INTRODUCTION
The leaders of the G20, from leading industrial and developing economies, met at Hamburg in Germany on July 7-8, 2017, and came out with an official Statement on Countering Terrorismi, wherein the leaders collectively “condemned all terrorist attacks worldwide” and expressed their resolve to “stand united and firm in the fight against terrorism and its financing.” The G20 group, formed in 1999 to address the issue of debt restructuring and International Monetary Fund (IMF) reforms in the backdrop of the Asian Financial Crisis, has evolved in terms of representation and scope. Firstly, in the former category, the G20 has elevated from Ministerial level (Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors), starting as a joint initiative by Canada’s Finance Minister Paul Martin and United States (US) Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, to Leaders’ level, following the 2008 economic crisis. Secondly, as far as the scope of the group is concerned, the G20, apart from focusing on international economic issues, has over a period of time developed and evolved a narrative on counter-terrorism measures, with emphasis on financial controls.
Objective
The main objective of this paper is to analyse the evolution of the narrative on terrorism and counter-terrorism in G20. In doing this, the paper is broadly divided into three sections that deal with the following issues,
SECTION I
Evolution of the Narrative on Terrorism/Counter-Terrorism (CT)
The G20 members, which constitutes the most powerful and influential countries as well as the biggest economies of the world, are united against any form of terrorism and terrorist activity. Given the growing insecurity arising out of conflicts across the globe, terrorism has come to occupy a prominent position in the G20, which is a Global Governance Institution. Since its creation in 1999, the G20 has distinctively focused on economic issues in a globalised world, ensuring financial stability. However, the first reference to terrorism, particularly terror financing, at G20 was made in 2001 Meeting in Canada, following the September 11, 2001 (also known as 9/11) terror attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon in United States (US). Here, the US representatives used the G20 forum to respond to the critical challenges posed by terrorism. In addition, at this G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting on November 16-17, 2001, the representatives collectively expressed their will and determination to “stop the financing of terrorism”ii in cooperation with the International Financial Institutions (IFIs that include the World Bank, the Regional Development Banks, and the IMF), the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF), the Financial Stability Board (FSB, which prior to the G20 London Summit (2009) worked as the Financial Stability Forum) and other relevant and related international bodies. In pursuing this commitment, the representatives agreed to freeze terrorist assets under the United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) 1373iii that was adopted on September 28, 2001, and enhance international cooperation by exchange of information and outreach under the ratification and implementation of UN Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorismiv that was drafted on December 9, 1999 and came into force on April 10, 2002.
The 2001 Meeting was held in the ‘backdrop of a global economic slowdown whose effects were exacerbated by the tragic events of 9/11 that was intended to shake global economic confidence and security.’v Subsequently, post-9/11 the issues of global security, mainly fight against terrorism and terror financing, have found a significant place in the agenda of the G20 Summits, with the exception of two Ministers & Governors Summits --- in 2005, China and 2007, South Africa, and two Leaders Summits --- in 2009, London and in 2014, Brisbane. With the exception of these four Summits, the issue of terrorism and counter-terrorism has found a place in the rest of the G20 Summits in varying degrees As shown in Table 1. This advancement in the scope of the G20 forum could be a result of increasing security threats emerging out of conflict zones around the world and posed by new and old non-state actors. Terrorism, from within or without, is an attack on the essence of Westphalian sovereign state system, which directly impacts economic growth and development.
The table below (Table 1) highlights the major themes covered at the 12 Leaders Summits, starting with 2008 when the urgency of the global financial crisis precipitated the representational status of the Summit from Ministerial level to Leaders level.
Table 1: G20 LEADERS SUMMIT DOCUMENTS ON TERRORISM/CT (2008-2017) |
||||||||||||
Themes |
2008 Washington DC, November 14-15 |
2009 (a) London, April 1-2 |
2009 (b) Pittsburgh, September 24-25 |
2010 (a) Toronto, June 26-27 |
2010 (b) Seoul, November 11-12 |
2011 Cannes, November 3-4 |
2012 Los Cabos, June 18-19 |
2013 St. Petersburg, September 5-6 |
2014 Brisbane, November 15-16 |
2015 Antalya, November 15-16 |
2016 Hangzhou, September 4-5 |
2017 Germany, June 7-8 |
United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (UNGCTS) / UNSCR |
No Reference (henceforth NR) |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR
|
NR |
Recognition of UN’s central role with full implementation of UNSCR and UNGCTS. CT to be based on UNSCR 2178 that expresses concern over the growing threat posed by Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTF) and the threat it poses to all States, including countries of origin, transit and destination. |
Under the larger framework of strengthening financing of terrorism, the leaders called for the effective and universal implementation of UNSCR 2253 that expanded and strengthened the Security Council’s framework on al Qaeda sanctions to include a focus on Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Daesh). |
The leaders gave a call for the implementation of existing international commitments on countering terrorism, including the UNGCTS. Taking it from the 2015 Summit in Antalya, the leaders recalled the UNSCR 2178 and addressed the evolving threat of returning FTFs from conflict zones. |
Terror Financing: FATF / FATF-style bodies |
Under the Action Plan to Implement Principles for Reform the leaders at G20 (1) required the FATF to continue working against money laundering and terror financing / (2) and urged the implementation of measures to protect global financial system from illicit financial activity. (3) Extended support for the efforts made by the World Bank on Stolen Assets Recovery (StAR) |
NR |
Leaders acknowledged the (1) progress made by the FATF in fight against ML and TF. (2) With the increase of capital flow into developing countries, the leaders urged for the prevention of illicit outflow, including StAR. |
The leaders expressed (1) full support to FATF and FATF-style regional bodies, (2) encouraged FATF to continue monitoring and enhancing compliance with the anti-ML (AML) and CT-Financing, (3) for innovative financial inclusion the leaders proposed to consider “an appropriate, flexible, risk-based AML and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) |
As part of the larger Anti-Corruption Agenda, the leaders called to (1) further strengthen efforts to prevent and combat money laundering in order to prevent corrupt officials from accessing the global financial system. For this, the G20 leaders invited the FATF to continue to emphasise the anti-corruption agenda. Recalling the 2009 Pittsburgh Summit, the leaders (2) urged the need to identify and engage those jurisdictions with strategic AML/Counter Financing of Terrorism (CFT) deficiencies, while also ensure the implementation of FATF standards for transparent of cross-border wires. |
The leaders reiterated their pledge to (1) support the work of the FATF to identify and engage those jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies and (2) update and implement FATF standards. (3) Expressed agreement on the work programme, which includes a framework for asset recovery and building of World Bank’s StAR. |
In an attempt to reform the financial sector and foster financial inclusion, the leaders at the Summit (1) expressed their support to the renewal of the FATF mandate, which include global efforts to combat ML and TF along with combating the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). This could be the result of growing concerns over Syria’s possession of WMD, which was disclosed a month later in July 2012 by the Syrian Foreign Ministry. |
The Declaration reiterated the (1) leaders’ commitment to FATF’s work in fighting ML and TF along with other related crimes like tax crime, corruption and drug trafficking. These measures taken by FATF will remain significant areas of cooperation |
NR |
Leaders reiterated their commitment to (1) tackle financing channels of terrorism. This includes, freezing of terrorist assets, criminalisation of terrorist financing and robust targeted financial sanctions regimes related to terrorism and TF, including implementation of FATF in all jurisdictions. |
The leaders resolved (1) to tackle all sources, techniques and channels of terrorist financing, including extortion, taxation, smuggling of natural resources, bank looting and kidnapping-for-ransom. (2) To effectively exchange information, freeze terrorist assets, and criminalise terror financing, along with swift implementation of FATF standards. |
|
Counter-Radicalisation / Internet recruitment |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
Apart from UNSCR 2178, the leaders expressed that CT actions must be based o countering violent extremism, combating radicalisation and recruitment, hampering terrorists mobility, countering their propaganda, and preventing terrorists from exploiting technology, communications and resources that incite violence. |
NR |
Emphasis was laid on combating radicalisation and recruitment, which would in turn hamper the movement of terrorists as well as pose a challenge to their propaganda mechanism. Secondly, the leaders discussed the need for knowledge sharing in order address the threat emanating from FTFs. Thirdly, collaborate with private sector, particularly, communication service provider, to fight exploitation of the internet and social media. |
Consensus on condemnation / action |
Commitment to address challenges like terrorism |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
The leaders pledge their solidarity and resolve to fight terrorism in all its forms. Enhance cooperation and develop relevant measures, including operational information-sharing, border management and strengthen global aviation security |
Collective voice condemning terrorism in all forms and manifestations. |
The leaders condemned all terrorist attacks worldwide and called for the elimination of terrorist safe havens from every part of the world. |
Remarks |
The first G20 Leaders Summit primarily focused on promoting integrity in financial markets by encouraging measures to protect markets/investors from illicit actors, illicit financing, money laundering and terrorist financing. The group did not make any reference to the UN CT or any such related Resolutions in the UN. It was in this Summit that the G20 for the first time expanded its scope to include global security issues. |
At the London Summit the issue of terrorism/CT was not raised. |
The Pittsburgh Summit was limited in terms of focus. The declaration was restricted to ML/TF and was without a unanimous voice on condemnation of all manifestations of terror. |
The 2010 Toronto Summit was a reiteration on CTF based on international standards that would enhance global compliance and monitoring. |
The Seoul Summit (2010) was limited to its anti-corruption agenda that also took into account the 2009 agreement/declaration that emphasised on engaging and identifying the AML/CFT deficient jurisdictions. |
Much like the previous Summits, the 2011 Summit at Cannes in its declaration on building common future stressed on renewing collective action for the benefit of all. This would include AML and combating financing of terrorism in cooperation with the FATF. |
Apart from reaffirming the efforts to enhance cooperation in combating ML/TF, the leaders at the G20 Summit for the first time articulated the need to deter and combat the proliferation of WMD. |
Limited to ML/TF |
No mention of ML/TF |
The Antalya Summit in 2015 was holistic in its approach, discussing global economic trends as well as the issue of terrorism on a lengthy note. It was the first time that the leaders came out with a separate statement on the fight against terrorism, entailing crucial points that have been discussed above. |
The 2016 Hangzhou Summit addressed the universal implementation of FATF and provisions of UNSCR 2253, while at the same time collectively condemned terrorism in all its forms. Despite the emphasis on the implementation of UNSCR 2253, the leaders did not address the issue of online recruitment and threat posed by the FTF and fighters returning from Syria and Iraq to their home countries. |
The 2017 Summit at Hamburg indicates the pressing concerns of G20 countries on the issue of security governance with the evolution of the discourse on terrorism within the international forum of G20 in the last ten years. |
An analysis of Table 1 suggests that the narrative on terrorism/CT has evolved in G20 since the beginning of its first leaders’ Summit in 2008. It is observed that the initial agenda of the forum was limited to addressing terrorism as part of the larger anti-corruption programmes with an aim to controlling financial flows, particularly money laundering and strengthening of the FATF standards. However, with the evolution in the trends and pattern of terrorism and terrorist activities across the world, there has been a significant broadening of parameters in the discourse on the subject within the G20. For instance, in the initial seven years, from 2008-2014, the response of the leaders to terrorism was restricted to the use of economic and financial inflow/outflow, which also expanded in 2016 to include, financial instruments like sanctions on al Qaeda and Daesh.
Hence, the communiqués in this period (2008-2013) are mainly a reiteration and reaffirmation of one another, with no substantial shifts or adaption observed; and limited to terrorist finance. However, this reference to terrorism/CT was absent from the agenda and declaration of the Brisbane Summit in 2014.
On the other hand, in 2015 at the Antalya Summit, chaired by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the issue of terrorism was given prominence. The outcome of this was a separate Statement on the Fight against Terrorismvi, which demonstrated the higher level of discussion on the subject, illustrating an expansion of discourse, moving beyond “inclusive economic growth” to “fight against terrorism in all its forms.” In the context of refugee crisis emerging out of the conflict in Syria – the biggest driver of migration - the leaders at Antalya while recognising the central role of UN and the UN Charter and obligations under international law, made the fight against terrorism “a major priority”vii for all our countries. In fact, the narrative on CT in 2015 was a major departure from the previous Summits, with the inclusion of some necessary and important issues required for combating terrorism. These include, tackling financing channels of terrorism by enhanced cooperation on exchange of information and freezing of terrorist assets, criminalization of terrorist financing and robust targeted financial sanctions regimes related to terrorism and terrorist financing, including through swift implementation of FATF standards in all jurisdiction, countering violent extremism combating radicalization and recruitment, hampering terrorist movements, countering terrorist propaganda and to prevent terrorists from exploiting technology, communications and resources to incite terrorist acts, and implementation of UNSCR 2178, which expresses concerns over those who attempt to travel to become foreign terrorist fighters that pose a security threat to all regions and Member States, including those far from conflict zones.viii The invocation of UNSCR 2178 appears to be a result of the growing flow of foreign terrorist fighters that are being recruited by or joining the ISIL, al Qaeda and its derivatives, local splinter groups or global affiliates like al-Nusra Front (ANF/Syria), al Qaeda in Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) or al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) among others.
These were the serious issues discussed at 2015 G20 Summit. However, what needs to be answered is the reason/rationale behind this sudden leap in the discourse of terrorism. What could be the reason behind the significant shift of focus at G20 in 2015 from purely economic concerns to global security? This will be discussed in the next section on causes of the evolution of CT discourse.
Meanwhile, in the 2016 Hangzhou Summit a similar approach was seen towards countering terrorism; however, the leaders did NOT bring out a separate statement elaborating on the measures and methods of tackling terrorism/terror financing. As part of the main Communiqué, the leaders in the 45th paragraph of the document that had a total number of 48 paragraphs “strongly condemned terrorism in all forms and manifestations.”ix Acknowledging the challenges posed by terrorism to international peace and security, the leaders reaffirmed their resolve to fight terrorism “in all its forms” and “wherever it occurs.” Much like all the previous Summits, the 2016 Summit addressed the issue of tackling terror financing by calling for a “swift, effective and universal implementation of FATF.” The leaders also called for the implementation of the provisions of UNSCR 2253, which was adopted on December 17, 2015, to expand the sanctions framework to include ISIL, with the aim to dismantle funding channels, freezing of assets, travel ban and arms embargo.
While the 2016 Summit declaration on terrorism addressed a few important issues, it was not as holistic as the one in 2015 and 2017. Continuing with the trend in 2015, the Summit at Hamburg in 2017 also came out with an exclusive leaders’ Statement on Countering Terrorism that firstly “condemned all terrorist attacks worldwide”x and then discussed the different parameters and methods to combat the growing problem of terrorism. Discussed under three broad themes, implementing international commitments and enhancing cooperation, fighting terrorism finance, and countering radicalisation conducive to terrorism and the use of the internet for terrorist purposes, the leaders at the Summit addressed a range of issues. Laying emphasis on role of UN and UN charter in coordinating a multilateral approach towards combating international terrorism, the leaders recalled the UNSCR 2178 (2014) to tackle the evolving threat of returning FTFs from conflict zones like Syria and Iraq. For this, the leaders committed to improve existing international information architecture (in areas of security, travel and migration) an also facilitate exchange of information between intelligence and law enforcement and judicial authorities. At the regional level, the leaders called upon border agencies to strengthen cooperation to detect travel for purposes of terrorist activity, improve information sharing and watch-list capability. The 2017 Summit also addressed the evolving threat in aviation security and recalled UNSCR 2309 (2016) that deals with “closer collaboration to ensure safety of Global Air Services and prevent terrorist attacks.”xi In addition to the evolving threat posed by FTFs and potential vulnerabilities of the aviation system, the leaders called for swift implementation of FATF standards and UNSCR measures against financing of terrorist organisations, particularly, ISIS/Daesh, al Qaeda and its affiliates. Expressing the urgent need to address radicalisation and online recruitment, the leaders committed to devise a comprehensive approach that would hamper terrorist movement, fight exploitation of the internet, social media and counter terrorist propaganda, particularly enhance cooperation with the private sector that includes communication service providers. Lastly, the leaders stressed the importance of media, civil society, community groups, which includes religious groups, business community and educational institutions in fostering an environment conducive to prevent radicalisation.
The vast spectrum of issues discussed at the Hamburg Summit in 2017 not only suggests an expansion in the leaders’ perspective on the issue but also throws light at the growing insecurity emerging out of terrorism, non-state actors and their reach beyond the conflict zone areas. In this context, the next section will discuss the possible reasons behind the sudden progress/change in the discourse on terrorism since 2015.
SECTION II
The Inflection in the Narrative
As seen in the previous section, there has been a significant change or rather inflection in the narrative on the subject of terrorism and counter-terrorism within the G20. Noticeably, the variation in the narrative is not gradual, but one that was sudden. It is here that we raise the question, what led to this sudden change in the discourse on terrorism? Was it a conscious decision to expand the scope of the forum or a coincidence, given the terror attack in Paris prior to the Summit in 2015? While the answer to this question doesn’t lie in binaries, it appears to be a result of both. As noted above, the statements and communiqués at Summits prior to 2015 were weak and more of a reiteration of past declarations and G20 commitments, pledging to tackle terrorist financing. However, in 2015, the G20 forum came out with a separate statement on fight against terrorism. The reason behind this could be the deadly terror attacks in six different locations in Paris on November 13, 2015, a day before the start of the Summit on November 14. It appears that the series of terrorist attacks in Paris that killed 130 civilians and carried out by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/ISIS) could have acted as a catalyst, leading to a unifying response from the G20 leaders who had gathered at Antalya (Turkey) that year. Thus, unsurprisingly, the terror attacks in Paris only a day before the Summit were an opportunity for the leaders to make a shift in the scope of the G20’s original agenda of inclusive financing to a more broad approach of incorporating the issue of terrorism and measures on counter-terrorism.
In addition, it can be presumed that the target and time of the attacks had a direct link with the Summit. In an online statement, the ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack saying that eight militants, wearing explosive belts and armed guns, attacked selected areas in French capital Paris that were in response to French airstrikes in Syria. The attacks in Paris stimulated the G20 leaders, articulating a stronger and comprehensive set of CT measures. Given the political capital possessed by the European leadership at the global level, the terrorist attacks in Paris, much like other issues that directly affect them, made terrorism figure in the central agenda of the Summit. Equally important, the time of the attack coincided with the meeting of global powers in Antalya.
In fact, the agenda for the 2015 G20 Summit that was laid down by the host country, Turkey, in December 2014, focused on a range of economic and development issues, including, trade, employment, climate change, international finance architecture. But the Paris attacks shifted the agenda focus to terrorism. Apart from Paris attacks, some of the countries represented at the Summit had faced similar attacks in their country. The November 13 attack in Paris was preceded by deadly suicide bombings in Ankara, Turkey’s capital, on October 10, 2015 that killed more than 100 people.xii This was followed by an explosion of the Russian charter flight, carrying 224 passengers and crew to St. Petersburg from Sharm al-Sheikh (Egypt), soon after taking off on October 31, 2015. The crash killed all passengers on board.xiii Spurred by the sequence of these tragic events and the subsequent shocks, the response by the G20 leaders on the issue of terrorism and the related refugee crisis highlights their conscious position in tackling such global issues other than those related with core economic fundamentals.
This shift of focus in the Summit agenda was absent in the 2016 Summit in Hangzhou that primarily centred the discussion on the then resilient and progressing recovery of global economy. While the 2015 G20 Summit adopted a Statement on fight against terrorism, the 2016 Summit addressed the issue of terrorism in the main Communiqué. However, at Hangzhou, the leaders unanimously condemned terrorism in all forms and manifestations and urged the strengthening of FATF and FATF-style regional bodies. This oscillation in the focus of agenda indicates that while the position taken by the leaders is a matter of conscious choice, the focus of agenda depends on the events that occur close to the Summit date. The attacks in Paris triggered and shifted the focus in Antalya from purely economic to mainly terrorism. Since there was no such unfortunate incident prior to Hangzhou Summit in 2016, it continued with the pre-2015 trend, where the focus was primarily international economy. However, owing to the global risks terrorism poses to sustainable and inclusive growth, the leaders addressed the issue in terms of terror financing.
Meanwhile, the 2017 Hamburg Summit, unlike the Hangzhou Summit, had a broader agenda. This time the shift in emphasis towards terrorism was not a direct result of a particular terrorism-related incident in France or US, but it can be seen as a response to the larger growing global security concerns emerging out of terror attacks by ISIS or other Islamic extremists as well as the ongoing regional conflicts in West Asia and other parts of the world. Indeed, most of the G20 countries have endured deadly Islamist terrorist attacks. As stated before, in the aftermath of Paris attacks terrorism became the focal point at the 2015 G20, however, in 2017, the focus on terrorism was highlighted when after the first day of the Summit German Chancellor Angela Merkel in her remarks on the issue, G20 to intensify fight against terrorism, said,
It was an intensive and fascinating discussion because it became clear from various perspectives from different continents that international terrorism is a threat to us all and that terrorism knows no bounds. That’s why there was broad consensus that the G20 has to tackle this issue because it is a topic that also affects free trade and economic growth. And in that manner we have discussed it together in a very close and intensive manner.xiv
By the end of the Summit the leaders came out with a consensus statement on countering terrorism, which includes a range of issues under the UN Charter and Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Amid growing concerns over the mobility and flow of foreign terrorist fighters from conflict zones, the leaders recalled the implementation of UNSCR 2178 (2014) that urges for international cooperation, encourages Interpol to intensify its efforts with respect to threats emerging from the FTFs and encourages Member States to engage relevant local communities and non-Governmental actors to develop a counter-narrative to violent extremism. The issue of FTF received considerable attention in the Summit statement, given the diversifying threat emanating from Daesh and al Qaeda and their returning accomplices. While quoting the exact number of foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq is not plausible, the last estimates made by the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee in June 2016 put the foreign fighter number at 30,000 from more than 100 countries around the world,xv including approximately 4,000 from Western Europe.xvi Referring to Syria and Iraq as a “veritable international finishing school for extremists,” the March 2015 UN Report warned of a “medium-term threat from the new generation of foreign fighters through ‘plug and play social networks for future attack planning - linking diverse foreign fighters from different communities across the globe.’”xvii
During a press briefing on the flow of foreign terrorist fighters on June 22, 2016, Jean-Paul Laborde, Executive Director of the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) said, “There is no doubt that the threat from terrorism remains persistent and, unfortunately, credible, as demonstrated in many places. A country cannot, and is not in the position, to fight this phenomenon alone... The first action is really to reduce to zero the territory of Da'esh. This means that the so-called ‘caliphate’ cannot anymore be a hope for anybody.”xviii
With the ISIS experiencing military pressure and resultant setbacks in Iraq and Syria, the threat posed by the returning fighters becomes more potent, posing challenges to the capacities of the State. In this perspective, the leaders at the 2017 G20 Summit iterated the challenges faced by the international community. These concerns articulated by the leaders at Hamburg are imperative given the vulnerability to the Member States by returning FTFs. As the return of the fighters constitutes a serious threat to national security, considering an attack by them in future is completely inevitable. On an unspecified date, the ISIS issued a document, originally a series of lectures in 30 parts by Abu Abdallah al-Adam, titled, Safety and Security Guidelines for Lone Wolf Mujahideen and Small Cellsxix, calling upon its followers to be ready to carry out terrorist attacks in their home countries.”
As ISIS introduces innovations in its strategies, including recruitment and propaganda, the scope of commitments in multilateral institutions, like the G20, have evolved, taking note of the new strategies devised by terrorist outfits and articulating its counter-responses. While the G20 Summit at Hamburg encapsulated most of the pressing issues concerning terrorism and the dangers related to its diversification and innovation, it indicates that the G20 is moving towards becoming a Security Governance Institution from a Financial and Economic Regulation Body. However, it is imperative to question the future of such an approach adopted by the G20 towards expanding its remit to include global security. Starting with Antalya in 2015, will the G20 grow further as a global security Governor or will discussion on security be a temporary inflection spurred by incidents preceding the Summit?
SECTION III
Future Challenges
In this ambiguity over G20 expanding its remit or temporarily engaging in terrorism-related security concerns, the challenge lies in sustaining itself as a credible institution on matters of global security, encompassing various facets of international terrorism and abandoning slightest degree of political correctness. If the institution decides to expand its scope to include terrorism on full scale agenda, all Member
States must secure the legitimacy of the G20 by articulating the global security crisis and implementing necessary cooperative measures. On the other hand, if the issue of terrorism is subjected to event-based stimulation, the G20 must speak out with one voice condemning all forms of terrorism and also invite “guest countries” for more inclusive regional representation on an issue that threatens regional security first. This measure would take into account the permanent number of participants and would not increase it beyond its stated limit.
Notably, while it is viable for an institution like G20 to expand its agenda beyond the initial economic core, the challenge lies at two levels – (1) deliverance and (2) ensuring balance. Firstly, the issue of deliverance can be ensured by three important steps taken by Member States, individually as well as collectively. These steps include,
Secondly, on the issue of ensuring balance, the G20 as a forum of responsible nations must move with prudence. Having gone through the discussion above, it appears that G20 can possibly expand its scope of including counter-terrorism on its agenda,
which would facilitate its initial core agenda of inclusive economic growth. However, the danger lies in overemphasis or imbalance in narrative that can be tilted more towards terrorism, putting the financial issues in the backburner. In fact, G20 leaders can discuss any subject/issue they want, but with a balanced approach that constructively adds to the original agenda and not hampers it.
Conclusion
As discussed in the paper, the G20 has been an institution that has evolved its narrative on terrorism/CT, though it is obvious from the developments within the forum that the decision to expand its scope was initially a coincidence, given the terrorist attacks a day before the 2015 Summit, and then became a matter of conscious choice, with diversification of the strategies and tactics adopted by the terrorist outfits as well as counter-measures tackling the problem. In the early years of Leaders’ Summit, the G20 was silent about terrorism, abstaining from making any formal declaration. However, a rudimentary reference to financing of terrorism was made in the pre-2015 Summits, with the exception of 2014 and 2009 (London) Summits where no reference to terrorism, financing or otherwise, was made. By focusing and limiting itself to the financial dimension of terrorism, the G20 consciously restricted its scope to the economics of terror, despite the occurrence of some of the most deadly attacks across the globe and keeping itself away from any political discourse.
However, the terror attacks in Paris, a day before the 2015 Summit, led the leaders to take a firm step towards a more security-related issue and a little away from the economic line. With the growing global insecurity, given the permeation of the problem of international terrorism into areas away from conflict zones, what needs to be seen is whether the G20 will continue to address these issues in future? Since terrorism has emerged out to be the most critical global concern, the G20 can act as a bigger platform for countries to not only voice their apprehensions but also act against growing radical ideologies with innovation and dynamism in global cooperation.
****
*The Authoress, is Research Fellow at the Indian Council of World Affairs, New Delhi.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are of author and do not reflect the views of the Council.
End Notes
i The Hamburg G20 Leaders’ Statement on Countering Terrorism, G20 Germany, 2017, https://www.g20.org/Content/DE/_Anlagen/G7_G20/2017-g20-statement-antiterror-en.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2, accessed on July 24, 2017
ii Communiqué, G20 Action Plan on Terrorist Financing, G20 Meeting, 2001 Documents, November 16-17, 2001, G20 Information Centre, University of Toronto, http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2001/2001communique.html, accessed on July 24, 2017
iii United Nations Security Council, Resolution 1373 (2001), UN, http://www.un.org/en/sc/ctc/specialmeetings/2012/docs/United%20Nations%20Security%20Council%20Resolution%201373%20(2001).pdf, accessed on July 28, 2017
iv International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, Resolution 54/109 of December 9, 1999, New York, UN, http://www.un.org/law/cod/finterr.htm, accessed on July 28, 2017
v Ibid
vi G20 Statement on the Fight against Terrorism, G20 Summits, Antalya, 2015, G20 Information Centre, University of Toronto, http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2015/151116-terrorism.pdf, p.1, accessed on August 1, 2017
vii Ibid
viii United Nations Security Council, Resolution 2178, September 24, 2014, http://www.un.org/en/sc/ctc/docs/2015/SCR%202178_2014_EN.pdf, p 2, accessed on August 4, 2017
ix G20 Leaders' Communiqué: Hangzhou Summit, Hangzhou, September 5, 2016, G20 Information Centre, University of Toronto, http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2016/160905-communique.html, accessed on August 4, 2017
x The Hamburg G20 Leaders’ Statement, Op Cit, accessed on August 4, 2017
xi Adopting Resolution 2309 (2016), Security Council Calls for Closer Collaboration to Ensure Safety of Global Air Services, Prevent Terrorist Attacks, United Nations, September 22, 2016, https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12529.doc.htm, accessed on August 4, 2017
xii Nearly 100 dead as Ankara peace rally rocked by blasts, Al Jazeera, October 10, 2015, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/10/explosions-hit-turkey-ankara-peace-march-151010073827607.html, accessed on Augus 58, 2017
xiii Neil Mac Farquhar & Merna Thomas, Russian Airliner crashes in Egypt, Killing 224, New York Times, October 31, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/world/middleeast/russian-plane-crashes-in-egypt-sinai-peninsula.html, accessed on August 5, 2017
xiv Merkel: G20 to intensify fight against terrorism, DW News, http://www.dw.com/en/merkel-g20-to-intensify-fight-against-terrorism/av-39604166, accessed on August 5, 2017
xv Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee, Foreign Fighters, https://www.un.org/sc/ctc/focus-areas/foreign-terrorist-fighters/ , accessed on August 5, 2017
xvi Michelle Nichols, Syria, Iraq a 'finishing school' for foreign fighters: U.N. report, Reuters, March 31, 2015, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-islamic-state-un-idUSKBN0MR2NP20150331, accessed on August 5, 2017
xvii Ibid
xviii Top UN counter-terrorism official urges cohesive response to 'persistent' threat of terrorism, UN News Centre, July 22, 2016, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=54537#.WYaawoQrLIU, accessed on August 5, 2017
xix Abu Ubayda Abdullah al-Adm, Summarized English Translation, Safety and Security Guidelines for Lone Wolf Mujahideen and Small Cells, initially published by Al-Fajr Media Centre, https://cryptome.org/2016/01/lone-wolf-safe-sec.pdf, accessed on August 6, 2017