Ambassador A. Peter Burleigh served as Deputy Representative of the United States to the United Nations from August 1997 until December 1999. He was Charge of the Mission from September 1998 to August 1999. He was Ambassador to Sri Lanka and was in Nepal during the early years of his career.
Ambassador Burleigh has held senior positions at the State Department including: Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Personnel (1992-1995), Coordinator of the Office of Counter-Terrorism, with the rank of Ambassador (1991-1992), Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research (1989-1991); and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs (1987-1989), with primary responsibilities for the Persian Gulf region.
Organized by:
Institute of Foreign Affairs
at Hotel Himalaya,
February 26th, 2002
|
The Institute of Foreign Affairs organized a talk program on "Counter Terrorism" by Ambassador A. Peter Burleigh. He was in Nepalgunj as the Peace Corps volunteer during the early sixties. The talk program was well participated by former foreign ministers, officials of His Majesty's government and a large number of Nepali academicians and journalists.
Ambassador Burleigh began his presentation with his "personal" views on the horrific attacks in Washington and New York on September 11, 2001. The event triggered an enormous interest on the American people that are seldom interested about foreign policy issues. What was outstanding about this particular event was: 1) horror of the breath and scope of the attack around the world 2) very strong US leadership showing clearly that it was going to take actions. 3) A wide feeling that other countries could also be similarly targeted; 4) quick support for the initiatives taken by the US by major powers like Russia, China, UK and India; and 5) Strong conviction in the US that the country should retaliate with or without outside support.
Virtually all countries joined the counter-terrorism efforts of the U.S. After President Bush's extraordinary statement that "you are either with us or with the terrorists" even those from countries that are regarded as the sponsors of terrorism like Cuba, Libya, North Korea and Sudan not only declared their interest on the global war against terrorism but also became the first ones to declare their support. However, this momentous event rearranged global equations and paradigms, the most noteworthy being in South East Asia. Al Queda had penetrated deeply in that region and there now exists both intra-regional and international partnership to counter the tentacles of its menace. Several Indonesians who attempted to bomb the US base have been arrested in Singapore. Similar regional cooperation endeavors are taking place currently in Latin America, Caribbean and other regions.
Ambassador Burleigh outlined that, "The United Nations too has been proactive in this cause but much of it has gone unnoticed by the international press", which he chose to state as "press play". The Security Council on September 28th unanimously passed resolution 1373 that made it mandatory for member states to actively engage in countering terrorism and compulsorily reporting whatever actions they have taken in this regard. A monitoring committee chaired by England was set up to see whether member states are complying. Over a hundred countries filed their reports before the allocated time period.
On the other hand, there is no agreed definition on "terrorism" and even the resolution 1373 "agreed" to delay a definition on terrorism. This incongruity comes especially because my terrorist can be your freedom fighter and vice versa. This question is actually real for South Asia. The real question that needs answering is, "Is the U.S policy going to be the same with other terrorist groups that don't target America and the Americans, or is going to apply only to America?" Prior to 9/11 only 28 groups were named by the US State department as "terrorists" one of them being the LTTE, from South Asia. Now, two more groups the Lashkar-e-Toiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammad have been included. This clearly shows the internationalization of US concern and we will also be witnessing the widening of US concern with political results. An example of this is the US response to the LTTE. There is reason to believe that with the US putting the LTTE in the terrorist list, it cut off funds to LTTE which then forced the organization to come to the negotiating table.
None of the countries inside what President Bush calls the "axis of evil" had anything to do with the events of September 11. But, is similar action going to be taken against North Korea, Syria, Iran, Cuba, Sudan and Iraq as well? President Bush has not been clear regarding this but if over emphasized could result in devolution.
What can other countries expect regarding the implementation of the UN resolution? Will the US deploy its military in order to assist individual countries in curbing terrorism at home? Only if there is a very special consideration like in the Philippines. However, like in Sri Lanka, the United States will help in the training of soldiers and provide logistical support.
On Nepal, Ambassador Burleigh said that "he was not an expert on Nepalese affairs but since Nepal has a lot of friends in the US and given that he was a Peace Corps volunteer in Nepalgunj, he had the interest in visiting the city". He said that after landing in Nepalgunj, firstly he along with the US ambassador were taken to the Royal Nepal Army divisional headquarters for a briefing after which we even saw the 36 dead bodies of the Nepal Police personnel that were killed in Salyan the other day by Maoist rebels. He said that he was horrified to see that the bodies had been mutilated by Khukri even after they were shot. For the first time, an American official may have seen this heartbreaking scene of wives and children of victims coming in the helicopters and has dashed his image of a peaceful and serene Nepal with its lovely mountain peaks and trekking ranges.
We also went, Ambassador Burleigh added "to Mangalsen where the Maoists had overrun an army barrack. We saw that RPG and mortars were used either from the Dang barrack from any other source. What was fascinating was the total destruction of the town, even the old palace there was still burning."
He said, Nepal now urgently needs a two-pronged approach:
- It urgently needs to reform the working style of its civilian ministries.
- The RNA and the Police will do a better job over time only if they break off the reactive posture, which allows the rebels to choose the time and place.
"I don't think it is fair to expect the RNA and the police to solve the Maoist problem on their own," he said. To leave the responsibility to them is unfair because there exists a serious problem with Nepal's national government.
Question: Prof. Surya Lal Amatya: Terrorists have interconnections. RIM has a footing in the developing countries and the Maoists of Nepal receive support from RIM through MCC and PWG. There was an article in an Indian newspaper saying that in accordance with the 1950 Treaty, Nepal cannot receive military assistance from the U.S. What is your reaction to this?
Answer: The government of Mrs. Indira Gandhi had supported the LTTE uprising in Sri Lanka, she had been instrumental in starting the problem but it got out of hold of the Government of India. Nowadays, Colombo privately informs New Delhi concerning every move of the LTTE, they even solicit help from the Indian Navy with identifying or spotting ships coming in from Malaysia, Thailand carrying weapons for the LTTE. They now have a good coordination among themselves. Presumably, you should also inform the GOI clearly what you want and make direct your requests. All of us in the international community would also then tell the Indian government.
Question: Trilokya Aryal, intern, IFA: If there is a fine line between a terrorist group and a freedom fighter, why hasn't the US listed the Maoists as terrorists among the 30 organizations that you mentioned ?
Answer: I would argue that the American action is only evolving, coming up. Till date, actions have been only limited to groups attacking US citizens and America but I will tell you that it is evolving. Some of the Maoists' acts are purely terrorist's acts like the incident the other day of that bus where even a small child was burnt alive. For now, the only thing that I can tell is that it is under consideration.
Question: Prof. Bidya Bir Singh Kansakar, Head of Geography department, TU: Isn't it that because Rukum and Rolpa are less known to the center and the alienation and neglect of those areas coupled with the geographical difficulty that the Maoist movement has actually started and progressed? Don't we need to change some of the provisions of our Constitution?
Answer: I met with my former Tharu students in Nepalgunj. They were unhappy that they did not even get the land that the government had promised for them. So there is much more to the movement than just the geographical difficulty. As far as your political system is concerned, the US was very happy when Nepal moved into a democracy 12 years ago. You know best regarding the structure of your democratic system.
Question: Robert C. Kerr, USIS: Is civilian police considered combatants or non-combatants?
Answer: The police are not combatants.
Question: Kanak Mani Dixit, Publisher, Himal Kabarpatrika: Our civilian ministries were not doing a better job even before the Maoist movement commenced and there are several other countries in the world that are as much poor as we are but are not facing the threat of the Maoists. Since there is no data on how the Maoists really originated doesn't the US government possess information on this since US Aid funded the Rapti valley project?
Answer: Yes, the US government funded the Rapti valley project for a long time. It is important to understand the origins and motivations are for the Maoists. Poverty linked with rising aspirations certainly begets conflict.
Question: Lt. Gen. (retd.) Krishna Narayan Singh Thapa: For the army to perform best they need information, a well-coordinated security system and one cell to synchronize the operations, shouldn't there be such a system?
Answer: Yes, there is a need of that. But at the same time I also hear that in some regions there already exists such coordination between all the organs of the security apparatus.
Question: Prof. Dhruba Kumar: The RNA has not fought a war after 1816. What they lack today clearly is information like the Israeli army possesses about Hamas and other rebels.
Answer: Yes, security system will simply exhaust themselves if they do not have a good information system.
Question: Madhukar SJB Rana: There is as yet no definition on terrorism, leaving it at the unilateral decisions. K.Subramanyam has written recently that the next war on terror will be fought in Pakistan.
Answer: What is happening in Pakistan is crucial for the entire region. The course that its government and society takes will affect South Asia as whole.
Question: Paras Ghimire, under secretary, MOFA: The attacks in Washington and New York were attacks from liberty through liberty. Is there going to be only shock but no shock therapy ?
Answer: Yes, there has to be balance of civil liberties.
e
Question: Prof. Lok Raj Baral: What do you have to say regarding the usage of human shield by the Maoist rebels ?
Answer: Yes, it is very serious.
