On 18 August 2026, the Security Council Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999), 1989 (2011) and 2253 (2015) concerning ISIL (Da'esh), Al-Qaida and associated individuals, groups, undertakings and entities enacted amendments to 21 entries on its ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions List 1. The changes, marked with strikethrough and underline in the published entries, adjust the roster of individuals and entities subject to the assets freeze, travel ban and arms embargo set out in paragraph 1 of Security Council resolution 2734 (2024), adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter 1. The move represents the latest routine but consequential update to a sanctions regime that has served as a cornerstone of multilateral counterterrorism efforts for more than two decades.
The committee, commonly known as the 1267 Committee, was originally established by resolution 1267 in 1999 to oversee sanctions against Al-Qaida and the Taliban. Its mandate was expanded by resolution 1989 (2011) and further refined by resolution 2253 (2015) to encompass the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as Da'esh) and its affiliates 1. The regime operates under Chapter VII, making its decisions legally binding on all 193 UN member states. The measures include a comprehensive assets freeze, a travel ban preventing listed individuals from entering or transiting through member states' territories, and an arms embargo prohibiting the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer of arms and related materiel to designated parties 1. Resolution 2734 (2024) reaffirmed and updated these measures, providing the current legal basis for the list's maintenance 1.
Amendments to the list are a regular feature of the committee's work. The use of strikethrough and underline in the published document signals specific textual changes — such as updated names, aliases, dates of birth, nationalities, passport numbers, or addresses — that improve the accuracy of designations and assist member states in implementation. In some cases, amendments reflect new information about an individual's or entity's activities, associations, or status; in others, they may precede a delisting following a review or a request from the designating state or the Office of the Ombudsperson. The modification of 21 entries in a single session suggests a substantial review cycle, possibly incorporating intelligence updates from multiple member states or outcomes of the committee's periodic reassessment of existing listings.
The practical impact of these amendments extends well beyond the UN's New York headquarters. Once an entry is added or updated, every member state is obligated to freeze without delay any funds, financial assets or economic resources owned or controlled by the listed party, to prevent entry into or transit through its territory, and to block any transfer of arms or related materiel. Financial institutions, border agencies, and law enforcement bodies worldwide rely on the consolidated list to screen transactions, visa applications, and cargo manifests. Accuracy is therefore paramount: outdated identifiers can allow sanctioned actors to evade detection, while erroneous listings risk harming innocent parties and undermining the regime's legitimacy.
The sanctions regime remains one of the few areas where the Security Council's five permanent members have sustained a functional consensus despite deep divisions on other geopolitical files. The 1267 Committee's decisions are taken by consensus, and its listing and delisting procedures have evolved to incorporate due-process safeguards, including the independent Ombudsperson mechanism established in 2009. These institutional features have helped the regime withstand political pressures and maintain credibility as a targeted tool rather than a blunt instrument. The August 18 amendments, while technical in appearance, are part of that ongoing calibration.
At the same time, the regime faces persistent implementation gaps. Not all member states possess the administrative capacity to integrate list updates swiftly into domestic legal frameworks, and some have been criticized for delayed asset freezes or porous border controls. The committee's periodic reporting and the work of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team aim to identify and address these shortcomings. The latest amendments will feed into that monitoring cycle, providing a fresh benchmark for assessing compliance.
Geopolitically, the continued vitality of the ISIL and Al-Qaida sanctions list underscores the international community's assessment that both groups, though degraded in their core territories, retain a diffuse and adaptive global presence. Affiliates in Africa, South Asia, and Southeast Asia continue to pose threats, and the sanctions regime is designed to disrupt their financial and logistical networks across borders. The committee's ability to update the list in a timely manner is therefore not merely administrative; it is a measure of the multilateral system's responsiveness to an evolving terrorist landscape.
Looking ahead, the committee will continue to review listings at regular intervals, guided by the criteria set out in the governing resolutions and informed by intelligence shared by member states. The August 18 amendments, encompassing 21 entries, represent a snapshot of that process. They signal that the sanctions architecture remains active, that the legal framework under Chapter VII continues to function, and that the collective effort to constrain the operational space of designated terrorist actors endures as a shared priority among nations.