What's In Blue

Posted Fri 24 Jan 2025
  • Print
  • Share

Counter-Terrorism: Adoption of Presidential Statement

This afternoon (24 January), the Security Council adopted a presidential statement on counter-terrorism. The presidential statement was proposed by Algeria in connection with its signature event on counter-terrorism in Africa, which began on 21 January, and the vote took place before that meeting resumed this afternoon. (For more information on the signature event, see our 21 January What’s in Blue story.)

Algeria circulated the first draft of the presidential statement on 11 January and convened an in-person negotiation on 14 January. Algeria then sent members a document with the comments made by Council members during this meeting on 15 January.  Following written inputs on the draft, on 16 January Algeria circulated another document compiling the comments it had received from members and scheduled a second in-person negotiation on 20 January. A revised draft was circulated to Council members on 22 January and placed directly under silence. Russia broke silence on 23 January and, following bilateral consultations, Algeria then put a second revised draft directly under silence until 9am today. That draft passed silence and was adopted this afternoon.

The presidential statement includes new language specifically relating to terrorism in Africa, such as text acknowledging that terrorism hinders the implementation of the AU’s Agenda 2063 and poses a challenge for the efforts of the AU to silence the guns in Africa by 2030. The presidential statement also requests the Secretary-General to provide annual updates to the Council on joint AU-UN efforts to combat terrorism in Africa. It appears that some members questioned whether there was a need for such reporting, and text indicating these reports should be provided “as necessary” was added to address these concerns.

Some issues proved to be controversial. It appears that a proposed reference to the importance of ensuring predictable, sustainable, and flexible funding for African Union-led peace support operations (AUPSOs), which was drawn from resolution 2719, was a particularly contentious issue. (Adopted on 21 December 2023, resolution 2719 authorised support for AUPSOs from UN assessed contributions on a case-by-case basis. It also underlined the need to enhance the adequacy, predictability, and sustainability of financing for AUPSOs authorised by the Council.) France apparently sought to bolster the language on this issue by adding text welcoming the adoption of resolution 2719, while the US argued that the relevant paragraph should also refer to the 75 percent budget cap. (Resolution 2719 determined that AUPSOs authorised by the Council will have access to funding from UN assessed contributions not exceeding 75 percent of their annual budgets.) It seems that some members, including Slovenia, the UK, and the US, also contended that the paragraph should use the same language as resolution 2719 and refer to “adequate, predictable, and sustainable” funding rather than “predictable, sustainable, and flexible” funding. Russia, however, opposed referring to this issue entirely and appears to have broken silence over the relevant text during the first silence procedure. Language on the financing of AUPSOs was subsequently removed from the presidential statement.

It seems that text relating to women and gender was another controversial issue, with several likeminded members seeking, albeit without success, to add relevant language in different parts of the presidential statement. The UK, for instance, apparently argued that gender inequality should be referred to as a condition conducive to terrorism, while Denmark and Slovenia suggested including previously agreed language from an 11 March 2020 presidential statement on the use of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) by terrorist groups. It appears that Denmark also contended that language from resolution 2242 on the differential impact of terrorism on the human rights of women and girls should be incorporated in the text. Panama, for its part, apparently proposed adding text on the important role played by women in countering terrorism. These suggestions were opposed by other members, including Russia, and were not included in the presidential statement.

Council members also disagreed over text referring to violent extremism. The first draft circulated by Algeria included several references to violent extremism, including violent extremism conducive to terrorism; however this was generally opposed by Russia, which apparently sought to remove the qualifier “violent” from all references to extremism and replace it with more general language, such as “acts of extremism”. This was opposed by other members and, in an apparent compromise, the presidential statement does not include any references to extremism.

Language from the General Assembly’s July 2023 resolution on the eighth review of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy reaffirming the determination of member states to do all they can to, among other matters, resolve conflict, end foreign occupation, eradicate poverty and promote sustained economic growth, was another issue for Council members. Russia apparently proposed deleting this paragraph, while the US suggested it would disassociate from it, and it was ultimately removed from the presidential statement.

New member Pakistan, which has indicated that counter-terrorism is a priority for its term on the Council, was active during the negotiations and suggested several changes to the text. Some of these amendments were incorporated while others, including a proposal to include text on reviewing, adjusting, and terminating sanctions regimes where appropriate, were not.

Sign up for What's In Blue emails

Subscribe to receive SCR publications