Civil society organizations gathered at the United Nations in New York on April 8 for a “town hall” to provide input into the 9th review of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (GCTS), which is due to culminate in a new strategy by the end of June. Unfortunately, unlike CSO town halls during other reviews of the strategy in recent years, the planning and organization of this one was largely directed by U.N. entities, led by the U.N. Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT). By contrast, during the previous review in 2023, for example, civil society took the lead in partnership with member states that co-facilitated the review.
While the reasons for U.N. entities taking the reins this time might be logistical or for expediency, it reflects a disturbing global pattern of civil society increasingly being sidelined. Worse yet, in some countries, civil society is even criminalized and falsely labeled as terrorists or terrorist supporters. Such suppression of civic activity, and the recent rejection of international human rights standards on a number of fronts, generates creeping doubt about the commitment of U.N. counterterrorism entities to meaningfully include civil society going forward.
As the 9th review of the strategy unfolds in the coming months, member states, the U.N. system, and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) must take concrete actions to restore and deepen the involvement of civil society, especially those from the Global South.
20 Years of the U.N.’s Counterterrorism Push
The completion of the current review of the strategy will mark the 20th anniversary of its first passage in 2006, stemming in part from U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373 that was adopted in the days following the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaeda attacks on the United States. The aim of the strategy was to enhance national, regional, and international efforts to counter terrorism, and it features four pillars:
- Addressing the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism.
- Preventing and combating terrorism.
- Building the capacity of states to prevent and combat terrorism and strengthening the role of the U.N. in that regard.
- Ensuring respect for human rights for all and the rule of law as the fundamental basis of the fight against terrorism.
During the first several reviews, which usually are conducted every two years, civil society participation was minimal, if not virtually non-existent. Two human rights and legal experts who know the process well described it in these pages during the 7th review in 2021, writing, “The United Nations counterterrorism system is hostile to civil society participation, is harming civic space and needs to change direction.” That year’s review was still quite closed overall, despite increased civil society engagement. Space for civil society participation improved to some extent since then, due in no small measure to sustained efforts of entities such as the CSO Coalition on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism (where I serve on the steering committee) and international NGOs. Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, the U.N. special rapporteur on protecting human rights while countering terrorism at the time, also helped by consistently highlighting obstacles to civil society participation and providing concrete recommendations for their greater inclusion.
Yet, the U.N. counterterrorism system continues to resist meaningful participation, and there is a risk that hard-won small gains in the ability of civil society to shape global counterterrorism policy might be lost.
Organizations from the Global South, including many that have worked to address the often-devastating human rights impacts of counterterrorism measures in their local communities, face particular challenges in this regard. Many of these organizations and activists who work on addressing the local effects of counterterrorism strategies and tactics may even be unaware of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and its relevance to their work. And even if they were aware and interested in the review process, most lack the means to obtain information about it or to engage with the U.N. counterterrorism entities or member states involved in the negotiations.
Despite the inherent weaknesses of the international legal system, CSOs in the Global South prevailed on their own governments to adhere to these norms. The ongoing attacks on and dismantling of the international rules-based order by countries including the United States, however, might now make Global South organizations reject the U.N. or at the very least make them skeptical of the relevance of the GCTS and the U.N.. And yet they are best-placed to provide evidence-based input on the protections required to ensure that counterterrorism measures do not undermine human rights. Their absence from the review process deprives the negotiators critical insight that would make the strategy more effective.
Heeding Civil Society: Moving Beyond Ticking the Box
Terrorism and counterterrorism issues that are most visible and currently generating interest from member states and U.N. structures include topics such as “terrorism in Africa,” which, while an issue, is often overbroadly invoked and instrumentalized by states to restrict rights, a point suggested recently by U.N. Special Rapporteur on Protecting Human Rights while Countering Terrorism Ben Saul. While such issues might prompt civil society from that part of the world to be included in the processes, it too often becomes more of a box-ticking exercise with too little diversity among invitees and too few opportunities to engage meaningfully.
In the meantime, decades-long counterterrorism initiatives in other parts of the world garner far less attention, including in South Asia, for example, where governments have weaponized states of emergency, colonial-era sedition laws, and even laws meant to protect human rights to restrict rights in the guise of counterterrorism. Barriers to civil society involvement include understanding and navigating complex mechanisms and processes, the lack of access/entry points due to the closed nature of the mechanisms and processes, and the absence of consistent and meaningful institutional support from U.N. counterterrorism entities.
While certain international NGOs based in the United States or Europe provide avenues for their national partners in the Global South to gain some access to the U.N. counterterrorism system, it is not done consistently. Even where that occurs, the practice in effect privileges CSOs with such international connections. The obstacles to participation faced by civil society in the Global South reflect a similar pattern in the ongoing UN80 “reform” efforts, which have ended up focusing less on improvements based on clear need for substantive reform than on budget cutting amid the worst funding crisis the U.N. system has witnessed. (The U.N. already, for example, has reduced its field presence and activities.) Faced with such significant internal structural changes and rapidly declining resources, the U.N. counterterrorism entities might be even less inclined to prioritize civil society engagement.
There are several processes that run parallel to the counterterrorism strategy review that seek to provide a civil society analysis of the implementation of the strategy and an assessment of the performance of U.N. counterterrorism entities. One such initiative is the Blue Sky Report by the Global Center on Cooperative Security, an international NGO. The report is presented at a retreat on Long Island attended by member states, U.N. officials, and civil society. Yet, civil society from the Global South is usually absent and largely unaware of these processes.
In other words, inviting CSO partners from the Global South to New York – whether U.N. headquarters or otherwise — to speak at an event or meet with diplomats once every couple of years or even annually does not provide them the opportunity to build relationships with diplomats or U.N. officials or to be up to date on counterterrorism initiatives. Several other factors, such as visa restrictions, the lack of funding, and the risk of reprisals from their own governments for expressing their concerns in international counterterrorism forums, makes their participation even less likely. The CSO Coalition on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism provides regular updates on the review process to its members and ensures that voices from the Global South have platforms for input. But these opportunities are limited and greatly inadequate.
The Strategy Review: An Opportunity to do Better
U.N. counterterrorism entities, as reiterated in the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy as well as the Secretary General’s Guidance Note on the Protection and Promotion of Civic Space, have a responsibility to adopt proactive measures to increase civil society participation and leadership on these issues. This is reiterated in the U.N. Secretary-General’s 2020 Call to Action for Human Rights, which reaffirmed the need to “Review and strengthen United Nations tools that aim to empower civil society, protect civic space and encourage participation by all groups in democratic processes.” The strategy review is an opportunity to demonstrate that oft-stated commitment through concrete action.
The recent intensification of attacks on the international rules-based system is the result of decades of prioritizing militarized or law enforcement-powered imperatives over human rights obligations and the values of the U.N. Charter under the misguided notion that it will lead to greater global “security.” It is common for some U.N. counterterrorism entities to view human rights as distinct from security, rather than as the means for ensuring it.
A simple way of addressing this artificial bifurcation would be to measure the success of counterterrorism programs supported by the U.N. not only by tabulating project outputs but, more significantly, by documenting whether human rights were protected, whether the “do no harm principle” was followed to ensure that counterterrorism efforts don’t do more harm than good, and whether space for civil society to work on the human rights aspects of counterterrorism measures shrank or grew.
During the 8th review of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in 2023, the Civil Society Town Hall held between the first and second drafts of the strategy provided an avenue for civil society from all over the world to recommend ways of strengthening the text, supported by examples from national and regional contexts. The CSO Coalition took the lead in organizing that Town Hall in collaboration with the co-facilitators of the review process. This meant that in both appearance and in content, the event was truly led by civil society and directly relevant to the ongoing negotiations.
The impact of the event extended beyond the review process. During the 8th review, member states maintained existing human rights protections and added a few more, while also ensuring over-broad terminology (such as “violent nationalism” and “extremism” without the qualifier “violent”) was not included in the final review. This can be partly attributed to the visibility civil society gained as a result of the town hall, which enabled CSOs to raise the downstream harms of over-broad language. The town hall also led to increased civil society engagement with U.N. counterterrorism actors.
The only way to assuage the important and very legitimate concerns of civil society is through action.
Next Steps
After the scheduled release of the zero draft of the new strategy on April 15, the review process, led by the permanent representatives (ambassadors) to the U.N. from Finland and Morocco and the U.N. Office of Counter-Terrorism (which functions as the secretariat for the review), includes circulating revisions on May 5 and May 26, based on interim feedback. That offers more opportunities to acquire the invaluable input that civil society, especially from the Global South, can offer. It also is a chance for member states and the U.N. office to ensure that the strategy going forward substantially improves mechanisms for global civil society to offer input — and for the U.N. system to take it seriously and implement the recommendations.
Member states should call upon the U.N. counterterrorism system — in particular, the U.N. Office of Counter-Terrorism — to proactively reach out to civil society in the Global South and engage them in the process. At the same time, member states should enable and facilitate CSOs in their own countries to do the same.
The U.N. counterterrorism system should proactively reach out to and involve a diverse group of CSOs in the review process, while devising a long overdue long-term strategy to encourage civil society to engage. For this, they could enlist the assistance of U.N. agencies that work on rights issues and have deep relationships with diverse civil society organizations and leaders, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and UN Women. While ensuring that platforms such as the town hall are civil society-led and -curated in the future, the U.N. should also create more space and meaningful ways for gathering civil society input and integrating their views and perspectives into U.N. counterterrorism planning.
International NGOs should increase their advocacy for including Global South civil society leadership. In their engagement with member states and the U.N., they could scrutinize planning for counterterrorism events, especially events related to the global strategy review — not only the U.N.’s but also the international NGOs’ own — to ensure participation. They may even need to take steps at times to cede space, such as by refusing to speak for or on behalf of the Global South, and instead ensure their counterparts’ voices are heard.
The U.N. and its member states have an obligation to civil society, which should be better represented at the U.N. and to enable their greater participation in processes at multilateral bodies. After all, addressing the root causes and drivers of terrorism and preventing it cannot be effective without the substantive, serious involvement of civil society, especially at the grassroots. More than 20 years of failed experimentation on counterterrorism without heeding the advice of civil society proves the point.
– Ambika Satkunanathan, Published courtesy of Just Security.
