Problem of Definitions in United Nations Documents

By Ayman Okeil
There is a significant issue that specialists and those familiar with United Nations affairs may recognize, but it often surprises the average person who is not engaged with the international system or armed groups. This issue is the inability of member states to agree on specific definitions for phenomena that have affected entire populations and resulted in countless victims, such as terrorism. Currently, there is no comprehensive, globally accepted definition of terrorism found in United Nations documents.
This problem primarily arises from ideological differences rooted in the interests of member states and their differing perspectives on what constitutes terrorism. A terrorist, from the viewpoint of United States, may be seen as a freedom fighter by other countries. Despite efforts by United Nations to establish a universally accepted definition of terrorism, these attempts have unfortunately not succeeded.
None of the thirteen UN counter-terrorism conventions provide a comprehensive definition of terrorism, including 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and 1999 International Convention for Suppression of Financing of Terrorism. Various resolutions issued by different bodies of the international organization have also failed to adopt a universal definition. Security Council attempted to navigate this controversy by stating in some of its resolutions that all terrorist acts cannot be justified, regardless of the motives behind them, but it did not offer a specific definition. In its resolution 1373 of 2001, Security Council urged member states to criminalize terrorist acts in their domestic laws, yet it did not provide a definition of terrorism, leaving the debate among member states ongoing.
In 2006, UN General Assembly adopted resolution 60/288 on United Nations Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which acknowledged that member states were committed to resolving outstanding issues, including the definition of terrorism. However, eighteen years after the adoption of this strategy, this commitment has not translated into a consensus on a comprehensive definition of terrorism. In a public session, members of the United Nations Sixth Committee engaged in debates over the definition of terrorism. Despite years of negotiations, the international community’s efforts to formulate a comprehensive convention on international terrorism have failed.
Under General Assembly resolution 51/210, a specialized committee was established to draft such a convention. Additionally, in December 2021, the General Assembly decided in resolution 76/121 to recommend that the Sixth Committee establish a working group to expedite the process related to the draft comprehensive convention on international terrorism. Some countries attribute the stagnation in negotiations to disagreements over a globally accepted definition of terrorism. In my view, this issue will remain unresolved unless independent international institutions are established that operate free from the control of member states, particularly the five countries that hold veto power. These institutions should not allow the interests of these countries to interfere in the scientific and legal foundations of phenomena that impact us all.