Role of UN in addressing terrorism

Was not one of the reasons and the objectives of formation of the United Nations maintaining and protecting human rights besides other reasons like maintaining international peace and security? Was not such formation done with the debris of the League of Nations after the end of the second World War since the League could neither prevent war nor domination of a few powerful countries nor absence of mutual co-operation between the countries? Although almost all sovereign countries in the world are the members of the United Nations, yet it is still far from functioning satisfactorily as per the enshrined charter in respect of realising the lethal dangers of terrorism, maintaining world peace and protecting human rights. Instead reports on such rights are, many a time, prepared and circulated with manufactured and hence avoidable content and data. That casts big shadows on the concepts of propriety and probity of the UNHRC one of the constituent bodies of the world body. Perhaps in 1945 when the UN was set up, one of the greatest scourges and dangers for societies, countries and possibly for the world peace, was neither conceived nor visualised to be in the form of terrorism both in disguised form and otherwise. Among the countries worst hit by terrorism for decades in a row, is India and at every international forum, this country has been highlighting, based on innumerable instances of losses both human and otherwise, suffered over the years, as to how the growing menace had the potential to destabilise and even destroy the countries and their ways of social life, liberty and freedom. Until September 11, 2001 when twin towers of American World Trade Centre and other buildings of importance, where four coordinated suicidal terror attacks wreaked havoc, what this country had been alerting the countries about the dangers of terrorism, was not probably taken seriously. Terrorism is such a malady that it knows no boundaries and has twin characteristics of imposing its way of thinking and living by brute force and scare as also spreading its tentacles fast. What has, therefore, the UN body done so far now that the scourge is menacingly active for the last many decades, to mobilise an international opinion, stand and a combined strategy to fight it? It is a travesty, to call a spade a spade, that the basics of even defining the problem let alone convening an international convention on it, has not been addressed by this world body so far. On these lines, Second Secretary in India’s Permanent Mission to the UN has recently expressed fears about the inability of the world body in addressing the ”most dangerous of scourges” faced by societies and countries in the world. While explicit reasons need to be known looking to the toll of human lives, destruction of infrastructure and other costly installations and assets as also disturbing the equilibria and stabilities of peace, social harmonies and relations of societies by the affliction of terrorism , at the same time how to dismantle its enabling networks was, as such, becoming more ticklish. That augured well neither for the world body nor for the future and fate of the cherished objectives for which it came into being. India has consistently and rather vigorously been pursuing with the world body to look more seriously, with intent to implementation, into its draft proposal on Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism but of no avail despite eRole of UN in addressing terrorism
Was not one of the reasons and the objectives of formation of the United Nations maintaining and protecting human rights besides other reasons like maintaining international peace and security? Was not such formation done with the debris of the League of Nations after the end of the second World War since the League could neither prevent war nor domination of a few powerful countries nor absence of mutual co-operation between the countries? Although almost all sovereign countries in the world are the members of the United Nations, yet it is still far from functioning satisfactorily as per the enshrined charter in respect of realising the lethal dangers of terrorism, maintaining world peace and protecting human rights. Instead reports on such rights are, many a time, prepared and circulated with manufactured and hence avoidable content and data. That casts big shadows on the concepts of propriety and probity of the UNHRC one of the constituent bodies of the world body. Perhaps in 1945 when the UN was set up, one of the greatest scourges and dangers for societies, countries and possibly for the world peace, was neither conceived nor visualised to be in the form of terrorism both in disguised form and otherwise. Among the countries worst hit by terrorism for decades in a row, is India and at every international forum, this country has been highlighting, based on innumerable instances of losses both human and otherwise, suffered over the years, as to how the growing menace had the potential to destabilise and even destroy the countries and their ways of social life, liberty and freedom. Until September 11, 2001 when twin towers of American World Trade Centre and other buildings of importance, where four coordinated suicidal terror attacks wreaked havoc, what this country had been alerting the countries about the dangers of terrorism, was not probably taken seriously. Terrorism is such a malady that it knows no boundaries and has twin characteristics of imposing its way of thinking and living by brute force and scare as also spreading its tentacles fast. What has, therefore, the UN body done so far now that the scourge is menacingly active for the last many decades, to mobilise an international opinion, stand and a combined strategy to fight it? It is a travesty, to call a spade a spade, that the basics of even defining the problem let alone convening an international convention on it, has not been addressed by this world body so far. On these lines, Second Secretary in India’s Permanent Mission to the UN has recently expressed fears about the inability of the world body in addressing the ”most dangerous of scourges” faced by societies and countries in the world. While explicit reasons need to be known looking to the toll of human lives, destruction of infrastructure and other costly installations and assets as also disturbing the equilibria and stabilities of peace, social harmonies and relations of societies by the affliction of terrorism , at the same time how to dismantle its enabling networks was, as such, becoming more ticklish. That augured well neither for the world body nor for the future and fate of the cherished objectives for which it came into being. India has consistently and rather vigorously been pursuing with the world body to look more seriously, with intent to implementation, into its draft proposal on Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism but of no avail despite elapsing of years in a row. There was no logic in the world body keeping such a threat either in a state of triviality or ”eternal” pendency to face effectively , not the least ignoring its diabolical aims and objectives. That virtually, without mincing words, is tantamount to rendering itself to a mere ruse if not gravely imperilling its very existence in the not very long run. Why cannot terrorism, especially having its links with ideologies based on extremist religious and fundamentalist basis , be properly defined and lineated followed by holding much talked about an international convention on terrorism which could pave way for formulating well coordinated and suitable policies to tackle it lock stock and barrel . Since that would bring in focus those countries which were brazenly and nakedly sponsoring, aiding, abetting and promoting terrorism and thus getting more exposed and even subjected to face international economic and diplomatic sanctions, if not absolute isolation, the issue could get a way of how properly to handle it. On the contrary, when even on the basics, there was neither any broad consensus nor any urgency among the member countries, especially the five permanent members, how could terrorism be effectively tackled is the moot question
lapsing of years in a row. There was no logic in the world body keeping such a threat either in a state of triviality or ”eternal” pendency to face effectively , not the least ignoring its diabolical aims and objectives. That virtually, without mincing words, is tantamount to rendering itself to a mere ruse if not gravely imperilling its very existence in the not very long run. Why cannot terrorism, especially having its links with ideologies based on extremist religious and fundamentalist basis , be properly defined and lineated followed by holding much talked about an international convention on terrorism which could pave way for formulating well coordinated and suitable policies to tackle it lock stock and barrel . Since that would bring in focus those countries which were brazenly and nakedly sponsoring, aiding, abetting and promoting terrorism and thus getting more exposed and even subjected to face international economic and diplomatic sanctions, if not absolute isolation, the issue could get a way of how properly to handle it. On the contrary, when even on the basics, there was neither any broad consensus nor any urgency among the member countries, especially the five permanent members, how could terrorism be effectively tackled is the moot question