Counter-Terrorism International Conference: ‘Riyadh Declaration’

The Counter-Terrorism International Conference held in Riyadh February 5-8, 2005, issued a final communiqué on February 8, to be known as the ‘Riyadh Declaration’.

The Riyadh Declaration stresses that no international effort will be capable of effective confrontation with the phenomenon of terrorism unless there is cooperation and a comprehensive strategic perspective to deal with it. Within this framework, the countries and organizations support and adopt the proposal of Deputy Prime Minister and Commander of the National Guard Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, referred to in his opening address to the Conference, for the establishment of an international center for combating terrorism. A task force has been formed to crystallize this proposal.

The communiqué raised the spirit of understanding and cooperation that prevailed during the conference, and the unanimity of vision and stance concerning the danger of the phenomenon of terrorism and the necessity of confronting it by long-term, united, and organized international efforts. These efforts must respect the principles of the United Nations, particularly those regulations governing human rights that enhance its inherent role, in adopting a comprehensive and multilateral approach. The Conference affirmed that terrorism constantly threatens peace, security and stability, and that there is no justification whatsoever for terrorist acts, which are always condemned whatever their circumstances or alleged motives might be.

The Declaration emphasized the importance of enhancing the values of understanding, tolerance, dialogue, and multilateralism, becoming acquainted with other peoples, bringing cultures together, rejecting any clash of civilizations, and combating any ideology that calls for hatred, instigates violence, or justifies the terrorist crimes that are denounced by all religions and laws.

The Conference affirmed that terrorism has no particular religion, race, nationality or geographical area. In this context, it stressed that any attempt to link terrorism with any religion is helpful only to the terrorists.

This is an excerpt of a report prepared by the Saudi Embassy in Washington on the final document issued by the International counterterrorsim Conference held in Riyadh earlier this month. The document itself, a communiqué, is written in “diplomatese”, thus touching the high points upon which all parties agree–it’s a consensus summing up of what went on over the period of the conference: not a lot of detail, but general principals.

The details, though, are found in another document, the Recommendations of the Four Working Groups (this is an eight-page PDF document), which are certainly worth a few minutes to read.

The second recommendation of the First Working Group clearly needs to be spot-lighted:

No matter what pretext terrorists may use for their deeds, terrorism has no justification. Terrorism, under all circumstances, regardless of the alleged motives, should be condemned unconditionally.

This item is followed by one that says there’s dispute over the definition of the term “terrorism”. It goes on to refer back to a United Nations report that should serve as the basis for working out this issue. While this may sound like a waffle, it’s not. Here’s what the pertinent part of the December 2004 UN report in question (a 99-page PDF document) says:

160. The search for an agreed definition usually stumbles on two issues. The first is the argument that any definition should include States’ use of armed forces against civilians. We believe that the legal and normative framework against State violations is far stronger than in the case of non-State actors and we do not find this objection to be compelling. The second objection is that peoples under foreign occupation have a right to resistance and a definition of terrorism should not override this right. The right to resistance is contested by some. But it is not the central point: the central point is that there is nothing in the fact of occupation that justifies the targeting and killing of civilians. [Emphasis added]

Read the Working Groups’ recommendations; they’re only eight pages long. The UN report is significantly longer and very formally written–it’s a slog to read–but is worth reading, too.