UN Security Council Resolutions on Terrorism: Controversies, Analysis, and Recommendations - Paper Sample

Adoption was after the September terrorist attack in America. It aimed at preventing groups from unleashing terror by hindering formations of radical groups. The resolution scrutinized earlier resolutions on terrorism activities. From the explanation, the agreement was all the member states of the United Nations were to share their understanding of radicalized groups to assist in fighting global terrorism (Andreopoulos, 2018). Further, this new resolution called on governments to alter their local laws and regulations to ratify other international laws and conventions dealing with terrorism. In the answer, member states must ensure all acts of terrorism are grave criminal acts in their internal regulations and protocols and the seriousness of violations of the rules reflected in convictions. To make sure that member states adopted this, the United Nations formed the Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee, tasked with monitoring that member states comply with the provisions adopted in the resolution.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The resolution also aimed at warning laws on immigration. According to the committee, before granting asylum status, all member states must take appropriate measures to ensure they do not plan to participate in or facilitate acts of terrorism. Further, member states must ensure these asylums do not get abused by the organizers, perpetrators, or facilitators of terrorist acts. Also, claims of radical incentives are documented as conditions for declining requirements for extraditions of alleged acts of terrorism.

Why each of the three areas of the United National Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1373 is controversial and a recommendation on how these controversies could be addressed or corrected?

Many people have questioned normative activities advanced by the United Nations Security Council in recent years, mostly in the match on terrorism. And therefore, due to its legislative actions, there have been controversies among different scholars and Member States, leading to the question of whether the United Nations Security Council is acting ultra vires. Most scholars and states think that the Security Council has revealed new forms of creating international norms, some of which override member state's consent, which is the basis of international law. Therefore, there are need to investigate the scope of powers of the Security Council as provided in the resolution. There are need to look at the historical background together with the reactions of the United Nations members towards determinations provided by the answers. My recommendation on how these controversies could be addressed or corrected; the United Nations Security Council should have the legislative capacity with vital political, legal, and real limits.

Describe the role of the CTC and give an example of why it is controversial. As with the first question, make a recommendation on how to change the CTC.

Resolution 1373 also created the Counter-Terrorism Committee, whose role is to prevent groups from unleashing terror by hindering formations of radical groups. It scrutinizes explanations of terrorism activities. From the resolution, the agreement was that all the member states of the United Nations were to share their insight on radicalized groups to assist in fighting global terrorism (Rosand, 2016). Therefore, it calls on governments to alter their local laws and regulations to ratify other international laws and conventions dealing with terrorism. It also tasks all member states with obligations of ensuring that all acts of terrorism are identifiable as grave criminal acts in their internal laws and protocols and that the seriousness of violations of the terrorism laws is reflected in convictions. Thus, the committee monitors that member states comply with the provisions adopted in the resolution. Besides, the committee warns about the laws of immigration. It demands that, before granting asylum status, all member states must take appropriate measures to ensure they do not plan to participate in or facilitate acts of terrorism. Further, member states must provide these asylums not abused by the organizers, perpetrators, or facilitators of terrorist acts.

What makes the Counter-terrorism Committee controversial is its inability to define what terrorism is. It also failed miserably by only adding Taliban Al-Qaeda as the only terror group. It opened room for authoritarian governments to tag non-violent activities as terrorist acts, therefore overstepping people's fundamental rights. Thus, I recommend that the committee come up with ways to define terrorism well and clarify who to consider as a terrorist or terrorist group.

Part 2

Summary of the Resolutions

Resolution 1373 (2001) of September 2001 was adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council at its 4385th meeting. The meeting adopted a counterterrorism measure after the September terrorist attacks on the United States. From the official report, this meeting lasted for just 5 minutes, from 9:55 pm to 10:00 pm. In the forum, it resolved to come up with an amendment for controlling explosives and arms. The administrative and legal measure was necessary to maintain explosives at the national level, eliminate the supply of weapons to terror groups, and also to enhance greater security by controlling weapons linked with terrorism. The controversy here is that the committee on terrorism failed to identify who should be regarded as terrorist, thus opening room for dictatorial governments to classify those opposing them as terror groups.

Security Council resolution 2354 (2017) emphasizes people's rights to enjoy the freedom of expression as provided for in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The resolution directed the committee, with the assistance of a committee called the Counterterrorism Committee Executive Directorate, to organize an open meeting once a year to review global developments in counterterrorism activities and the methods of operations (Kravik, 2018). The resolution requested the committee to recommend ways for the Member States to enhance their efforts in the field of countering terrorist narratives. The solution also required that all actions taken by the Member States must include counterterrorism, including to counter terrorist narratives, and must comply with their obligations under international law, including international human rights law, international refugee law, and international humanitarian law. The resolution was controversial to the Israeli government. It interfered with Israel's sovereignty and how the country operated within its borders with Palestine. The prime minister said that the resolution criticized its government and thus forced Israel not to embrace it.

United Nations Security Council resolution 2396 took note of the industry-led and emphasized the usage of the Global Internet Forum to prevent acts of terrorism (2017). It, therefore, is called a global internet forum to engage governments with other technical organizations worldwide. It recognized the importance of peace and the use of technology to counter terrorism by ensuring efforts to adopt alliances with other states. It thus called for the benefit of technology in promoting peace through countering terrorism. In resolution 2170 (2014), the Security Council adopted the United Nations Security Council at its 7242nd meeting of August 2014. It addressed the terrorists' threat to international security and peace. Therefore, it addressed ways of combating terrorism to achieve world peace. It demanded concepts of collective responsibility of members to ensure stability by providing collective security as provided in the international laws and regulations. Further, to ensure this, it adopted prevention conflicts like armed conflicts, disarmament, and practicing self-defense.

Conclusion

In conclusion and in light of Roach's critique of 1373, the three resolutions are very different. The three solutions adopt different approaches to combating terrorism. Whereas 2396 (2017) calls members to come together in promoting the usage of the internet and technology in fighting international terrorism, 2354 (2017), for example, causes divisiveness by forcing Israel to move out of the organization. 2354 (2017) seems to interfere with the sovereignty of an independent state (Hamilton, 2018). Therefore, to ensure its effectiveness, the United Nations Security Council should look for ways of bringing all nations on board to fight terrorism without interfering with the members' internal affairs.

References

Andreopoulos, G. J. (2018). The quest for accountability: The resolution 1373 process at the United Nations Security Council. In The Rule of Law in an Era of Change (pp. 73-101). Springer, Cham.

Kravik, A. M. (2018). United Nations Security Council Resolution 2354 & Comprehensive International Framework to Counter Terrorist Narratives. International Legal Materials, 57(1), 180-192.

Hamilton, C. (2018). Sword or shield? The influence of international organizations in counterterrorism law and policymaking. Brazilian Journal of Criminal Sciences, 147(26), 67-68.

Rosand, E. (2016). Resolution 1373 and the CTC: The Security Council's Capacity-building. In International Cooperation in Counter-terrorism (pp. 97-104). Routledge.

United Nations Security Council. (2017). Resolution 2396. In Adopted by the security council at its 8146th meeting: on 21 December 2017.