U.N. Security Council Moves Toward Creating List of Terror Groups

The Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution Friday paving the way for the creation of a global blacklist of groups considered to be terrorist organizations and a compensation fund for the families of their victims.

Russia introduced the measure after being hit by a series of attacks, including a hostage-taking at a school in Beslan and the downing of two passenger planes. It seeks international support against the Chechen groups that claimed responsibility and said they were fighting for self-determination.

Although the measure does not define terrorism or establish the global blacklist because of objections from Pakistan and Algeria, it creates a working group that is expected to draw up a list of organizations not already covered by sanctions against the Al Qaeda network and the Taliban.

The working group was also asked to recommend more effective ways to curb terrorist activities, including prosecution and extradition, freezing of assets, and bans on travel and arms sales. It will consider creating a compensation fund for families of victims, which could be financed by seized assets.

The resolution fell short of defining terrorism, a goal that has eluded the U.N. General Assembly and Security Council for years because what some states consider terrorism, others see as part of a liberation struggle.

However, it does state that intentional targeting of civilians for a cause is criminal and unjustifiable and exempts no group for political, religious or ideological reasons. The measure leaves the identification of terrorism suspects to the working group, which will refer to conventions against terrorism for its criteria.

“While we all agree that acts against civilians are terrorist acts, there is no similar consensus on what are the rights of people struggling against foreign occupation,” Pakistani Ambassador Munir Akram said.

The vagueness of the resolution, intended to help it win passage, disturbed U.S. Ambassador John C. Danforth, who said that harming civilians is never justifiable, no matter what the root cause.

“The resolution, which we have adopted, states very simply that the deliberate massacre of innocents is never justifiable in any cause. Never,” he said after the vote. “Supporters of the murder of civilians sometimes say that these are justifiable acts of national liberation or of self-determination. Some claim that exploding bombs in the midst of children is in the service of God. That is the ultimate blasphemy.”

Some Islamic groups believe that they are being targeted by the resolution, and human rights organizations say civil liberties are often ignored in crackdowns on suspected terrorist groups. Accelerated extradition can deprive suspects of due process, and suspects may face extended detention or even torture in the effort to curb terrorist activity, rights groups say.

The resolution’s stipulation that countries prosecute or extradite anyone who “supports” or “facilitates” the planning of terrorist attacks is too broad and can be abused, Amnesty International said. For example, someone who unknowingly provides lodging for a person who goes on to commit a violent attack could be arrested.

“This language casts the net so wide that people, including human rights advocates or peaceful political advocates, can easily and unintentionally fall victim to the measures,” the group’s statement said.

British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, noting the beheading of British hostage Kenneth Bigley in Baghdad, addressed concerns that the resolution’s broad powers could be abused.

“Of course, there are some difficult balances to be struck... ,” he told the Security Council. “The threat of terrorism confronts democratic states with an acute dilemma: to fight those who recognize none of the values for which we stand, while remaining true to those values. Counter-terrorism must be conducted in accordance with international law.”