United Nations and Terrorism

In today’s world it is easy to say that terrorism has stretched to every corner of the world. Potential targets of terrorism have always known the fear of an impending surprise attack, to include the feelings of hopelessness that accompany trying to deter such an attack. Since the United Nations mission is to instill cooperation in international law, international security, human rights, and to achieve world peace it isn’t impractical to say that they have integrated themselves as the main front against terrorism in today’s world.

The biggest front that the United Nations has in the war on terrorism is the Security Council. The Security Council is one of the principal organizations within the United Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. After 9/11 the Security Council introduced Resolution 1373. The aim of Resolution 1373 is to place barriers on the movement, organization, and fund-raising activities of terrorist groups.

In the last decade terrorism has exploded upon the world and doesn’t appear to be fading anytime soon. Terrorism has in fact been around for thousands of years but ever since the United States was attacked on 9/11 it has brought a new emphasis to terrorism. With everything that has transpired it is easy to see that the United Nations hasn’t adapted to the ways that terrorism has changed warfare. Through its concerns of human rights for the very terrorists that endanger human rights, in some regards it could jeopardize this war and make it impossible to win. Also by studying the history of the things the United Nations have done in combating terrorism we can see where they failed and whether or not they are making the same mistakes twice. It all relates to the simple adage, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

Although the United Nations believes it is essential for them to combat terrorism by safeguarding Human Rights, they are incapable of succeeding and are abusing the power that they were entrusted with at the end of World War II.

After World War II, the Security Council wasn’t given the power to make, implement, and enforce global law and has gone beyond its traditional role. The United Nations has been concerned with terrorism since it was formed and it is evident that its efforts have done close to nothing in abolishing terrorism. The United Nations has taken many steps at combating terrorism since the devastating attacks of September 11th, most notably being the Security Council Resolution 1373

The United Nations has decided that there is only one way to combat terrorism and it has swayed the very direction the United States has taken in its War On Terror. Since the United Nations defines terrorism as an attack against human rights it believes that the only way to combat terrorism is with the protection of these very rights. The United Nations itself states that only through protecting human rights can we defeat a force whose primary aim is to destroy human rights. The official United Nations website states, “In his recommendations to Member States, the Secretary-General stressed that defending human rights of all – not only those suspected of terrorism, but also those victimized by terrorism, and those affected by the consequences of terrorism – was essential to all components of an effective counter-terrorism strategy.” It has been embraced by most of the nations involved in this war and has been understood that this is what makes us better than them. Whether or not this consists of safeguarding the human rights of the terrorists or the victims of terrorism, the United Nations has recognized this as the only way for them to combat terrorism.

One of the strongest ideals against the War On Terror is by pacifists who have a completely different idea of how to handle terrorism. Pacifists are against any and every war. They think that there are other options such as negotiations and discussing our differences. Even though terrorists have never listened in the past, pacifists believe that this is a more sensible option than war.

In 1992, the United Nations Security Council declared that the absence of war and military conflicts amongst States does not in itself ensure international security and that non-military sources of instability in the economic, social, humanitarian and ecological fields have become threats to peace and security. The United Nations and others have interpreted this to mean that since it is already their mission to provide stability with humanitarian aid and other non-military action, they should also ensure international security within military conflicts and operations. They believe that this is the only way to ensure the Laws of Armed Conflict (according to the Geneva Convention) are followed and that security is maintained during combat operations. The Laws of Armed Conflict are a set of laws that the United Nations has embraced in an effort to regulate war and protect human rights.

Resolution 1373 was adopted on September 28, 2001 and is the cornerstone of the United Nations counterterrorism effort. It declares international terrorism as a threat to international peace and security. One of the most important aspects of Resolution 1373 was the creation of the Counter-Terrorism Committee. The Counter-Terrorism Committee has a unique role in the fight on terror and is most assuredly at the center of the fight. The Resolution also strives to suppress the financing of terrorism and abolish any potential safe havens for terrorists. Resolution 1373 is an ambitious step in combating terrorism and has shown promise. Nesi writes, “In the four years after 9/11 it has adopted almost twenty resolutions on the topic: some of these resolutions were immediate reactions by the Security Council to specific terrorist attacks; others framed a coordinated international response to terrorism in a substantive way” (p. 1).

After World War II, the Security Council was given the power to maintain international peace and security. Instead they have decided to make, implement, and enforce global law and have overstepped its traditional crisis management role. The United Nations is to concerned with human rights, which hasn’t been the most effective strategy. They have taken war and tried to establish strict directives and laws, which in a sense has crippled the United States Armed Forces. War is in essence an unjust and barbarous necessity in the world.

Ever since the dawn of man, we have been plagued with overwhelming emotions, to include a strong desire to stay alive. War equals fear, but with the Laws of Armed Conflict that the United Nations enforces the men fighting in these wars are supposed to be devoid of emotion, especially fear. The soldiers over in Iraq are expected to be a police force but actually have more strict laws. If a terrorist points a gun directly at a soldier according to these Laws of Armed Conflict he is unable to fire until he is fired upon or sees the muzzle flash. If this were a police officer he would have put the enemy down the second he attempted to raise his gun. To expect a soldier to stand there and wait to die is absurd and only one reason why the United Nations has no place within a war zone.

The overseeing of armed conflicts has increased the probability that we will fail in the War On Terror. Lets take a look at the history to add some substance to this. During the American Revolutionary War it was custom to stand in straight lines and fight face-to-face with the enemy. America began hiding in bushes while firing on the enemy, or even us surprise attacks in order to catch the enemy off guard. The British were unable to adapt to this style of warfare and lost the war. Now over in Iraq and Afghanistan we have enemies that don’t wear uniforms and embrace tactics that are foreign to the soldiers fighting them. With the United Nations in the middle of these situations enforcing the Laws of Armed Conflict it makes it impossible to adapt.

Terrorism is definitely an attack on human rights and should not be taken lightly. But should we strive to protect the human rights of the very terrorists that wish to instill fear and eradicate human rights? It is understandable that the United Nations doesn’t wish for innocent civilians to have their human rights, or even their lives, taken from them. It is a chivalrous mission to embrace but it is a sad truth that civilians will die in war.

The United Nations has done great things for the world and nobody would deny that. Although its intentions are good, the United Nations should focus on missions like humanitarian aid and the human rights of the people affected by terrorism. This is a very important aspect of war since many people that are left in need during war. Not only will it help those affected by the war but will help win over the general populace which is something which hasn’t been accomplished in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Resolution 1373 is an ambitious goal although the United Nations may be biting off more than it can chew. They are most assuredly equipped to handle such things as tracking and freezing the money of suspected terrorists, even though they are concerned with whether or not this violates the rights of him and his family by doing this. The creation of the Counter-Terrorism Committee is probably the greatest stride of Resolution 1373. Although, one of the many challenges that the Counter-Terrorism Committee may face is that their funding may dwindle as time passes if the United Nations decides to tackle what it perceives as higher priorities, such as hunger or HIV/AIDS. If this course of events were to transpire it may not be the worst possible outcome since the United Nations has proved in the past that it is capable of handling and succeeding at either of these missions. Another situation that should be addressed is that the United Nations Security Council and the Counter-Terrorism Committee should merge so they can work together, instead of having two separate committees doing essentially the same things. Rosand states, “The committee will need to consider ways to increase the level of cooperation it receives from states, to maintain the credibility and effectiveness of the consolidated list, and to improve coordination with the Security Council’s other terrorism body, the Counter-Terrorism Committee” (p. 746).

Almost eight years have passed since the atrocious terrorist attacks of September 11th and it doesn’t seem that the world is any closer to winning the War On Terror. The United Nations is an excellent group and has done great things for the world but it should shift its sights to more attainable goals, which can aid the fight against terrorism. Although their intentions have been good, it appears that the influences they have had haven’t helped abolish terrorism.

The United Nations is most effective in giving humanitarian aid. It has had little to no effect in stopping terrorism. Just ask yourself, where has fighting for human rights gotten us so far? It hasn’t decreased the amount of terrorist attacks in the world but has in fact actually increased. Only the countries that have taken any type of responsibility at what happens within their borders have given opposition to terrorism. The United States and its allies have won numerous battles and the United Nations has only created screens for terrorists to hide behind. Through this the focus is lost and these screens have actually extended the war. The truth is that each country has the responsibility to protect its nation and people in whichever way they see best and not what the United Nations sees as the best way.

Bibliography

Gutteridge, J.A.C.. United Nations in a Changing World.

Manchester U.P.; Oceana Publications

Johnstone. (2008). Legislation and adjudication in the U.N.

security council: Bringing down the deliberative deficit.” American Journal of International Law 102, 275-308. Retrieved from EbscoHost Database.

Nesi. (2006) Internatonal Co-Operation in Counter-Terrorism: The

United Nations and Regional Organizations in the Fight Against Terrorism. 1st. USA: Ashgate Publishing, 2006.

Rosand. (2003). Security council resolution 1373, the counter-

terrorism committee, and the fight against terrorism. American Journal of International Law, 97, 333-41. Retrieved from EbscoHost Database.

Rosand. (2003). The security council’s efforts to monitor the

implementation of Al Qaeda/Taliban sanctions. American Journal of International Law, 98, 745-63. Retrieved from EbscoHost Database.

“UN Action to Counter Terorism”. Department of Public

Information, United Nations. 11 Mar 2009 .

“UNODC and terrorism prevention”. United Nations Office on Drugs

and Crime. 11 Mar 2009 .

“U.S. Mission to the United Nations in New York”. United States

Government. 11 Mar 2009 .