 United Nations chief Kofi Annan on Tuesday unveiled a global counter-terrorism strategy that puts new emphasis on the need to address bioterrorism, counter terroristsÂ’ growing use of the Internet and defending human rights. The 32-page strategy, responding to a call by world leaders at their summit last September for enhanced UN coordination of the global fight against terrorism, sidestepped the question of defining what terrorism is.
| I've developed a strategy or two in my time. I've never developed a strategy for something that I couldn't define. |
“It is also essential that member states conclude, as soon as possible, a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism,” Annan said as he outlined his proposals to the 191-member General Assembly. “However, lack of progress in building consensus on a convention cannot be a reason for delay in agreeing on a strategy,” he added.
| Why not? It has been so far. |
For nearly nine years, diplomats have been sweating over a draft convention that would encompass previous texts on the fight against terrorism, including bombings, financing and nuclear and biological threats. But they have so far stumbled over an acceptable definition of terrorism, particularly in the Middle East, where groups seen by some countries as terrorists are viewed by others as freedom fighters.
| Mostly the countries that see boomers, murderers, kidnappers, and various other proponents of Armed Struggle™ as Freedumb Fighters™ are the very countries that support them. |
Annan’s counter-terrorism strategy is articulated around what he called the “five Ds”: 1) Dissuading people from resorting to terrorism or supporting it. 2) Denying terrorists the means to carry out an attack. 3) Deterring states from supporting terrorism. 4) Developing state capacity to defeat terrorism. 5) Defending human rights.
| 1) If you kill enough people who are terrorists, whether defined or un-, that will dissuade others from joining up. That means not only bumping them off in shootouts, where they can feel like heroic martyrs, but also catching them, trying them quickly, and stringing the bastards up. 2) You can deny the terrs the means to carry out attacks by arresting their money men, trying them quickly, and stringing them up. This will dissuade other money men from joining the parade. 3) You can deter states from supporting terrorism by invading them and killing the leadership. That will never happen, given the current UN setup, except when the U.S. runs out of patience. Syria and Iran support terrorism outright, and the UN has done nothing to "deterr" them. 4) MOABs help a state have the capacity to defeat terrorism. Well-trained troops with tight integration of air and navy support help. 5) People have a right not to be murdered in their beds, blown up by suicide boomers, herded from their homes and shot down like dogs, or similar mayhem. The human rights of inhuman krazed killers fall somewhere down the list from those. |
Annan’s report underscored the need for “innovative solutions” to prevent bioterrorism.
| People always call for "innovative solutions" when they don't have the slightest idea what to do. |
“The approach to fighting the abuse of biotechnology for terrorist purposes will have more in common with measures against cybercrime than with the work to control nuclear proliferation,” it noted.
| If it's going to be effective, it should have more in common with an episode of C*O*P*S. |
Annan also stressed that a prerequisite to an effective counter-terrorism strategy was defending the “human rights of all — of the victims of terrorism, of those, of those suspected of terrorism, of those affected by the consequences of terrorism.”
| When warm milk sentiments like that are expressed, we usually see the limp handshake set breezing right by the human rights of the victims of terrorism — like in Darfur or southern Sudan — and fixing on the human rights of those suspected of terrorism — like at Guantanamo — and never quite getting to the point of doing something about the violations of human rights of those affected by the consequences of terrorism, like in Kashmir. |
“States must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with their obligation under international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law,” Annan told UN member states. “Any strategy that compromises human rights will play right into the hands of the terrorists.” The General Assembly is to hold consultations on Annan’s recommendations on May 11.
| Right, Kofi. That pretty much translates as saying that if we try to do anything about terrorism then the terrorists have won. That argument was stale before October, 2001. For this sort of stuff they give out half million dollar awards? |
|