International Response:  U.N. Counterterrorism Committee Lacks 17 Reports

The U.N. Security Council yesterday called on 17 remaining countries to submit reports on their counterterrorism measures as mandated last year in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (see GSN, Oct. 7).

Martin Belinga-Eboutou of Cameroon, which holds the rotating presidency of the council, called on the remaining countries to join 174 member states in submitting the reports to the year-old counterterrorism committee (see GSN, April 16).

The committee “calls on the 17 member states which have not yet submitted a report to do so urgently,” Belinga-Eboutou said.

Six of the 17 countries — Chad, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia and Swaziland — have not yet contacted the committee (U.N. release, Oct. 8).

Back to top

International Response:  U.N. Counterterrorism Cooperation Improves

By Jim Wurst
Global Security Newswire

UNITED NATIONS — One year after a counterterrorism committee was established to help governments comply with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373 on counterterrorism measures following last September’s attacks on the United States, the council Friday reviewed progress on the efforts (see GSN, April 16.

British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock, who has chaired the committee since its inception, said Friday that the council has “enjoyed unprecedented support from the U.N. membership for its efforts to turn the global consensus on fighting terrorism into practical action.”

Resolution 1373 called on states to adopt national laws to deny safe haven to terrorists, to halt the international transfer of money for terrorist activities and to ratify the 12 anti-terrorism treaties.  “Governments throughout the world have responded to the challenge ... [to] prevent and suppress terrorism,” Greenstock said.  “In almost every case, parliaments have begun to consider or adopted new laws and governments have reviewed the strength of their institutions to fight terrorism.”

Greenstock said more than 180 states have “reported to the CTC on the action taken and planned.  And the dialogue has continued. … To date, the total number of reports received by the CTC stands at 265.  Awareness of what we are doing, and of what we need to know, is close to universal.”

He added, “As required by the resolution, states have looked again at the 12 international conventions and protocols related to terrorism.  Ratifications have gone up significantly since July a year ago.  A year ago, only Botswana and the U.K. had ratified all 12 instruments.  Today, 24 states have done so.  We want the pace to accelerate further.”

Greenstock also told the council, “There is still much more to do before terrorists find that there is no safe haven because the bar against terrorism has been raised in every country.  The CTC will continue to offer encouragement, advice and guidance to states on the implementation of 1373.”

Secretary General Kofi Annan told the council the United Nations has a three-prong strategy for countering terrorism:  dissuasion, denial, and cooperation.  Dissuasion means “setting effective norms and implementing relevant legal instruments,” he said.  “To achieve effective dissuasion, it is essential to remember that the fight against terrorism is above all a fight to preserve fundamental rights and sustain the rule of law.”

Regarding denial, Annan said, “We must deny would-be terrorists the opportunity to commit their dreadful acts” by supporting the CTC, “by greater efforts to achieve disarmament — especially through strengthening global norms against the use or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; and by giving technical support to states seeking to curb the flow of arms, funds, and technology to terrorist cells.”

Annan described the U.N. role in cooperation as “encouraging subregional, regional, and global organizations to join forces in a common campaign.”

“Just as terrorism must never be excused, so must genuine grievances never be ignored simply because terrorism is committed in their name,” Annan said.  “It does not take away from the justice of a cause that a few wicked men or women commit murder in its name. … As the United Nations unites to defeat terrorism in the months and years ahead, we must act with equal determination to solve the political disputes and long-standing conflicts which generate support for terrorism.  To do so is not to reward terrorism or its perpetrators; it is to deny them the opportunity to find refuge, in any cause, any country.  Only then can we truly say that the war on terrorism has been won.”

The debate, which continued throughout the day Friday, resumes tomorrow afternoon.  At the conclusion, the council is expected to issue a statement calling on states to focus on ways to further implement Resolution 1373, to ratify the anti-terrorism conventions and to pass national legislation to strengthen laws against terrorism.

For more details of the session, click here.

For more information, see:

U.N. Counterterrorism Committee

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  Bush Rejected Final Insurance Offer, Senators Say

By Pamela Barnett

CongressDaily

WASHINGTON — The ideological dispute over tort reform that toppled terrorism insurance legislation in 2001 is again threatening to upend the bill, with Senate Democrats late Thursday saying the White House failed to respond to what they described as their “final” and most conciliatory offer.

“People have asked, ‘What is the best you can do?’  We’re here to tell you, this is the best we can do,” said Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn).  “If you take this language, we can have a bill signing ceremony in 24 hours.”

“This is our final plea.  We’ve gone as far as we can go.  The trial lawyers don’t like it, I can tell you that,” Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) added.

President George W. Bush Thursday called for Congress to reach an agreement by today, demanding in appearances that Congress place a bill on his desk on terrorism insurance, homeland security and Defense appropriations.  At a hastily convened news conference, a clearly exasperated Dodd and Schumer indicated they decided to go public on the secretive negotiations as a last ditch effort, after waiting since Wednesday to hear back from the White House on their most recent offer.

At issue is whether businesses should be shielded from liability associated with acts of terror.  The House-passed version of the terrorism bill incorporated tough legal-reform language that effectively prohibits any collection of punitive damages by victims of terrorism and caps attorney’s fees associated with such cases.  The Senate bill is silent on business liability, but shields the federal government.

The senators said the White House had sent “signals” that it would not accept the Democrats’ latest offer on liability.  Sources familiar with the proposal said the White House had sent it back with suggested changes.

That rejection apparently proved galling to the Democratic senators, who said they literally lifted GOP-drafted liability language included in last year’s education reform bill, which was approved by both chambers and subsequently signed into law by Bush.

The civil justice reform language in the education bill dealt with shielding teachers from lawsuits arising out of efforts to maintain classroom discipline.

Specifically, the bill limited the availability of punitive damages against teachers by requiring “clear and convincing evidence of willful or criminal misconduct, or a conscious, flagrant indifference to the rights or safety of the individual harmed.”

Dodd and Schumer said they proposed that the exact same standard, which represents an extremely high legal bar, be applied to terror-related lawsuits brought against private business.

“It has already been accepted as part of earlier legislation,” Dodd said.  “Can you take this legislation, and apply it here?”

Touted by such groups as the American Tort Reform Association as the most significant federal legal reform achieved during Bush’s tenure, the so-called teacher protection language is hardly popular with the trial bar, Schumer emphasized.

Nevertheless, Dodd said it was his understanding that the deal had been approved by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), who has been accused by the GOP of coddling the trial bar at the expense of the insurance bill.

Schumer said he was “totally befuddled” by the White House’s failure to embrace their compromise.

“We’ve gone as far as we can go,” he said, but added, “The signals we’re getting from the White House is that they’re not accepting it.”

Schumer said it would be a “tragedy” for the terrorism reinsurance bill to suffer the same fate as bankruptcy reform legislation, and suggested the White House is being held hostage to a handful of “ideologues” and tort reform “extremists” in “both chambers.”

Schumer also took a jab at the White House, saying:  “Leadership is not holding press conferences and saying you want a bill.  Leadership means telling this extreme element, this needs to get done.”

Asked whether he thought a deal was still possible this year if today’s deadline was missed, Schumer shrugged.  “There’s always life while we’re still in session,” he said.

Dodd conceded that other parts of the reinsurance negotiations remain unresolved, including questions about whether to include the House’s “payback” mechanism.

However, Dodd said he felt confident those aspects could be quickly settled if the tort reform issue was settled.

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Senate Democrats Reject Homeland Compromise

U.S. Senate Democrats yesterday rejected a Republican compromise on legislation to establish a homeland security department, which has been mired in debate for five weeks, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, Oct. 2).

The Republican compromise, which would have modified a bipartisan-suggested alternative, would have preserved the authority sought by President George W. Bush to waive union agreements for employees of the new department (see GSN, Sept. 25).  It would also have mandated, however, that for the waiver to apply, an employee’s job must have “materially changed” through transfer to the new department.  The Republican compromise would have allowed the president to use the waiver in the event of such a job change or of a change in the threat of domestic terrorism.

The Republican proposal contained nothing new and would have weakened the labor protections included in the bipartisan alternative, said Ranit Schmelzer, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.).

“This is all show and no substance,” Schmelzer said (Curt Anderson, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 4).

As Long As It Takes

Leaders in the Senate and House of Representatives said yesterday that they plan to stay in session until they pass the homeland security department bill.

“If it isn’t passed, we’re just going to stay until the election, and then we’ll be right back right after the election,” Daschle said.

The House also plans to stay in session in the event the Senate completes work on the bill, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said.

“If we have to come back one day a week to be in session to make sure that we are here, so that we can finish our work if the Senate does their work on homeland security, we will do that,” he said.

The Senate has made little progress on the homeland security bill since debate began in early September, according to the Washington Times.  Senate Republicans, supported by Senator Zell Miller (D-Ga.), have blocked five attempts to end debate, saying such a move would prevent an up-or-down vote on the White House proposal.  With the Senate scheduled next week to debate Iraq, there is no scheduled time to resume work on the bill before Congress is expected to adjourn Oct. 11 to campaign for the November elections, according to the Times.

Bush spoke out in support of the homeland security bill yesterday, saying he will accept no compromise on the hiring flexibility he has sought.

“The Senate must understand that I have a duty not only to protect the American people, but a duty to protect the prerogatives of the president,” Bush said during a Hispanic Heritage Month meeting of Republicans.

Democrats have offered their own version of the homeland security department bill, which is almost identical to the White House’s proposal, Daschle said.

“It’s down really to two things:  Should you have a right to belong to a union?  And if you’re fired, should some independent board have a chance to review why you were fired?  That’s really what we’re talking about here,” he said (Stephen Dinan, Washington Times, Oct. 4).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP