Heads of Committees Tasked with Defeating Terrorism Tell Security Council States on Front Lines to Assess Nature of Threat
Heads of Committees Tasked with Defeating Terrorism Tell Security Council States on Front Lines to Assess Nature of Threat
|Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York|
7071st Meeting (AM)
Heads of Committees Tasked with Defeating Terrorism Tell Security Council
States on Front Lines to Assess Nature of Threat
Speakers in Debate Underline Need to Ensure
Compliance with Sanctions, Combat Money Laundering
States on the front lines were in a unique position to assess the nature of the terrorism threat in their regions and keep the international community informed, the Security Council heard this morning in a review of the work of its anti-terrorism committees.
In briefings, the Council was told that avenues of cooperation and information-sharing to tackle the evolving scourge were being explored by the three committees — the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001), also known as the Counter-Terrorism Committee; the Committee established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) concerning Al-Qaida; and the 1540 Committee aimed at halting the proliferation of mass destruction weapons.
Speaking on behalf of the three bodies in a joint statement, Gary Quinlan (Australia) highlighted joint initiatives such as the recent open briefing for Member States on the roles of the Security Council and the intergovernmental Financial Action Task Force in combating the financing of terrorism and proliferation.
The Committees had also continued their practice of sharing relevant information, he added. Their expert groups participated actively in the activities of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF), continuing to cooperate in combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism, and weapons proliferation.
Turning to the activities of the so-called Al-Qaida Committee, which he chaired, he noted that “a major lesson” from 2012-2013 had been that the threat was no longer primarily anchored in a global Al-Qaida organization but revolved around a range of increasingly heterogeneous franchises. The latest report of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team had highlighted the Sahel and the Middle East as the most visible arenas for Al-Qaida affiliate activity in 2013. While the French-led Operation Serval had dislodged various Al-Qaida affiliates in northern Mali, “pockets of resistance remained”, he said.
Operational contacts, he added, between terrorist entities in eastern Libya and Al-Qaida affiliates in the Sahel, the Maghreb, the Middle East and South Asia also illustrated the evolving nature of the Al-Qaida threat. In response, the Committee had invited Member States of the Sahel and Maghreb regions to a special meeting to consider ways in which the sanctions regime could support affected States and how they could be integrated with national and regional responses to the Al-Qaida threat. The Committee had also recently considered recommendations for improving the implementation and effectiveness of the sanctions measures.
Mohammed Loulichki ( Morocco), Chair of the so-called Counter-Terrorism Committee, informed the Council that several steps had been taken to strengthen facilitation efforts. They included regional and thematic workshops on topics including the freezing of terrorists’ assets and the misuse of the non-profit sector for terrorist purposes. The Committee had held a meeting on 20 September on enhancing cooperation and technical assistance to States in the Sahel region.
Resolution 1963 (2010), he continued, encouraged the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) to work with States on developing comprehensive and integrated national counter-terrorism strategies. Accordingly, the Executive Directorate had conducted State visits, during which it had discussed the potential benefits of multidisciplinary strategies and, on various occasions, had recommended adoption of a national strategy.
Also briefing the Council was Joon Oh (Republic of Korea), Chair of the 1540 Committee, who reported steady progress in the implementation of that 2004 resolution. The Committee and its experts had participated in 46 outreach events and conducted various country and bilateral visits to enhance the global awareness of the resolution and to facilitate assistance to countries to implement it. Facilitating “matchmaking” between assistance requests and offers remained a priority, an example of which was the assistance offered by Japan and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime to Kyrgyzstan in legislation and controls.
In the debate that followed, broad support emerged for the Organization’s counter-terrorism efforts, with several delegations underscoring the imperative of cooperation in areas such as combating money laundering, implementing the sanctions, and universalizing adherence to the resolutions. Emphasis was also on better utilizing existing instruments over formulation of new ones.
The representative of the United States, for example, said that the United Nations had created a plethora of committees to deal with terrorism, but he added “the measure of success was not how many Committees we create or how many projects we plan but how many lives we save”. With that, he encouraged the Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee to work with Member States to rectify issues of non-compliance and recommend ways to tighten enforcement. Focused efforts were necessary to help countries improve national capacities to freeze assets and improve arms embargoes.
One of the best ways to combat terrorism, stressed Togo’s delegate, was by preventing terrorist groups from accessing funds that enabled them to finance their activities. Many States considered it best to act alone, but an absence of “high-calibre” human resources and porous borders weakened their efforts. Asset freezes, illegal exploitation of natural resources and travel bans were best implemented in cooperation. It was often difficult for less wealthy States to address both their national priorities and international requirements.
Sharing a new development, the representative of Croatia, also speaking on behalf of Poland, said that in June, those countries had launched a peer review, which had engaged non-proliferation experts from both countries in comparing legal frameworks relevant to resolution 1540. Moving beyond traditional tools for the text’s implementation, those countries had engaged in a voluntary dialogue, identifying opportunities rather than shortcomings in a “non-patronizing” manner. What made it “groundbreaking”, he said, was the local ownership of the process. A report would be presented to the 1540 Committee early next year.
The representative of China, in his capacity as Council President, thanked the members and the Secretariat for their hard work and positive contributions, and wished the French Mission success at the Council’s helm in December.
Also speaking were the representatives of Azerbaijan, Rwanda, Pakistan, Guatemala, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, Argentina, France, China (in its national capacity), Syria, Israel, Japan, and Austria.
A representative of the European Union Delegation also participated.
The meeting began at 10:10 a.m. and ended at 1:15 p.m.
The Security Council met today to hear briefings by the Chairs of three of its subsidiary bodies: the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001), also known as the Counter-Terrorism Committee; the Committee established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) concerning Al-Qaida; and the Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004), known as the 1540 Committee, concerning the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. A debate on the subject was expected to follow.
GARY QUINLAN (Australia), Chair of the Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) concerning Al-Qaida, reading a joint statement on behalf of the Co-Chairs of the Committees established pursuant to Security Council resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011), 1373 (2001) and 1540 (2004), said that on 18 November, the Chairs of those Committees had joined the Chairs of the Committees established pursuant to resolutions 1718 (2006), 1737 (2006) and 1988 (2011) and the President of the Financial Action Task Force in an open briefing for Member States on the respective roles of the Security Council and the Task Force in combating the financing of terrorism and proliferation, in an effort to raise awareness among Member States of the measures imposed by the Council and the related recommendations and guidance developed by the Task Force.
Further, he said, the three Committees, on whose behalf he was speaking today, had continued to share relevant information through their experts and to discuss common issues and points of view. The expert groups also participated actively in the activities of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF), continuing also their close cooperation on combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism and proliferation. The three expert groups continued to explore further strengthening that coordination and cooperation.
Speaking in his capacity as Chair of the Al-Qaida Committee, he said that a major recent lesson learned had been that the threat was no longer primarily anchored in a global Al-Qaida organization, but revolved around a range of increasingly heterogeneous franchises, which were themselves continuously evolving, with the recruitment of younger fighters and increased mobility across borders. In its fourteenth report, the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team had highlighted the Sahel and the Middle East as the two most visible arenas for Al-Qaida affiliate activity during 2013.
Noting that the French-led Operation Serval had dislodged various Al-Qaida affiliates, including Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, Ansar Eddine and the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa from the main towns in northern Mali, he cautioned that “pockets of resistance remained”. There were also operational contacts between terrorist entities in eastern Libya and Al-Qaida affiliates in the Sahel, the Maghreb, the Middle East and South Asia. In response, the Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee had invited Member States of the Sahel and Maghreb regions to a special meeting to consider ways in which the sanctions regime could support affected States and to discuss the integration of those measures with national and regional responses to the Al-Qaida threat.
Ensuring that the regime’s application remained relevant and effective was also important, he said, adding that the Committee had recently concluded its consideration of the recommendations contained in the fourteenth report of the Monitoring Team, which focused on advancing a more effective, evidence-based United Nations targeted sanctions regime and improving the implementation and effectiveness of the sanctions measures. Another key focus had been on ensuring that the sanctions regime had fair and clear procedures. In November, the Committee had considered a request from a listed individual for an exemption to the travel ban. That request was the first of its kind to be received through the focal point mechanism established by resolution 1730 (2006).
The second special meeting of the Al-Qaida Committee would stress the complementarity between the Organization’s broader Sahel strategy and the Al-Qaida sanctions regime measures, he concluded. Emphasizing that “Member States on the front lines were in a unique position to assess the nature of the Al-Qaida threat in their regions”, he encouraged them to share their views with the Committee.
MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco), Chair of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001) concerning counter-terrorism, said that in the area of monitoring and promoting implementation, two new assessment tools had been introduced in May: the Overview of Implementation Assessment (OIA) and the Detailed Implementation Survey (DIS), developed to replace the Preliminary Implementation Assessment and assist the Committee in its dialogue with States. The Committee had adopted nine files, and expected to complete another five before the end of the year. In addition, country visits provided an opportunity to discuss terrorism-related challenges, as well as States’ counter-terrorism efforts and good practices in implementing resolution 1373 (2001) and resolution 1624 (2004). The Committee had visited six States, bringing the total number of visits to 88 since 2005. It expected to conduct two further visits before year-end.
In the area of technical assistance delivery, he said a number of steps had been taken to strengthen the Committee’s facilitation efforts, including giving priority to follow-up requests by States visited and working with both traditional and new donor States to facilitate assistance provision. In addition, regional and thematic workshops had been facilitated on such topics as the freezing of terrorists’ assets and the misuse of the non-profit sector for terrorist purposes. The Committee had held a special meeting on 20 September on “enhancing cooperation and technical assistance to States in the Sahel region to strengthen their capacity in the global fight against terrorism”. Workshops also had been organized around specific topics in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and Algiers, Algeria.
Council resolution 1963 (2010), he recalled, encouraged the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) to work with States on developing comprehensive and integrated national strategies. During State visits, the Executive Directorate discussed the potential benefits of putting in place such strategies built around a multidisciplinary approach. Based on that dialogue, the Committee had, on various occasions, recommended that a State adopt a national strategy, and it had conveyed its readiness to provide advice. The Executive Directorate also continued to take account of human rights concerns, and it had been briefed on 24 October by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Committee was now considering the renewal of the Executive Directorate’s mandate, due to expire next month, as well as recommendations on its future work.
JOON OH (Republic of Korea), Chair of the Security Council Committee pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004), said that there had been steady progress in the implementation of that resolution. His Committee and its experts had participated in 46 outreach events, which were opportunities to enhance global awareness of the resolution and facilitate assistance to strengthen national capacities towards its implementation. The Committee had also conducted country and bilateral visits to assist various countries to develop national action plans. As regional organizations played a crucial role in implementing the resolutions, the Committee encouraged the direct sharing of experiences and practices.
Towards universal reporting, he said that, in July, the Committee had approached 16 non-reporting States in an effort to engage them. Facilitating “matchmaking” between assistance requests and offers remained a priority, and was discussed at all the outreach events. Japan and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) had offered assistance to Kyrgyzstan on legislative controls. The UNODC also had offered legislative training to the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). He had given a keynote speech to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) on 7 October. Direct interaction with legislators around the world had opened a new platform for high-level cooperation between the 1540 Committee and IPU.
Noting that the Security Council had asked the Committee to compile effective practices in the non-proliferation of mass destruction weapons, he appealed to Member States to be forthcoming in that regard, which would be a valuable resource for the international community. By resolution 2118 (2013), the Council had determined that chemical weapons were a threat to international security and had decided that Member States should inform it of violations of resolution 1540 (2004), which would strengthen efforts to universalize acceptance of that text. With the approaching tenth anniversary of resolution 1540 (2004), he looked forward to the cooperation of all actors in non-proliferation.
TOFIG F. MUSAYEV ( Azerbaijan) said that significant efforts had been made to promote cooperation in this field, but more should be done. The implementation of international legal obligations by all States was fundamentally important, as was the work of the Council’s counter-terrorism committees. He strongly supported close cooperation among the Committees and their expert groups. Over the last six months, the Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee had focused on situations in Mali, the Sahel, the Maghreb and the Middle East. He commended its work to ensure the relevance of the sanctions regime and to make operational the procedural enhancements of resolution 2083 (2012). In the area of armed conflict, especially in territories under foreign military occupation, he urged States to implement their commitments and strengthen cooperation to address challenges related to the accumulation of arms in places beyond the reach of international control, and the risk of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to non-State actors.
TOFIG MUSAYEV (Rwanda) commended the transparent work of the Ombudsperson, saying that the Al-Qaida sanctions list was essential to addressing the changing nature of the terrorism threat. He requested more information on the interaction between the Ombudsperson and the Committees, expressing concern over the threat of Al-Qaida and its affiliates across the Sahel and the Horn of Africa. He also looked forward to the special meeting on the Sahel and considering ways to use sanctions as part of the regional responses to the Al-Qaida threat. He urged more cooperation with States across that region through use of the 1267 sanctions regime, which would allow better anticipation of that threat. On resolution 1540 (2004), developments in Syria and Iran regarding their chemical and nuclear programmes would require the Committee’s close follow-through. Also, workshops on the implementation of 1540 (2004) organized for African States must be pursued to help non-reporting African countries prepare their national reports. As for the Counter-Terrorism Committee, he urged the Executive Directorate and donors to provide technical and financial support to affected States, which focused on youth, education, job creation and development projects.
JEFFREY DELAURENTIS (United States) said that Security Council sanctions were effective only if implemented fully. If necessary, the Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee monitoring team should work with Member States to rectify issues of non-compliance and recommend ways to tighten enforcement. Focused efforts were needed to boost national capacities in freezing assets and enforcing arms embargoes. Almost a decade after its creation, the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate had become an indispensable player in the United Nations efforts to diagnose terrorism and develop capacities. It was also necessary to address the political, social and economic drivers of instability, which provided enabling opportunities for terrorism.
He said that “non-counter-terrorism tools” were also important in building civilian institutions and enhancing the liberty of local citizens, and his country encouraged the Counter-Terrorism Committee to work with development actors. Efforts by non-State actors to acquire mass destruction weapons were a grave challenge to international security. His country applauded the 1540 Committee for its forward-looking strategy. “The United Nations had created a plethora of committees to deal with terrorism. But the measure of success was not how many Committees we create or how many projects we plan, but how many lives we save.”
MASOOD KHAN (Pakistan) said that his country’s counter-terrorism strategy was based on deterrence, development and dialogue. Terrorists had adapted to new conditions and their tactics now took more sinister forms, utilizing new technologies and the Internet. Therefore, counter-terrorism efforts also needed to be adaptable. Deprivation, unresolved conflicts and stereotyping created conditions that supported the “drift” to terrorism. No religion, ethnicity, or culture or society should be associated with terrorism. That said, the universal norm of zero tolerance to terrorism should be strengthened. Pakistan agreed with the Al-Qaida Committee that the organization had evolved in various regions with franchises, and new synergies and holistic solutions would enable the Committee to battle that evolving threat. Pakistan also supported the work of the Counter-Terrorism and 1540 Committees.
GERT ROSENTHAL (Guatemala), discussing the 1267 (1999) and 1989 (2011) Committees, said sanctions against Al-Qaida played an important role in stemming the financing of that group and its different chapters, effectively restricting their capacity to undertake terrorist acts. The sanctions’ effectiveness, however, depended on a credible, transparent and equitable listing and delisting process, for which the Ombudsperson was crucial. He supported the work of the 1373 Committee in assisting capacity-building, aimed at implementation of resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1624 (2005). He urged close cooperation between the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate and States, and encouraged that body to carry out capacity-building activities and propose technical assistance. Two key elements for the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004) were assistance and information-exchange; it must facilitate communication between donor countries and those seeking assistance. Also critical was intensifying work on effective practices.
VITALY CHURKIN ( Russian Federation) described the trend of terrorist activities creeping into the fabric of modern-day conflicts. He cited, in particular, terrorist methods being used by anti-Government groups in Syria. He urged collective efforts to combat that threat, with the United Nations as a linchpin. The Counter-Terrorism Committee was the cornerstone of that endeavour, and recent reforms in its work procedures and the change in format of its evaluation documents, among others, would improve implementation of its mandate. The 1267 and 1989 Committees were among the most effective counter-terrorism mechanisms. They must react to the changing nature of the Al-Qaida threat without excessive red tape. He regretted it had still not listed two individuals of Emarat Kavkaz. Also important was to enhance the effectiveness of sanction mechanisms. Despite paragraph 4 of resolution 2083 (2012), the information arm of Emarat Kavkaz was still active. All States should fully implement resolution 1540 (2004), and States must brief the Council on any violations. In light of use in Syria of chemical weapons by armed groups, that requirement was particularly pertinent.
KODJO MENAN (Togo) said that “the three counter-terrorism committees were a key link in the chain” of the institutional framework established by the United Nations to combat terrorism. Togo commended the synergy which prevailed among the entities and between States, as that enabled them to fully utilize their scarce resources. Outreach, country visits, and cooperation with regional and subregional organizations were also crucial areas of cooperation. One of the best ways to combat terrorism was by preventing terrorist groups from accessing funds to finance their activities; those shifted and flowed through formal and informal financial channels. Many States considered it best to act alone, but an absence of “high-calibre” human resources and the existence of porous borders weakened their efforts. Assets freezes, illegal exploitation of natural resources and travel bans were best implemented in cooperation. Serious shortcomings existed in that area, not due to a lack of will, but because it was often difficult for less wealthy States to address both national priorities and international requirements.
PETER WILSON (United Kingdom) said that one of the way in which terrorism had evolved was through self-radicalization of individuals and groups, as evidenced in the killing of an off-duty soldier in London in May. Terrorism was an international threat that required an international response. Al-Qaida sanctions were vital to disrupt its activities, and the United Kingdom urged member States to implement those regimes. As terrorism evolved, sanctions should also evolve. The global reach of United Nations sanctions was a powerful tool to assist national efforts to combat terrorism. Next year marked the adoption of the tenth anniversary of resolution 1540 (2004) and “there was much to celebrate”. However, global fears that terrorists could acquire weapons of mass destruction were still a reality. There should be a forward-looking comprehensive matrix of information-sharing between United Nations counter-terrorism entities. “Our work on counter-terrorism should not become static,” he said.
SYLVIE LUCAS ( Luxembourg) urged States to honour their counter-terrorism obligations, saying that sanctions against Al-Qaida played an important role in that fight. She commended the monitoring team for its work, but stressed that the sanctions list should be updated regularly to ensure the regimes were relevant. She looked forward to the special meeting on the changing nature of the terrorist threat in the Sahel and the Maghreb in December. Defeating terrorism should be guided by respect for fundamental democratic values and the rule of law principle. She supported the work of the Ombudsperson and called on States to fully cooperate with that Office. Luxembourg awaited the review of resolution 2083 (2012) in the coming year. She commended the work of the 1373 Committee and noted that next year would mark the anniversary of resolution 1540 (2004). That text would not be effective unless States implemented all its provisions.
PÍA POROLI (Argentina) said the General Assembly and the Council were most appropriate forums for counter-terrorism work, underscoring the importance of the open briefing on the role of the Council and the Financial Action Task Force in terrorism financing, held jointly by the three committee Chairs. The holding of such open briefings was a good practice. On the 1267 Committee, she underscored the importance of having clear and fair procedures, and commended the independent work of the Ombudsperson. The Committee must review the Consolidated List to ensure its usefulness. She hoped that the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate would continue its work in State capacity-building, as the success of global efforts in connection with resolution 1540 (2004) hinged on the implementation of national measures and regional coordination. She encouraged a regional approach to that resolution, as well as greater synergy among the three committees.
ALEXIS LAMEK (France) called for vigilant implementation of sanctions against Al-Qaida and the committee charged with facilitating that task must continue to work, as well as continue to update its list. It was also vital to respect the fundamental freedoms of the listed individuals, and the sanctions regime must have due process, as highlighted by the Chair. The Counter-Terrorism Committee must continue to focus on proper implementation of the relevant resolutions and regularly follow up with States. It must also prioritize human rights in the battle against terrorism. Turning to the 1540 Committee, he said that the proliferation of weapons and the danger of their acquisition by terrorists was a grave and collective concern, and it was crucial to ensure accurate reporting from countries regarding that resolution.
LIU JIEYI (China), Council President, speaking in his national capacity, said that the Al-Qaida Committee was a main tool of the Council’s for combating that organization’s terrorist activities. China supported the activities of the Monitoring Team and also noted the efforts of the Ombudsperson’s office to improve the fairness of that mechanism. Commending the many activities of the Counter-Terrorism Committee and Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate in their continued efforts to implement the relevant resolutions, he expressed the hope that the Committee would continue its dialogue with Member States and to assist them in capacity-building. The 1540 Committee had enhanced international awareness of that resolution, which was necessary for its universal and balanced implementation. China supported the Committee’s “solid and steady efforts", in line with its mandate, to increase the number of reporting States.
BASHAR JA’AFARI (Syria) said United Nations counter-terrorism entities must step up their efforts, improve their effectiveness and avoid polarization, so as to dispel any belief in the existence of “benign terrorism”. A new surge of extremism had led to unprecedented violence, with certain entities and their affiliates trying to launch their activities in new places and exploit the unlimited sponsorship offered by some States. Syria had sent 258 letters to the Secretary-General and successive Council Presidents concerning terrorism, 76 of which referred to Al-Qaida activities. Nine letters had been sent to the President of the 1373 Committee and four to the President of the 1540 Committee.
With that, he urged addressing Syria’s concerns: preventing the funding and sponsoring of terrorist groups; combating fanaticism; and controlling State borders and stopping the transit of terrorists to Syria. Further, terrorist attempts to access weapons of mass destruction in Syria must be prevented. Governments that trained terrorist elements must be brought to account and treated as participants in terrorist activities. He urged a settlement of the Syrian crisis through a Syrian-led political process based on national dialogue.
GILLES MARHIC, representative of the European Union Delegation, said terrorism could only be overcome by measures that adhered to the highest human rights standards in full compliance with the rule of law. Sanctions were also a vital part of the counter-terrorism toolbox, and he welcomed the Council’s significant steps to reinforce fair and clear procedures for sanctions, including by enhancing the role of the Al-Qaida Ombudsperson, with whom he urged all States to fully cooperate. In the area of regional cooperation, he said the European Union would finance a partnership among Nigeria, UNODC, and the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate on strengthening criminal justice responses.
The European Union, he noted, had started to develop counter-terrorism strategies in partnership with countries in the Sahel, Horn of Africa and Yemen, and Pakistan. Increasing efforts to counter violent extremism, radicalization and recruitment, and terrorist financing was a top priority, and he welcomed the United States’ announcement of the establishment of a global fund for that purpose. From a geographic point of view, he urged a focus on the Horn of Africa and Yemen, as well as on the Sahel. No efforts should be spared to boost capacity to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
VLADIMIR DROBNJAK (Croatia), also speaking on behalf of Poland, said resolution 1977 (2011) had extended the mandate of resolution 1540 (2004) for 10 years, tasking the Committee to carry out effective guidance on that text. In June, Poland and Croatia had launched a peer review, which had engaged non-proliferation experts from both countries in comparing legal frameworks and other measures relevant to resolution 1540 (2005). The peer review was “un-chartered” territory, as it had moved beyond traditional tools for the implementation of resolution 1540 (2004) and introduced a new way to assess implementation practices. What made it a ground-breaking idea was the local ownership of the processes. The countries had engaged in a voluntary dialogue, identifying opportunities rather than shortcomings in a “non-patronizing” manner. The peer review had been rolled out in two phases: in Croatia in June, and in Poland in October. A report would be presented to the 1540 Committee early next year. Speaking in his national capacity, he said that Croatia was ready to share its experience with partners in South-East Europe.
RON PROSOR (Israel) said that since its inception, not a single day had gone by in which the country had not faced the threat of terrorism, rendering it a “specialist” in the field, with techniques and tools unmatched by any other country. From aviation security to money laundering, Israel had a wealth of expertise from which other countries could draw. “Just as with families, we don’t get to choose our neighbours,” he added. As he spoke, he said, terrorist groups were taking advantage of the instability in Syria, which had become “the foremost academy of terrorism, teaching fundamentalism and the engineering of explosives”. No nation should have to stand alone in the face of global terrorism. Israel commended the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate for its efforts to coordinate actions and monitor the implementation of Council resolution 1373 (2001), which constituted the centrepiece of United Nations efforts to create a robust counter-terrorism regime. Israel also fully supported resolution 1540 (2004) and the Organization’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
KAZUYOSHI UMEMOTO ( Japan) said that the recent attacks in Kenya and Algeria proved that the international community must boost its counter-terrorism efforts with a particular focus on threats in Africa. It was crucial to promote more positive activities on counter-terrorism “within and without” the United Nations in order to maximize measures taken by the international community as a whole. Moreover, to increase efficiency and avoid duplication, the role of each main counter-terrorism-related entity, namely the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, and UNODC, must be made clear. The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Coordinator should focus on enhancing coordination. Highlighting Japan’s cooperation with the Executive Directorate, he noted his country’s contribution to making future activities more effective. He also stressed the need to ensure prevention of the proliferation of goods and technologies related to weapons of mass destruction.
MARTIN SAJDIK (Austria), also speaking on behalf of like-minded States on targeted sanctions (Belgium, Costa Rica, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland), commended the Council for addressing serious due process concerns regarding the Al-Qaida sanctions regime, notably its decision to establish and strengthen the Ombudsperson process. The European Court of Justice’s Kadi II judgment had made clear that the listing and delisting procedures could not be “the end of the line”. The Council must explore additional measures to improve the quality of listings and, most importantly, increase the information on the reasons for listings.
Further, avenues for increased information exchange must be explored, he said, noting that it was crucial to encourage designating States to make available all relevant information. Indeed, due process standards and the rule of law applied in all situations where actions by the United Nations affected individual rights and fundamental freedoms. The Ombudsperson process should gradually be extended, on a case-by-case basis, to other sanctions regimes, especially those with broad criteria for listing. The Somalia/Eritrea and the Liberia sanctions regimes would be opportunities to make such progress.
Taking the floor again, Syria’s representative said the Israeli delegate had spoken of terrorism in Syria as a way to cover up Israeli involvement in the Syrian crisis and the support it provided to terrorists.
* *** *