The conference concluded with a long communiqué that contained not a solitary concrete prescription on how to tackle terrorism.
While the speeches to the conference by Iranian officials were little more than anti-American screeds, the communiqué contained little of that, suggesting that a number of participating nations demanded that the anti-American rhetoric be dropped. As a result, the final communiqué contained little more than vague generalities about how bad terrorism is.
Six chiefs of state attended, including President Umar al-Bashir of Sudan, who faces two indictments by the International Criminal Court for genocide and war crimes for his use of terrorism against his own people. His presence raised questions about the sincerity of the conference.
The other chiefs of state appearing in Tehran for the conference were from Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Mauritania. Tehran did not issue a list of all the attendees, but a number of the countries were clearly represented only by their ambassadors in Tehran.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the conference was its single-minded emphasis on the significance of terrorism. It was President George W. Bush who decided to make terrorism a global focus and placed the “Global War on Terrorism” at the center of his foreign and domestic policies. Many critics have attacked this emphasis, saying terrorism is not an ideological enemy that needs to be confronted but merely a tactic used by those lacking any more sophisticated means.
The Islamic Republic, despite its constant assertions of opposition to all things American, has nonetheless embraced Bush’s philosophy and similarly put the war on terrorism atop its agenda, even if only rhetorically.
One of the consistent challenges when discussing terrorism has been an agree definition of the term. Especially in the Middle East, it is the practice to insist that acts of “resistance” by Palestinians are deemed not to be terrorism. The conference communiqué took that view, but did not make any effort to otherwise define what terrorism is. It simply stated “the need for providing a consensual definition for terrorism.” But Tehran did not need to convene 60 nations to make that observation.
As to what to do about terrorism, the communiqué “underlined the need to extend cooperation and interaction among all states in countering terrorism in all its aspects at bilateral, regional and international levels.”
Those attending the conference got to see a concrete example of terrorism. Visitors entering the conference hall were greeted by a twisted and battered Peugeot sedan. It was the car that Masud-Ali Mohammadi, one of Iran’s nuclear scientists, stepped into in front of his home one morning just before a bomb placed nearby exploded and killed him.
