no ng it has both poli cal and prac cal zones), but the GCTS and its emphasis on
impacts, and that “as an interna onal “pillar 1” preven on-related ac vi es
instrument adopted by consensus, it retains o ered an inroad to work on these issues
its universality,” shaping ac vi es of the UN through their par cular areas of work –
system and member states. Moreover, as such as development, human rights, gender,
some diplomats and experts recently and legal and criminal jus ce support.
observed, the review process creates the
openings for debate and dialogue needed to Subsequent emphasis on “preven ng
violent extremism,” encapsulated in a Plan
8United Na ons General Assembly & Security Council, Iden cal le ers dated 1 August 2002 from the Secretary-General addressed to the
President of the General Assembly and President of the Security Council, A/57/273-S/2002/875 (6 August 2002), available from
h ps://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/512/97/IMG/N0251297.pdf?OpenElement.
9 Following the bombings of US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam in 1996, the UN established the sanc ons regime (pursuant to
resolu on 1267) with a focus on al-Qaida and the Taliban. Subsequently the Taliban was removed from this list and placed on a dedicated
sanc ons list; and the group Islamic State/Da’esh, as well as numerous a liates of the groups, were added to the list. For more, read: Howard
Wachtel, “Assessing the U lity of the UN’s Terrorism Sanc ons Regime 20 Years a er 9/11,” Securing the Future Ini a ve, 5 August 2022, h p://
s -ct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Wachtel_Final-Design.pdf; Edmund Fi on-Brown, “The UN Al-Qaida and ISIL (Da’esh) Sanc ons Regime
Impacts and Implica ons,” The Soufan Center, January 2023, h ps://thesoufancenter.org/research/the-un-al-qaida-and-isil-daesh-sanc ons-
regime-impacts-and-implica ons/. Resolu on 1373 was adopted just days a er the a acks of September 11, 2001 (Eric Rosand, “The Security
Council as ‘Global Legislator’: Ultra Vires or Ultra Innova ve?” Fordham Interna onal Law Journal 28, no. 542 (2004), h ps://
ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol28/iss3/2. A er the “7/7” bombings in London and the a ack in Beslan in 2004, the Security Council adopted a
resolu on on comba ng incitement to terrorism, which also a rmed the importance of protec ng human rights and civil liber es. See: United
Na ons Security Council resolu on 1624, S/RES/1624 (14 September 2005), available from h p://unscr.com/en/resolu ons/doc/1624.
10Naureen Chowdhury Fink and Jack Barclay, Mastering the Narra ve – Counterterrorism Strategic Communica on and the United Na ons,
Center on Global Counterterrorism Coopera on, 2013, h ps://globalcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Feb2013_CT_StratComm.pdf.
5
fi
tt
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ft
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ffi
tt
tt
ti
ffi
ft
tt
ti
ft
tt
tt
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ttof Ac on put forward by former Secretary- developed and implemented, they are
General Ban Ki-Moon,11 o ered important re ec ve of lessons learned and exper se
openings for wider engagement and in other elds, including development,
programming. This has not always resulted human rights, con ict preven on, gender
in even engagement across the UN system, equality, as well as monitoring and
with a number of en es highligh ng a lack evalua on, par cularly in sensi ve
of resources and capaci es to meaningfully contexts.15 As most counterterrorism
engage with the expansive mul lateral CT coopera on is conducted on a bilateral or
architecture.12 regional basis between states, it is
par cularly important to ensure that the UN
At the same me, there have been concerns narra ve can re ect the values and
among many UN en es and civil society principles of the organiza on, while also
groups that expanding the counterterrorism retaining some in uence and relevance to
agenda13 risks securitizing development and those developing legal and opera onal
human rights work,14 and also risks measures in real- me.
instrumentalizing many frontline organiza ons
whose credibility might be compromised
through associa on with security actors. Fostering consensus
Addi onally, as one diplomat recently A key value added by the GCTS was its
noted, it could also mean the work of civil adop on by consensus, something that has
society organiza ons could come under been rea rmed through the adop on of
increasing scru ny (and penal es) by the seven review resolu ons by consensus. That
security sector in states given the complements the value of a comprehensive
associa on with counterterrorism. framework for the diverse and decentralized
UN system and its Member States. Given
Others have seen these as opportuni es not that this consensus has o en required more
necessarily to transform all exis ng UN compromises than if the document were
work into counterterrorism, but to ensure put to a vote, some have ques oned
that where CT measures are being whether it is worth seeking what some feel
11“Plan of Ac on to Prevent Violent Extremism,” (United Na ons O ce of Counterterrorism), h ps://www.un.org/counterterrorism/plan-of-
ac on-to-prevent-violent-extremism.
12See for example: “Interview with UN Special Rapporteur Fionnuala Ní Aoláin”, Columbia Journal of Transna onal Law, 28 November, 2020,
h ps://www.jtl.columbia.edu/bulle n-blog/interview-with-un-special-rapporteur- onnuala.
13 See for example: Fiona de Londras, The Prac ce and Problems of Trans-na onal Counter-Terrorism. Cambridge University Press, 19 January
2022. Doi:10.1017/9781139137010; David McKeever and h ps://www.undp.org/sites/g/ les/zskgke326/ les/publica ons/
Discussion%20Paper%20-%20Preven ng%20Violent%20Extremism%20by%20Promo ng%20Inclusive%20%20Development.pdf Fiona de
Londras, The Prac ce and Problems of Transna onal Counter-Terrorism, Journal of Con ict and Security Law 27, no. 3 (2002): 485-492, h ps://
doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krac022
14“A Fourth Pillar for the United Na ons? The Rise of Counter-Terrorism,” Saferworld, June 2020, h ps://www.saferworld. org.uk/resources/
publica ons/1256-a-fourth-pillar-for-the-united-na ons-the-rise-of-counter-terrorism; Melissa Lefas, Junko Nozawa, Eelco Kessels, “Blue Sky V:
An Independent Analysis of UN Counterterrorism E orts,” Global Center on Coopera ve Security, November 2020, h ps://
www.globalcenter.org/resource/blue-sky-v-an-independent-analysis-of-un-counterterrorism-e orts/.
15Naureen Chowdhury Fink and Alison Davidian, “Complementarity or Convergence? Women, Peace and Security and Counterterrorism,”
Oxford Handbook of Gender and Con ict (2018): 157-170; United Na ons Development Programme, Preven ng Violent Extremism Through
Promo ng Inclusive Development, Tolerance and Respect for Diversity (New York: United Na ons: 2016), available from
h ps://www.undp.org/sites/g/ les/zskgke326/ les/publica ons/Discussion%20Paper%20-
%20Preven ng%20Violent%20Extremism%20by%20Promo ng%20Inclusive%20%20Development.pdf.
6
tt
tt
ti
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
fl
fl
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ft
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
fl
fi
ti
ff
tt
tt
fi
ti
ti
tt
ti
ttFigure 2: Increases in GCTS Review resolu on length (OP’s)
is the lowest common denominator among The value of this consensus is not
states, and whether a vote would not allow universally accepted, however. Some
for more forceful change and statements. experts have noted that consensus comes at
the cost of accep ng unwelcome addi ons
However, consensus adop on sends an or formula ons proposed by states, and
important poli cal message to member some diplomats have favored breaking
states and civil society and reinforces UN consensus and putting the review resolu ons
norms, par cularly as the consensus has to a vote in order to preserve certain
held for every review to date. Given that the priori es in the text. Moreover, as some
review is a diploma c process and results in diplomats have noted, the absence of a
a document aimed largely at shaping single, all-encompassing, globally agreed
na onal and interna onal policies, losing de ni on of terrorism (in the UN GA’s Sixth
the consensus – even if the vote is Commi ee on legal issues) is a stark and not
perceived as a strong win by a group of insigni cant contrast to the consensus
states – could diminish the poli cal value achieved in the GCTS. To some, this
added. contradic on risks undercu ng the value of
the consensus. Despite the lack of a
universally agreed de ni on of terrorism,
there are however numerous interna onal
7
ti
fi
ti
ti
fi
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
tti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
titrea es that de ne several acts of shape the counterterrorism discourse at the
terrorism, re ected also in UN Security United Na ons, since, they do not have the
Council Resolu on 1566 (2004). Numerous opportuni es to adopt binding measures
binding Security Council resolu ons have o ered to Security Council members.
rea rmed that all counterterrorism Moreover, many states believe that, in light
measures must comply with interna onal of its universal membership, the General
law, including human rights, humanitarian, Assembly, not the Security Council, should
and refugee law. be tasked with se ng norms. Diplomats
have o en shared disquiet at the
dispropor onate in uence that the Council,
Against the background of the U.S.-led with its limited membership and ve
“Global War on Terror,” achieving consensus permanent, veto-wielding members, wields
on a UN framework that rea rmed the in shaping the CT agenda. This has even at
purposes and principles of the Charter and mes made nego ators reluctant to accept
highlighted the importance of development, language li ed directly from Security
con ict preven on, peacebuilding, and Council resolu ons into the GCTS review,
human rights aspects was seen by many as notwithstanding the binding nature of some
an important countervailing narra ve. of Council resolu on clauses.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE GCTS However, the length and scope of the
REVIEW, AND DOES IT CONTINUE TO MEET current itera on of the resolu on raises
THAT OBJECTIVE? ques ons about the func onality and
audience of the GCTS review at this stage.
The GCTS review is intended to ensure that Many experts report that the all-
the world body’s overarching framework encompassing, unwieldy nature of the
re ects contemporary dynamics and needs, document risks rendering it unusable for
and rea rm the UN’s role in addressing policymakers or prac oners in capitals
them. The review process creates where counterterrorism measures are
opportuni es for states and stakeholders – developed.
including civil society organiza ons,
interna onal partner organiza ons, and Moreover, the GCTS is not the only pla orm
experts – to ensure that the discourse on for UN Member States to debate the issue
counterterrorism at the UN reflects emerging of terrorism; terrorism is regularly debated
threats and trends, is up-to-date regarding in the GA’s sixth commi ee on legal issues,
the drivers of terrorism and responses to it, and the issue of human rights and
and includes a wider array of specialist counterterrorism is debated in the GA’s
agencies and experts. third commi ee in the Fall. States are also
free to propose their own resolu ons on
For some states in the General Assembly, the issue, as Afghanistan and Spain did on
the GCTS review is the only opportunity to the issue of vic ms of terrorism, for
share their na onal security priori es or example.16 The Security Council has also
16United Na ons General Assembly resolu on 73/305, A/RES/73/305 (2 July 2019), available from h ps://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?
FinalSymbol=A%2FRES%2F60%2F288&Language=E&DeviceType=Desktop&LangRequested=False, A/RES/73/305.
8
ti
ff
fl
ffi
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ft
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ft
ti
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
fi
tti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tf
fi
ttbeen proac ve in addressing the threats Seven GCTS reviews have been completed.
posed by interna onal terrorism since 1996, UN counterterrorism norms have been
when it was rst prompted to sanc on al- established by numerous Security Council
Qaida by the East Africa bombings. Since and General Assembly resolu on. However,
the adop on of Security Council Resolu on given the nature of contemporary threats –
1373 in the wake of 9/11, the Council has which include groups and individuals
issued nearly 50 resolutions relevant to mo vated by a variety (and some mes
counterterrorism, including numerous binding blend) of ideologies,19 as well as emerging
obliga ons for states to amend their technologies including 3D prin ng,
domes c approaches.17 Indeed, there have unmanned aerial systems (drones) and
been many calls for the Security Council to methods for communica ons, nancing,
adopt fewer resolu ons and instead focus and opera ons – it is important to consider
on implemen ng the exis ng ones.18 the purpose for which the GCTS was
adopted and whether the current itera on
In addi on to resolu ons, there is an of the review process can meaningfully
extensive program of work and ac vi es address these challenges, par cularly given
maintained by the Security Council Counter- the prolifera on of ins tu onal actors and
Terrorism Commi ee (CTC) and the ‘1267’ specialized bodies like the Interna onal Civil
Al-Qaida and Da’esh/ISIL Commi ee and Avia on Organiza on (ICAO), the Financial
their expert bodies, the Counter-Terrorism Ac on Task Force, or Interpol, for example,
Execu ve Directorate (CTED) and the that are dealing with di erent elements of
Monitoring Team, respec vely. S ll, this counterterrorism.
only represents a snapshot of some of the
ac vity undertaken by bodies at one HOW DOES THE GCTS REVIEW INTERSECT
par cular UN headquarters in New York. WITH WIDER UN PRIORITIES AND GOALS?
Other en es undertake their own
counterterrorism-related ac vi es and Evolu ons in interna onal approaches and
policymaking processes at UN o ces in priori es in rela on to CT have been
Geneva and Vienna; in regional and re ected in the GCTS review nego a ons,
subregional bodies like the European Union, as they have in Security Council resolu ons.
the African Union, the Organiza on for Terrorist a acks in London and Beslan (in
Security Coopera on in Europe; and in July and September 2004 respec vely)
intergovernmental bodies like the Global highlighted the importance of comba ng
Counter-Terrorism Forum. incitement; the emphasis on PVE brought
greater focus on structural condi ons,
17Eric Rosand, Alistair Millar, Naureen Chowdhury Fink, Counterterrorism and the United Na ons Security Council Since 9/11: Moving Beyond
the 2001 Paradigm, Securing the Future Ini a ve, September 2022, available at: h ps://s -ct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/SFI-
Report_Full.pdf.
18David McKeever, “Revisi ng Security Council ac on on counterterrorism: New threats; (a lot of) new law; same old problems?” Leiden Journal
of Interna onal Law 34(2) (2004): 441-470, available at: h ps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-interna onal-law/ar cle/
abs/revisi ng-security-council-ac on-on-terrorism-new-threats-a-lot-of-new-law-same-old-problems/3F6365BDA707C7B3261FEC23C20CF55B.
19“IntelBrief: The Counterterrorism Challenge of ‘Salad Bar’ Ideologies’,” The Soufan Center, 29 March 2021, h ps://thesoufancenter.org/
intelbrief-2021-march-29/.
9
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
tt
ffi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
fi
ti
tt
ti
tidevelopment approaches, and gender the staff more predictability and sustainability
equality work, highligh ng the importance for its initiatives and programming. While it
of UNDP and UN Women, for example. The remains likely in the near future that there will
unprecedented ou low of foreign terrorist continue to be signi cant extra-budgetary
ghters to con ict zones in Iraq and Syria donations by states for specific programming
brought greater a en on to issues like or offices, it is critical for both the
border management, avia on security, and beneficiaries as well as the ability to monitor
law enforcement, highligh ng the work of and evaluate the impact of the ac vity that
ICAO and Interpol and bringing more there be a viable sustainability plan for the
en es into the UN’s counterterrorism o ce. Moreover, this regulariza on can
work. However, it remains unclear if and help ensure greater integra on within the
how the GCTS review process contributes to UN system.
the wider UN work on peace and security,
human rights, and development. Global Compact: With 45 en es and eight
working groups, the Global Compact
The evolu on of the original Counter- presents a valuable opportunity to
Terrorism Implementa on Task Force (CTITF) exchange informa on and updates. CTED
from an informal task force of UN bodies for example has shared approximately 25
occasionally cooperating on counterterrorism con den al visit reports (with permission of
issues into the 40+ en es and more visited states) through the pla orm, a
regularized structure that make up the UN process that was unthinkable in the early
Global Coordina on Compact to Counter years of the process. However, reports from
Terrorism (Global Compact),20 and of the members of the group suggest there are
CTITF O ce, which featured only a handful ongoing challenges in ge ng informa on in
of people suppor ng the task force, into the a mely and impac ul manner, and that
UN O ce on Counter Terrorism (UNOCT), opportuni es to provide construc ve
headed by an Under-Secretary-General with feedback remain opaque at mes. It would
closer to 200 sta and millions of dollars of be useful to assess the Compact and
programming (funded by largely extra- d e t e r m i n e a w ay fo r w a rd t h a t i s
budgetary, or voluntary, resources from commensurate with the level of ac vity and
states outside the regular UN budget), investment demanded by states and UN
speaks to greater ins tu onaliza on within en es, o en re ected in GCTS review
the UN system. Yet several challenges process.
remain:
The meager references to terrorism in the
Resources: Ins tu onalizing a core UNOCT Secretary-General’s strategic planning policy
team within the UN’s regular budget, rather report, Our Common Agenda,21 calls into
than leaving the office almost wholly question the degree to which counterterrorism
dependent on voluntary contributions, offers issues have been meaningfully integrated into
20“UN Global Counter-Terrorism Coordina on Compact,” (United Na ons O ce of Counterterrorism), h ps://www.un.org/counterterrorism/
global-ct-compact.
United Na ons, Our Common Agenda – Report of the Secretary-General, (New York: United Na ons, 2021), available from h ps://
21
www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/assets/pdf/Common_Agenda_Report_English.pdf.
10
fi
ffi
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ffi
ffi
ti
ti
ft
ti
ti
ti
fl
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
tf
tt
tf
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
tti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tf
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
tt
ttthe wider UN system and its strategic As many states shi their priori es from
planning. Nonetheless, a number of the counterterrorism to interstate con ict; great
report’s recommenda ons (promo ng power compe on; and crises rela ng to
peace and preven ng con icts, adhering to climate, energy, and migra on, for example,
interna onal law and ensuring jus ce, ques ons remain about the role and u lity
improving digital cooperation, and working that the UN serves in di erent contexts.
with youth) have direct bearing on terrorism Undeniably, the organiza on provides much
and counterterrorism issues (i.e. targeting cri cal assistance in the eld and is an
young people through disinformation and important forum for states to engage in
radicalization materials online, manipula ng dialogue and diplomacy. However, given the
grievances rela ng to poor governance and increased a en on by states to inter-state
security, and exploi ng con ict se ngs to wars, the climate crises, more limited
create bases of opera ons and recruit nancial ows, the fallout of the global
support). p a n d e m i c , a n d n u m e ro u s re g i o n a l
sociopoli cal challenges, how does – or can
In 2002, then-Secretary-General Annan’s – the GCTS review contribute to the UN’s
Policy Working Group on Terrorism had wider work on these issues? Moreover,
already found that the UN’s compara ve without being able to ins tute any
advantages in comba ng terrorism lay in measures for accountability, how can
the elds of preven ng and mi ga ng member states ensure that the GCTS and its
con ict, addressing cri cal development reviews are not misused by states seeking
and humanitarian needs, and reducing the to jus fy repressive ac ons in the name of
appeal of terrorism through informa on. counterterrorism?24
The development of Secretary-General
Guterres’ forthcoming New Agenda for Prior to the next review process an cipated
Peace22 provides a valuable opportunity to in 2025, Member States could rst
revisit the questions of how the UN might best commission an assessment of the impact of
contribute to international counterterrorism the GCTS. They could also direct the UN
efforts in the current context, where many system to focus on implemen ng exis ng
UN ac vi es and missions are situated in measures, and develop a more regular
areas where designated terrorist groups are forum for states to share feedback and
ac ve, and where predatory governments inputs regarding counterterrorism that
con nue to priori ze security over human might replace the GCTS (one op on might
rights, despite evidence that such viola ons be a Group of Friends, or an ad hoc Working
con nue to fuel grievances and spur Group). The adoption by consensus of the
support for violent extremism.23 GCTS carries an implicit obligation for states
22 “New Agenda for Peace,” (United Na ons Department of Poli cal and Peacebuilding A airs), h ps://dppa.un.org/en/new-agenda-for-peace.
23United Na ons Development Programme, Journey to Extremism in Africa: Pathways to Recruitment and Disengagement (2023), available from
h ps://www.undp.org/publica ons/journey-extremism-africa-pathways-recruitment-and-disengagement; United Na ons Development
Programme, Journey to Extremism in Africa: Drivers, Incen ves and the Tipping Point for Recruitment, (New York: 2017) available from h ps://
journey-to-extremism.undp.org/v1/en/reports; see also: Naureen Chowdhury Fink and Arthur Boutellis, “Between a Rock and a Hard Place:
Counterterrorism and Peacekeeping in the Sahel,” Interna onal Peace Ins tute Global Observatory, 20 July 2021, h ps://
theglobalobservatory.org/2021/07/between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place-counterterrorism-and-peacekeeping-in-the-sahel/.
Akshaya Kumar, “Chinese Diplomats Try Using UN as Shield for Xinjiang Crimes,” Human Rights Watch, 1 November 2020, h ps://
24
www.hrw.org/ news/2020/11/01/chinese-diplomats-try-using-un-shield-xinjiang-crimes.
11
fi
tt
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ft
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ff
fi
fl
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
tti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
tt
tt
ti
tt
ttand the UN to account for its implementation fragile consensus achieved, while it is hard
and impact, as several diplomats recently to imagine what addi onal issues may be
noted. meaningfully addressed.
ADDRESSING GAPS IN THE UN CT One area where the GCTS could be valuable
FRAMEWORK THROUGH THE GCTS REVIEW is in regards to the challenge facing peace
opera ons in contexts involving designated
The expansion of the GCTS review terrorist groups. It will be important for the
resolu on over the years suggests most UN to develop a guidance or protocols for
themes related to counterterrorism have its sta and en es in these situa ons,
already been broadly covered. In 2016, especially as the UN and its members re ect
important emphasis was placed for the rst on how to address the burgeoning terrorist
me on preven on, human rights, gender, threat in regions like the Sahel or Lake Chad
and engagement with civil society, among Basin, or how to navigate the complexi es
others, and that emphasis has remained in of sanc ons and counterterrorism measures
place for the two following reviews. Over in Afghanistan.
the past 20 years, some progress has been
made in crea ng more transparent and S ll, it is not clear that these issues can be
inclusive processes. More civil society addressed through the GCTS review
briefers are invited to UN Security Council process. For example, in December 2022,
counterterrorism meetings,25 more emphasis the UN Security Council adopted a
has been placed on engaging with civil milestone humanitarian “carveout” across
society in CTED’s assessments and all UN sanc ons, including the 1267
analyses,26 and more opportuni es have counterterrorism regime. Though the issue
been created for civil society to provide has been debated in the context of the GCTS
inputs and feedback into UN CT processes review, and proved deeply conten ous in the
and mee ngs. past, it was the adop on of a binding
Council resolu on that was able to address
However, many organiza ons s ll believe – at least in large part – the concerns of civil
this progress has not created su cient society actors about the negative impacts of
openings and opportunity for systema zed counterterrorism measures on humanitarian
and meaningful access to the UN system on action.27
counterterrorism, par cularly during the
GCTS review process. Reopening issues for The GCTS review process, and the regular
debate risks jeopardizing the some mes report of the Secretary-General that
25United Na ons Human Rights O ce of the High Commissioner, “Civil Society Workshop Document,” 2022, h ps://www.ohchr.org/sites/
default/ les/2022-05/CIVIL-SOCIETY-OUTCOME-DOCUMENT-MALAGA-2022-1-1.pdf; United Na ons O ce of Counterterrorism, “2022 UNOCT
Malaga Conference,” 2022, h ps://www.un.org/counterterrorism/2022-UNOCT-Malaga-Conference.
United Na ons Security Council resolu on 2617, S/RES/2617 (30 December 2021), available from h ps://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?
26
OpenAgent&DS=S/RES/2617(2021)&Lang=E.
27Naureen Chowdhury Fink and Agathe Sarfa , “Milestone in the Security Council: What the New Humanitarian ‘Carve-Out’ Means for UN
Sanc on Regimes,” IPI Global Observatory, 16 December 2022, h ps://theglobalobservatory.org/2022/12/new-humanitarian-carve-out-un-
sanc ons-regimes/; Agathe Sarfa , An Un nished Agenda: Carving Out Space for Humanitarian Ac on in the UN Security Council’s
Counterterrorism Resolu ons and Related Sanc ons (New York: Interna onal Peace Ins tute, March 2022), h ps://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/
uploads/2022/03/Humanitarian- Ac on-in-UN-Sanc ons-Regimes-PDF.pdf.
12
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ffi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ti
ti
fl
fi
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ffi
tt
ttprecedes review nego a ons, provides an Beyond the formalized processes for
important opportunity to consider gaps in delibera ng on terrorism in the General
the UN ins tu onal architecture and the Assembly or Security Council, there are
substan ve focus of its bodies, as indicated numerous policy processes – resolu ons,
by paragraph 86 of the most recent GCTS ac vi es, events – that, while not directly
review, for example, which shapes states’ focused on the issue of counterterrorism,
expecta ons of the regular Secretary- include it among a host of considera ons.
General’s report on implementa on of the Re s o l u o n s o n re g i o n a l i s s u e s o r
GCTS (usually presented in the rst quarter organizations, for example, might have a
of the year).28 counterterrorism component; counterterrorism
priorities might intersect with other legal and
Previous reviews have resulted in directives thematic considera ons (for example, if
that shaped the work of the CTITF and its there are implica ons for sanc ons
successor organization, the UNOCT. Although compliance). These also require the
reconciling or consolida ng bodies like a en on of diplomats and experts, as well
CTED, the Monitoring Team, and the as resources in capitals, and are o en
Terrorism Preven on Branch of UNODC has presented on short and unexpected
long been deemed poli cally unrealis c, the melines.
viability and sustainability of the current
arrangement should come into ques on Such fragmenta on risks diver ng expert
amid increased nancial constraints and a en on and stretching diploma c
other global crises. Recommenda ons to capaci es; at best they may be neglected,
consolidate Security Council bodies like but at worst, they may be misused or
CTED and the Monitoring Team, at the very instrumentalized. Given that more than 20
least, have already been oated.29 States years have passed since the a acks of
could however use the 2023 review process September 11, 2001 catalyzed the
to direct the SG to focus on a more strategic prolifera on of many of these measures and
approach to the next report, o ering an created an “excep onalized” approach to
assessment of the UN’s impact to date counterterrorism,30 the Secretary-General
(beyond the GCTS) and o ering proposals to should consider a fresh posture for the
ra onalize the mul lateral architecture. world body that re ects contemporary
Nonetheless, customary tensions between dynamics and ins tu onal capaci es.
the GA and the UNSC will likely make any
dras c changes unlikely.
28“Calls upon the Secretary-General to assess the need to further enhance the integra on of the rule of law, human rights and gender, as cross-
cu ng elements of the Strategy, in the counter-terrorism e orts of the United Na ons system in order to strengthen their e ec veness,
including the need for internal advisory or monitoring and evalua on capacity in this regard, and to report on his assessment as part of the
report foreseen in paragraph 118 of the present resolu on for considera on by Member States;” This is linked also to paragraph 118, which
“requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its seventy-seventh session, no later than February 2023, a report on
progress made in the implementa on of the Strategy, containing sugges ons for its implementa on by the United Na ons system, as well as on
progress made in the implementa on of the present resolu on.”
29Eric Rosand, Alistair Millar, Naureen Chowdhury Fink, Counterterrorism and the United Na ons Security Council Since 9/11: Moving Beyond
the 2001 Paradigm.
30Eric Rosand, Alistair Millar, Naureen Chowdhury Fink, Counterterrorism and the United Na ons Security Council Since 9/11: Moving Beyond
the 2001 Paradigm.
13
ti
tt
tt
tti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
fl
fi
ti
ti
ti
ff
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
ti
ft
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
tiEarly on, senior UN experts recommended the format, melines, and process of the
that “measures should be taken to ensure GCTS review. Expanding the inter-review
that mandates of peacekeeping opera ons period from two to four years would allow
are sensi ve to terrorism-related issues, the UN system to focus on implementa on,
providing, for instance, that civilian police ra onalize the investment of me and
o cers receive appropriate training on exper se required by diplomats, and
measures to iden fy terrorist groups.”31 Yet alterna ve pla orms such as a poten al
the GCTS reviews, despite their expanded Group of Friends or ad-hoc Working Group
length and scope, have not meaningfully could allow states to con nue deba ng
grappled with how counterterrorism can cri cal issues as deemed necessary.
(and cannot) intersect with peace operations
and special political missions, a core area of RECOMMENDATIONS
the UN’s peace and security work. Setting
out the 2023 priorities for the General • Request Secretary-General’s 2025 Strategic
Assembly,32 Secretary-General Guterres report on UN counterterrorism efforts and
noted the need for a new generation of peace architecture, with a 2026 implementation
enforcement missions and counterterrorist proposal report: Member States should
operations; even if delibera ons cannot use the 2023 GCTS review to ask the UN
determine whether or not UN peace Secretary-General to produce a strategic
opera ons can undertake counterterrorism, report on the roles and impacts of the UN in
they should outline guidance and protocols countering terrorism, with recommendations
for how they should manage threats posed for a multilateral posture and architecture
by terrorist groups to themselves and the that reflects contemporary threats and
communi es they serve. dynamics. The report should not reproduce
the list of institutional activities found in the
The expansion of the GCTS review resolution regularly produced reports on UN responses
has resulted in lengthier negotiations, to ISIL, but offer a crisp, strategic assessment
increasingly complex detail, and an of the UN’s comparative advantages in
investment by UN member state capitals countering terrorism in the current
and missions that may distract from other context, and how to best leverage those
priori es, even counterterrorism issues that advantages to achieve the goals set out in
appear in other bodies. The 2023 review Our Common Agenda. This report should
should be used to lay the groundwork for a be produced in consulta on with Global
strategic refresh of the process, with Compact members, civil society organizations,
increased focus on impact, implementa on, and communities directly affected by
and integra on. This will require changing terrorism and counterterrorism. It should be
31United Na ons General Assembly & Security Council, Iden cal le ers dated 1 August 2002 from the Secretary-General addressed to the
President of the General Assembly and President of the Security Council, A/57/273-S/2002/875 (6 August 2002), Sec on V, Recommenda on 23,
available from h ps://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/512/97/IMG/N0251297.pdf?OpenElement.; see also: Arthur Boutellis
and Naureen Chowdhury Fink, “Waging Peace: UN Peace Opera ons Confron ng Terrorism and Violent Extremism,” (Interna onal Peace
Ins tute, October 2016), h ps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2893280.
32 “Secretary-General’s brie ng to the General Assembly on Priori es for 2023,” (United Na ons Secretary-General), available from h ps://
www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2023-02-06/secretary-generals-brie ng-the-general-assembly-priori es-for-2023-scroll-down-for-
bilingual-delivered-all-english-and-all-french-versions
14
ffi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
tf
ti
tt
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
tipresented to Member States no later than • Extend the GCTS review cycle to four
2025, with an implementation planning years, and establish pla orms for our
report to be produced by the 20th regular debate and dialogue in between
anniversary of the GCTS in 2026. them: Member States should use the
2023 GCTS review to lay the groundwork
• Request UNOCT report assessing impacts for a four-year review cycle, in addi on to
of GCTS: Member States should request discussing the form and format of the
that UNOCT assess the global impacts of review process itself. The GCTS review
the GCTS, as a basis for iden fying gaps currently takes approximately three to
and needs moving forward, and whether four months to complete, leaving the UN
and how the Strategy is e ec vely u lized system and states with only about a year
by states. Such an assessment may and a half to respond to the resul ng
include a combina on of self-repor ng taskings and requests before prepara ons
from states, a review of relevant and for the next review begin. A more exible
exis ng global indexes or sta s cs on format, like a Group of Friends or an ad-
relevant issues, or a dedicated series of hoc Working Group, could o er a forum
consulta ons with member states. for debate and dialogue on CT issues in
Although causality may be di cult to between the processes (or in lieu of
a ribute, understanding the impacts and them), should states require such an
implementa on of the Global Strategy will arrangement.
be cri cal to determining the future
course of the review process. This might • Revitalize the Global Compact: Although
be included as an annex in the report in balancing the compe ng aims of
recommenda on I, or as an independent ins tu onal streamlining and fostering
report. inclusion may prove challenging, states
should use the 2023 review process to
• Reevaluate exis ng tools for emerging be er understand the roles and impacts
challenges: Member States and UN of the Global Compact, and whether and
en es should review exis ng tools – how these contribute to more e ec ve
i n c l u d i n g re s o l u o n s , f ra m e wo r k engagement with the wider UN system or
documents, programs of work and events whether the form and working methods
– to iden fy how these might be adapted require reassessment to align with the
to address emerging threats and trends. resources and mandates of the member
For example, ac vi es focused on organiza ons.
terrorism financing may be directed to
target XRIRB actors; projects focused on
countering terrorist narratives and countering
incitement could be directed to focus on
online radicalization of youth and
complement efforts by partners like the
Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism
or the Christchurch Call.
15
tt
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
tf
ti
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ff
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tiCONCLUSION
This GCTS review will be undertaken against Reports of the UN’s demise are greatly
the background of the ongoing war in exaggerated. As the war in Ukraine reaches
U k ra i n e , d e fa c to Ta l i b a n r u l e i n its rst anniversary, the Taliban appear
Afghanistan, and concerns about future increasingly se led in their role as de facto
con ict in the Asia-Paci c region. For two rulers in Afghanistan, a stalemate sets in
decades, UN Member States and o cials Syria that does not address the needs of the
sought to de ne the role of the organiza on vic ms of the con ict or groups like ISIL,
in rela on to terrorism, beginning with Ko and internal con icts in places like Yemen
Annan’s 5D’s to Ban Ki Moon’s Plan of and Myanmar con nue to devastate civilian
Ac on on PVE. What will be the next UN lives, cri ques of the world body will be
itera on? So long as the GCTS and the balanced out by calls for an increased role
review process exists, “de-priori zing” it is and ac vity to foster peace, protect
not a viable op on. The UN is a dynamic civilians, and deliver cri cal humanitarian
poli cal space; what one set of states aid. In this context, states need to consider
chooses to depriori ze, others may pick up whether the GCTS review process, shaped
and shape. This era of increased strategic in a di erent security environment,
compe on underscores the importance of con nues to serve the UN and its members
areas like counterterrorism, where states in its current form. With the 2023 review
have long confronted the complex interests forthcoming, and a star ng point resolu on
of adversaries and partners. Moreover, the that already exceeds one hundred opera ng
withdrawal of French counterterrorism paragraphs, it is me for member states to
forces from the Sahel and issuance of a new boldly reassess whether the form of this
U.S. counterterrorism strategy that stresses process really serves the func on for which
“partner-led, U.S.-enabled”33 approaches it was established.
underscore the urgency of determining a
role for the UN in contexts that include
terrorist groups.
The author would like to thank the experts and civil society organiza ons, UN o cials, and diplomats whose insights and
feedback deeply enriched the dra s of this paper. Special thanks to the team at The Soufan Center for their contribu ons. All
errors and omissions, however, belong to the author alone.
33 Author discussions with U.S. counterterrorism o cials.
16
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
fi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
fi
tt
ti
ti
fl
ti
fl
ti
ti
fi
ft
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ffi
ti
ti
ti
fi
ti
ffi
tiLESSONS LEARNED FROM LISTING VIOLENT FAR-RIGHT EXTREMIST GROUPS IN CANADA
12 17You can also read
