|
Abu Dhabi, Sept 30, 2001 (WAM) -- Two UAE papers said today that the UN did well when it passed a resolution on fighting terrorism, but a lot of work remained to be done as the resolution did not define what terrorism is. Commenting on the issue, +The Gulf Today+ said : +The UN resolution on fighting terrorism, passed by the Security Council on Friday, is significant not only for its speedy conclusion or unanimity in agreement. For the first time it spells out concrete measures against an abstract concept that is unspecified but very real. +The resolution is proactive, uniting the world as one single army against terrorism. The speed with which the council stamped its seal is reassuring. All the 189 member nations are legally obliged to follow therules.There is a universal praise for the UN. No doubt, it makes one feel good. Or, does it? +The US-sponsored resolution makes it binding for all countries to make wilful financing of terrorism a criminal offence, immediately freeze terrorist-related funds and prevent movement of individuals and groups suspected of having terrorist connections. +No single country, society, or a group of people has been named as it is perceived that terrorism is global. A committee has also been created to oversee the implementation. The UN also sounded tough -in line with the general mood of tough-talking seen all over the world -when it stressed that the members have to accept it irrespective of whether protocols or conventions are ratified or not. +The resolution also supported the US decision to respond to the attacks on Sept. 11. So far so good. Washington is happy and so is the rest of the world. There is now legal framework for the whole exercise. +Experts say several legal measures have been incorporated into the resolution that make each country to follow certain rules. This would also mean that no country could take unilateral decisions that contradicts the framework. Action taken against terrorists or terror groups must be legally binding - a fact that may mark borderlines on Washington's retaliation map. +A whole lot of parameters have been brought in that could define the action plan. But then, it is anybody's guess how the US would read between the lines. The general perception the resolution gives is that it is no licence to kill. +Now comes the biggest blow that could blast the whole tower of euphoria like a house of cards. The UN does not say what this ''terrorism'' is. It simply does not define the enemy that it expects the world to erase from the world. This definitely is suspicious. Could the UN be once again playing safe? Framing an enemy without telling who he is could be a way of helping someone to escape. +The stand taken by the UAE and many other Muslim countries is very pertinent here. The UAE has stressed that Israeli attacks against Palestinians must be seen as terrorism and its presence in the US-led coalition may force Muslim countries to rethink about their role in the coalition. +The UN has the obligation to convince everyone that everything is fair in this war and that no terrorist escapes from the net. Otherwise the optimism would be misplaced, just another shot in the dark. MORE WAM/TF-VV |
|
(c) Copyright 2001 Emirates News Agency
(WAM) |