Press Conference on United Nations Counter-terrorism Efforts

 

While progress had made in implementing the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, implementation had not moved as fast as many had hoped, said Jean-Paul Laborde, Chair of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, as he urged States to implement the Strategy’s four pillars:  to address conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism; prevent and combat terrorism; build State capacity; and respect human rights and the rule of law.

“We all know that hard-power measures alone…have failed to stop terrorist attacks, or at least have not succeeded,” he stressed to reporters today at a Headquarters press conference.  It was imperative that the use of force to fight terrorism be combined with preventative measures to stop terrorist recruitment, training and attacks before they happened.

If the same level of investment dedicated to “hard power” measures — 10 per cent — could be replicated in “soft power” measures, we “really can at least reduce the terrorist threat,” he said.  For the Strategy to be implemented, it should be well known and well understood by all players in the field, “which is not the case at the moment”, and the media had a strong role to play in raising awareness, he added.

The Task Force, established by the Secretary-General in 2005, consists of 30 international entities that work to ensure coordination of the United Nations’ counter-terrorism efforts.  Joining Mr. Laborde, who is also the Director of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force Office, were Miroslav Jenča, Special Representative of the Secretary-General and Head of the United Nations Regional Centre for Preventive Diplomacy in Central Asia (UNRCCA); and Mr. Geoffrey Shaw, Director of the Office of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) at Headquarters.

Describing the situation in Central Asia, Mr. Jenča said many countries had adopted anti-terrorism laws and acceded to all 13 universal anti-terrorism instruments.  But the region was “definitely very delicate”, he said, citing Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in that context.  In a project launched earlier today, the Centre and the Task Force’s Working Group on Preventing and Resolving Conflict — charged with making the best possible use of the United Nations’ capabilities in areas such as conflict prevention, negotiation and mediation — would seek to build on efforts of Governments, regional organizations and other partners to implement the Counter-Terrorism Strategy.

Rounding out the discussion, Mr. Shaw, who focused on the “real and immediate” threat of terrorist access to chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological weapons or materials, said that for the United Nations to provide effective, timely and coordinated assistance for States, it was of fundamental importance to understand the capabilities of both individual international organizations and existing inter-agency mechanisms.  The goal of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Working Group, therefore, was to strengthen the exchange of information and knowledge among relevant actors.

A report, launched today by the Working Group, aimed to familiarize States about what the United Nations was doing to assist in areas of prevention, response and mitigation of terrorist attack using nuclear or radiological weapons or materials.  It outlined the types of preventive assistance provided by individual entities of the Working Group in areas such as nuclear security, ranging from help to put in place relevant laws to prevent terrorist access to such materials, to training in nuclear forensics.  The report also examined inter-agency mechanisms for dealing with radiation emergencies and provided information on the joint inter-agency response plan.

Taking a question about the confidence in the Strategy, given that the latest IAEA report on Iran had indicated that Iran had acquired enough uranium to build a bomb and refused to cooperate with the Agency, Mr. Shaw said that such issues fell outside the scope of the Task Force’s work.  That panel was looking to provide information to States on what assistance was available to put in place mechanisms to protect against terrorism.  It worked to ensure that the inter-agency process was robust.

Complementing that, Mr. Laborde said Task Force entities tried to work on issues on which there had never been collaboration.  One such area was the response to a possible attack of weapons of mass destruction and use of the internet by terrorist actors.  “Where we have the niche, then we go,” he said.  The Task Force was huge, with 30 agencies from development to security, and his job was to articulate the work of all players.  The Agency and Department of Political Affairs had their own mandates, but the Task Force was something different.

Fielding a question on unrest in Kyrgyzstan and whether the opposition’s actions were being characterized as terrorist behaviour, Mr. Jenča said the project launched today was about addressing issues related to the Strategy’s four pillars, a complex endeavour.  The Centre’s mandate was to cooperate with Central Asian Governments.  “The threat of terrorism is real and therefore it is necessary to talk about it,” he said, explaining he had visited Kyrgyzstan and been in touch with civil society and the Government.

An international independent commission of inquiry, headed by Kimmo Kiljunen, of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly, was looking into the causes into what happened in southern Kyrgyzstan and it was important to support those efforts for reconciliation.  It was also important to wait for the outcome of the inquiry.  On the Tajikistan suicide attack, he said that without a proper investigation, conclusions could not yet be drawn.

Asked about the Centre’s role in that inquiry, he said the United Nations was providing technical support to the Commission through the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights.  The Centre did not have any responsibility in the inquiry.  Adding to that, Mr. Laborde said terrorist acts were defined in the 13 Conventions.

As to why the implementation of the Strategy had not moved as fast as was hoped, Mr. Laborde cited a lack of resources to support the process.  The Strategy was a good instrument for two reasons:  it had been adopted unanimously by all Member States and touched all aspects of terrorism.  To implement all those aspects, there must be a body in the Secretariat to examine long-term issues and push action in countries.

On what the Task Force planned to do in Iran, Mr. Laborde said Iran had adopted the Strategy and had joined consensus in the 2008 review.  From the perspective of what Iran had said, there was no problem.  Other events were related to the Agency’s work and the Task Force did not have the mandate to speak about it.  In terms of international policy, Iran had joined consensus.

Asked about how the Strategy worked in Pakistan, where terrorist attacks happened all the time, Mr. Laborde said the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) was at the forefront of the Task Force efforts.

There were a series of agencies that worked with the Government and helped the population.  In the resolution to be adopted, there was a role for civil society.  “We need civil society to have some feedback on how they are being supported by agencies like the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,” he said.  The Global Survival Network was comprised of victims of terrorism, three of whom came from Pakistan.  At the end of the day, there was not much information to assess.  “We have to support the victims,” he said, and next, the agencies and Governments working with them.

As to the guidance the United Nations might have on the payment of ransom, Mr. Laborde said Security Council resolution 1904 (2009) outlined that such behaviour could constitute terrorist financing.  That body would have relevant information.

To a final question on what the Centre was doing to help people fleeing from Kyrgyzstan to Uzbekistan, Mr. Jenča said the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was dealing with those issues in cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which was on the ground.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record