A/HRC/43/46 range of issues that touch on preventing and countering violent extremism and a member of the Working Group. She notes however that no stand-alone resources or administrative capacity is provided to enable the mandate holder’s participation, and the ability to engage fulsomely in human rights oversight is significantly resource-constrained. 47. The very high number of projects aimed at preventing and countering violent extremism in the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Coordination Compact can be explained, in part, by the fact that preventing and countering violent extremism is not entirely new for the United Nations. It encompasses issues that were explicitly addressed in the first and fourth pillars of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, 94 as well as issues that are among its core values, notably peace, development, education and respect for human rights and the rule of law. Numerous United Nations personnel have confirmed to the Special Rapporteur that many of the issues that were previously addressed individually are now addressed under the banner of preventing and countering violent extremism. UNDP has stressed that it is a new era in the United Nations, in which the United Nations counterterrorism strategy interacts with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals.95 Most of the Goals are collectively relevant to promoting durable solutions for the prevention of violent extremism. 48. The Special Rapporteur notes several inherent risks with that approach however. The lens of preventing and countering violent extremism is a security-focused lens. Through the language of preventing and countering violent extremism, new operational imperatives and concepts have crept in institutionally. UNODC defines violent extremism as an ideology which accepts the use of violence for the pursuit of goals that are generally social, racial, religious and/or political in nature. It notes that violent extremism specifically refers to behaviour and thinking which can lead to the commission of acts of terrorism. 96 UNESCO refers to the beliefs and actions of people who support or use violence to achieve ideological, religious or political goals, which can include terrorism and other forms of politically motivated violence.97 It states that “hard power” is not enough to counter threats drawing on an exclusive world vision and building on false interpretations of faith, fuelled by hatred and intolerance.98 Such an approach leads to United Nations action on core issues – human rights, development, the rule of law and education – that is securitized. Importantly, it leads to unbiased and impartial legitimate action by the United Nations being tainted by potentially discriminatory, exclusionary and politically charged concepts, rendering such action “United Nations action, infected by overlying security-driven policies on extremism”. It can have severe consequences on many programmes, affecting the choice of civil society partners (exclusion), the way in which funding proposals are designed and pitched (securitization) and the beneficiaries of such programmes, both in terms of where the programmes are implemented and how recipients are viewed (stigmatization). An “all of United Nations”, “bridge the divide” or “break the silos” approach to the question, in which security is placed on an equal, if not higher, footing than development, human rights and humanitarian action may amount to the securitization of all United Nations action. 49. A further risk lies with the United Nations uncritically embracing the concept together with its myriad understandings on the ground. For some States, preventing and countering violent extremism is a foreign policy tool, deployed through development aid for example, or a tool to affect religious or political ideology or identity, rendering it inherently subjective. Absent any scrutiny or accountability mechanism, it can lead to the United Nations legitimizing, condoning and enabling action aimed at preventing and countering violent extremism that is in clear violation of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms and disregarding its fundamental role in safeguarding international human rights law. The Special Rapporteur has seen first-hand how the United Nations and regional entities are engaging and supporting programmes aimed at preventing and countering violent extremism based on the definition in national law and related practice that are in violation of international human rights treaties and directly impinging on fundamental rights, such as programmes that address 94 95 96 97 98 A/70/674, para. 7. UNDP, “Report on Oslo II”. UNODC, “Guidelines for the Central Asian preventing violent extremism network”, 2019. UNESCO, “Preventing violent extremism through education: a guide for policymakers”, 2017. UNESCO, “UNESCO in action: preventing violent extremism worldwide”, 2018. 17