Terrorism definition needed, says UAE

Muslim nations raise the right of occupied populations to fight state-sponsored oppression during United Nations debate.

UNITED NATIONS // The UAE declared its commitment to tackling terrorism during a UN debate on bolstering global co-operation but believes that international efforts are being hampered by a failure to determine its legal definition.

A two-day General Assembly forum concluded on Friday with the adoption of a counter-terrorism resolution, but the world body's 192 members remained deeply divided over what constitutes terrorism. Despite years of discussion, there is no internationally accepted definition of terrorism, partly because of the long-standing dispute between Israelis and Palestinians. What Israel describes as terrorist attacks are seen by many in the Muslim world as the legitimate response of an occupied population to its oppressor. In this analysis, Israel is seen to perpetrate what has controversially been termed "state-sponsored terrorism".

During the debate, the UAE, together with other Muslim nations, raised the right of occupied populations to fight oppression, as well as arguing against associating Islam with terrorism. Anwar al Barout, chargé d'affaires of the UAE mission to the UN, said: "The UAE is convinced that terrorism is one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century, and reiterates its commitment to implementing the UN counter-terrorism strategy."

Speaking only days before the seventh anniversary of the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington, Mr Barout said the UAE had passed federal laws that served to "criminalise illegitimate activities related to terrorism". As well as legislation to tackle cyber crime and freeze the assets of terrorist suspects, the Emirates was stepping up the battle against the illegal trafficking of guns and drugs.

"The UAE has introduced legislation and conducted educational initiatives to ensure all possible measures were taken against extremism, including through co-operation with Interpol," he said. But the diplomat warned that the global fight against terrorism was "running into difficulties". Mr Barout said: "There is no legal definition of terrorism that would distinguish between the rights of peoples to fight against aggression in occupation and terrorism per se." He also endorsed concerns expressed by many delegates from the Muslim world that terrorism had become associated in the minds of many people with Islam.

"We underscore again that it is impossible to link terrorism to any religion or civilisation or specific ethnic group, thereby undermining, jeopardising or instigating the undermining of religions and leading to xenophobia." The UAE's position was echoed by delegates from other Arab League and Organisation of the Islamic Conference governments, with some highlighting the lack of consensus on "state-sponsored terrorism", which they argued was perpetrated by Israel.

Daniel Carmon, an Israeli diplomat, reiterated his government's position on attacks carried out by militants, saying his country had been "challenged from terrorism from its very beginning". "Israelis and Israeli interests have been the target of terrorist attacks abroad, along our borders to the north and south, and in the very heart of the country," he told delegates at UN headquarters in Manhattan.

Disagreements over the definition of terrorism have long hindered co-ordination efforts, with the General Assembly adopting the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in Sept 2006 only after a year of fractious negotiations. The strategy focuses on addressing conditions that give rise to terrorism, improving states' abilities to fight the problem and ensuring that human rights and the rule of law are observed.

According to Srgjan Kerim, president of the General Assembly, the strategy has improved global co-operation on intelligence-sharing, technical assistance and training and helped tighten border controls and banking systems. Mr Kerim said that by reaffirming the UN's adoption of the counter-terrorism strategy, members had "risen above political differences" and taken "collective and practical action on a daunting and politically sensitive" issue.

Robert Orr, chairman of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, said UN members had put aside their differences in order to co-operate on the genuine threats posed by terrorists. "We would love to see that definition tomorrow if all member states could agree on it," said Mr Orr. "But the point has been that member states themselves decided to... adopt a strategy and proceed even before a definition was adopted."

Mr Orr added that there were already 13 UN conventions defining specific terrorist acts, such as hijacking, hostage-taking and bombing. "It is not like the lack of a definition means that there is a Hobbesian free-flow," he said. "A definition is important, but there is already a large body of international law out there." @Email:[e-mail]