DEFINING TERRORISM

From the United States to Indonesia, from London to Egypt, terrorism is a threat that affects people around the world. In his report, In Larger Freedom, Secretary General Kofi Annan urged countries to develop a definition of terrorism and a comprehensive agreement to confront it.

Overview

The international debate on the legal definition of terrorism has taken place for a number of years and has been a stumbling block towards the completion of a Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism. The debate on the definition can be traced back to discussions on a convention by the League of Nations in 1937. This initiative was not completed, in part due to issues pertaining to the Balkans, and the global community has since been unable to come to agreement on different aspects of the definition including the question of “freedom fighters” and attacks against military targets. The question of state conduct has also become a major obstacle to consensus in this debate.

Heading into the U.N. Summit in 2005, hopes were once again high that a definition would be agreed upon and subsequently included in the final outcome document. Secretary-General Annan had sought to emphasize the need for meeting this challenge. There was hope that a definition would include an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism in all of its forms, thereby allowing a comprehensive convention to be drafted.

Unfortunately, the outcome was limited to stressing “the need to make all efforts to reach an agreement on and conclude a comprehensive convention on international terrorism during [the current] session of the General Assembly.” (Paragraph 83.) This outcome fell well short of Secretary General Annan’s goal and failed to track earlier drafts that had at least repeated the stated intent to define terrorism.

U.S. Position

The U.S. has stated that reaching agreement on a definition of terrorism is one of its high priority foreign policy goals at the U.N. However, the U.S. is not proposing a specific definition for agreement by the international community. Instead, the U.S. has proposed what it believes should be “internationally acceptable formulations” of terrorism and indicated a few key elements that are central to the definition.

Citizens for Global Solutions Position

Citizens for Global Solutions believes that the international community should agree on a definition of terrorism and complete the Comprehensive Convention as soon as possible. 

About Citizens for Global Solutions

Citizens for Global Solutions envisions a future in which nations work together to abolish war, protect our rights and freedoms, and solve the problems facing humanity that no nation can solve alone. This vision requires effective democratic global institutions that will apply the rule of law while respecting the diversity and autonomy of national and local communities. We work to build political will for our vision in the United States by educating Americans about our global interdependence, communicating global concerns to public officials, and developing proposals to create, reform, and strengthen international institutions such as the United Nations.


Updated May 10, 2006