A Summary of Debate: The question of the global resurgence of political extremism. 

The issue of the “global resurgence of political externism” is particularly relevant as extremist ideologies continue to integrate rural and urban regions, threaten human rights, and endanger international peace. Political extemism often results in the exploitation of vulnerable communities facing poverty and instability. Extremist groups use these conditions to recruit followers and members, creating cycles of violence and destabilization that threaten the whole world’s security. By debating political extremism measures, delegates have the opportunity to tackle its root causes and prevent its spread, ensuring a more stable and peaceful global community.

                  The General Assembly convened to address this pressing issue. Submitted by Libya, with co-submitters Bosnia & Herzegovina, Denmark, Gabon, Niger, Qatar, Reporters Without Borders, Serbia, UN Habitat, Vietnam, and WHO, the resolution seeks to strengthen responses against rising radicalism and violent extremism. The measures range from improving and enhancing internet regulations to taking communication networks used by extremist groups apart with the increased cooperation of governmental figures.
China proposed an amendment to Libya’s resolution on countering political extremism, emphasizing security and information access in vulnerable areas. Beyond the original focus on rural media coverage to combat misinformation, the amendment calls for security checkpoints on routes, managed by local authorities and UN peacekeepers, to prevent extremist groups from exploiting infrastructure. China argued that “communication alone is not enough” and that “security measures are essential to fight extremism”.

On the other hand, several delegates voiced a strong opposition to the amendment. Denmark, Lithuania, and UNESCO, among others, raised ethical and legal concerns, focusing on the potential violation of fundamental rights. Denmark expressed that such checkpoints could violate Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the right to freedom of movement. Lithuania added that implementing checkpoints could lead to discrimination, as certain groups might be unfairly targeted under suspicion of extremism. Ultimately, the amendment passed with 111 votes for, 35 against, and 18 abstentions.

The conference then moved to open debate for the resolution as a whole to which Syria strongly urged delegates to vote against it. Syria criticized the resolution as “fundamentally flawed”, arguing that it focuses on “ineffective measures” like internet monitoring, while failing to address the true root causes of extremism, such as economic losses and poverty, especially in urban areas. The Syrian delegate emphasized that clauses on increasing news coverage and cooperation with local leaders would “do little to suppress extremist leaders and ideologies”.

In response, several points of information were raised by other delegations, including Vietnam, Guinea-Bissau, and Côte d'Ivoire. Vietnam suggested that, despite the resolution’s flaws, it may be better to implement an imperfect solution now rather than wait for a perfect one. Syria rebutted, describing the resolution as a superficial attempt that fails to address the actual causes of extremism, and only targets secondary issues such as news coverage. The delegation of Côte d'Ivoire expressed their concern with clauses 5 and 6, suggesting they could unintentionally increase the spread of extremism by pushing potentially harmful content onto local populations without guidance on what information should be shared. Syria agreed, reinforcing that vague policies could lead to unintended consequences.

The delegates requested a motion to extend points of information where the Dominican Republic and OPEC delegations were recognized. OPEC suggested that increasing news coverage could have positive effects by providing reliable information that might assist in solving extremism. Syria acknowledged this but pointed out that simply increasing news coverage would not address the deeper and root causes of extremism, such as misinformation and economic issues.

As the debate reached its end, the GA entered closed debate time against the resolution, where the Ethiopian delegation was recognized. Ethiopia questioned how the resolution and its amendments would maintain respect and tolerance, expressing concerns about its lack of specificity and effectiveness. Ethiopia argued that education systems, rather than increased news coverage, should be prioritized in the fight against extremism, as education offers a more sustainable solution to shaping perspectives and combating extremist ideologies in both the short run and long run.

In the voting procedure that followed, the resolution passed with 82 votes in favor, 79 against, and 6 abstentions.