Ambassadors, ministers, and other diplomats gathered around the Israel Democracy Institute’s (IDI) Roundtable on Thursday, February 21, 2008, for the first of a series of 3 briefings scheduled by IDI for the diplomatic corps in Israel. IDI’s Diplomatic Corps Briefings are aimed at increasing foreign diplomats’ understanding of the unique difficulties facing the State of Israel and its leadership. The topic of the February 21st event was Terror and Democracy: The Tension between National and Personal Security and the Right to Freedom, Privacy, and Life. Seated at the table were representatives from France, Argentina, South Africa, El Salvador, Ghana, Mexico and others.
IDI Senior Researchers, Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer and Col. Adv. Daniel Reisner, presented a comprehensive overview of the challenges faced by Israel in its struggle to protect its citizens from terror. The complex interplay between international human rights, democratic principles and institutions, and the phenomenon of modern terrorist organizations provides no shortage of hardship to Israel and other western nations. Among many of the diplomats gathered at the Roundtable, the subject matter and frustration rang familiar.
Although numerous countries face this common threat, Col. Reisner emphasized that as of yet there is no internationally accepted definition of “terrorism.” Despite the fact that terrorism is a transnational problem, countries have widely differing tactics for confronting it. This lack of coordinated response and cooperation comprises a major weakness of democracies in this ongoing battle.
Nations fighting terror must answer numerous difficult questions:
- Are terrorists always “non-state actors,” or can countries commit terror?
- Are terrorists to be treated as criminals, prosecuted under existing criminal laws and afforded the same rights as ordinary citizens? Or, do terrorists require special treatment and classification outside of the bounds of established legal precedents?
- Does confrontation with transnational terror organizations constitute warfare, or does war necessarily involve two countries?
- Are terrorists, embedded within a given population, to be fought by armies or controlled by the police?
Arriving at international consensus on these pressing issues is far from simple. Fighting and prosecuting terrorism constitutes a “strange place for lawyers and a terrible place for people,” according to Col. Reisner - himself an attorney with extensive experience in international human rights law. The decisions that must be made in combating terror can hurt civilians and involve elements of collective punishment. The possibility for these unfortunate and unintended consequences raises new legal and ethical questions.
Prof. Kremnitzer emphasized the importance of mobilizing the moderate elements within a population to renounce and fight terror. Assuring that the average citizen is not radicalized in the process of combating extremists requires careful, strategic decision-making.
At the meeting’s conclusion, the diplomats acknowledged a deeper understanding of the difficulties faced by Israeli leaders as they strive to maintain human rights while fighting terrorism - an often unnamed yet central issue facing the Jewish state. As many observed similar dilemmas within their own countries, there emerged a consensus that all terror- threatened nations must improve their communication and collaboration. Combating terror is a global issue. The more efficiently the international community learns to balance human rights and international law with the effective combating of terror, the safer all of our countries will be.