Molly Dinneen Director, Special Political and Decolonization Committee

Transcription

1 Special Political and Decolonization Committee Delegates, Welcome to WMHSMUN 30! My name is Molly Dinneen and I am delighted to direct your committee, the Special Political and Decolonization Committee, otherwise known as SpecPol. This is my second year here at the College of William & Mary as an International Relations major and European Studies minor. Unlike many of you, I m fairly new to Model United Nations. I joined MUN my freshman year of college having never participated in the organization during middle or high school. Growing up in Northern Virginia, I was always intrigued by Model United Nations and was determined to hit the ground running in college. Last year I was a delegate at the Duke International Security Conference and the McGill Model United Nations Assembly in Montreal, Canada. Over the course of the year I was exposed to a wide variety of Model UN management through serving as a Rapp at WHSMUN XXIX, directing a committee for WMIDMUN XIV, and crisis staffing the Ad Hoc Crisis Committee at &MUN IV. Furthermore, I m currently on the &MUN V Secretariat as the Director of Development. In addition to the International Relations Club, I am also an avid runner and member of William & Mary s Running Club. From 5ks to half-marathons, I enjoy any kind of distance running. Be sure to wave hello if you see me running around campus during the conference! As mentioned earlier, I have the pleasure of serving as your director for the SpecPol Committee. I intend to make this committee as intriguing as possible by combining unique and well-known topics. I m excited to hear your traditional and nontraditional methods for solving international disputes. Despite the double-delegate nature of the committee, I am determined to keep every delegate active, energized, and involved. Just as a reminder, position papers are required for each topic; please your papers to me prior to the first committee session. It is expected that there is one per delegation. Guidelines for the position papers can be found on the WMHSMUN website. I look forward to meeting all of you in November to discover your solutions to solving conflict and ensuring international peace. Molly Dinneen Director, Special Political and Decolonization Committee mcdinneen@ .wm.edu

2 Background Information In the early end stages of the Second World War, the Allies established the United Nations General Assembly. This assembly encourages multilateral discussions on a wide variety of international concerns by subdividing issues into debates within six main committees: Disarmament and International Security Committee; Economic and Financial Committee; Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Committee; Special Political and Decolonization Committee; Administrative and Budgetary Committee; and Legal Committee. 1 The Fourth Committee of the Assembly was established as the Special Political and Decolonization Committee in 1993 following the colonial independence movements. Prior to the 1990s, there were two separate committees: the Decolonization Committee (the former Fourth Committee) and the Special Political Committee (the former Seventh Committee). As the issue of independence became less relevant the two committees merged into the Special Political and Decolonization Committee 1 United Nations, Main Body, Main Organs, General Assembly. UN News Center. Accessed May 23, as prescribed in General Assembly Resolution 47/ The new committee s focus includes issues relating to decolonization, Palestinian refugees and human rights, peacekeeping, mine action, outer space, public information, atomic radiation and [the] University for Peace. 3 SpecPol investigates security concerns that are not addressed by the First Committee such as self-determination. Its broad approach to discussion, agenda, and membership often encourages issues to enter the General Assembly. While General Assembly resolutions are not binding and may not mandate military action, they lead the international community towards economic, political, and social development. Reports by the Fourth Committee rank second in importance only behind the First Committee of Disarmament and International Security. 4 As stated by the General Assembly Rules of Procedure, each member state 2 A/RES/47/233. Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly. UN News Center. September 14, Accessed May 23, documents/ga/res/47/a47r233.htm. 3 Special Political and Decolonization. UN News Center. Accessed May 23, shtml. 4 A/RES/47/233. Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly. UN News Center. September 14, Accessed May 23, documents/ga/res/47/a47r233.htm.

3 may be represented by one person for each of the main committees. However, member states may also assign advisers or experts to these committees. Rule 101 enables the chairman of the delegation to grant similar membership status in regards to voting and speaking rights to these advisers. 5 Therefore, as the director of the WHMSMUN 30 Special Political and Decolonization Committee, I have spoken with the chairman to ensure that for this double-delegate committee both the member and the adviser for every delegation have equal status and capabilities. Therefore, although each member state will only be allowed one vote, it will not matter which representative casts the ballot. While not all 193 member states of the United Nation will be present at this year s committee session, we will have sufficient representation to ensure comprehensive and substantive debate and resolution. Topic I: Keeping Kashmir? Conflict over control of Kashmir and Jammu remains one of the most violent disputes within the international system. Although many previous attempts 5 Rules of Procedure. General Assembly of the United Nations. Accessed May 23, un.org/en/ga/about/ropga/cttees. shtml. to pacify disagreements between India and Pakistan have failed, the international community continues to be interested in resolving the tensions. Debate persists as both countries believe that control over Kashmir is important to their national sentiment. It is SpecPol s responsibility to alleviate the tensions surrounding one of the United Nation s oldest controversies. History of Kashmir Issues over the control of Kashmir began in August of 1947 following India s independence from Britain. During the partition of India and Pakistan, regional leaders selected which nation would serve in an administrative capacity. Many rulers chose based on the religious differences between the states: India s Hindu majority or Pakistan s Muslim majority. For this reason, the belief was that the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir would accede to Pakistan due to its similar plurality Muslim population. However, Kashmir was led by Maharaja Hari Singh, who held a firm belief in Hinduism. Singh attempted to delay making a decision but conflict sparked by rival opinions encouraged him to sign an Instrument of Accession with India. He believed that this accession would be temporary until a plebiscite was held in Kashmir, which would give Kashmiris the opportunity to determine their own fate. A plebiscite refers to the direct vote of all members of an electorate on any

4 important public question. 6 The accession of Kashmir ended the autonomy of the Princely State and triggered violence that would instigate the first of four Indo- Pakistani Wars. India sent forces into Kashmir to remove the Pakistanis from the region which ensured further conflict between the nations. 7 In 1948, after a year of continued violence, India asked the United Nations to assist in resolving the dispute. The United Nations passed Security Council Resolution 47 which imposed a ceasefire between the nations and insisted on the removal of all Pakistani military presence and set a minimum Indian military presence to ensure a fair plebiscite. However, the ceasefire was the only action of this resolution that was enforced. 8 Fighting between 1965 and 1971 led to the signing of the Simla Agreement. This agreement granted independence to Bangladesh and designated a Line of Control of the Kashmir region. 6 Oxford Dictionaries - Dictionary, Thesaurus, & Grammar. Oxford Dictionaries - Dictionary, Thesaurus, & Grammar. Accessed June 08, Kashmir: Conflict Profile. Insight on Conflict. September Accessed June 03, org/conflicts/kashmir/conflict-profile/. 8 Kashmir: History and Background. About.com News & Issues. Accessed June 03, com/od/pakistan/a/kashmir-historybackgrounder.htm. This military partition is not a legally recognized international border, only a de facto separation. It defined the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir in contrast to the Pakistani states of Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir. 9 Conflict continued between India and Pakistan as both nations began to develop nuclear weapons. Prompted by each other s demonstrations as well as the nuclear research evolving around the world, Pakistan and India tested nuclear technologies. International fears of a nuclear arms race in the region led to intervention in ongoing conflicts such as the United States participation in the Kargil War of Current Views Several varying viewpoints must be considered when determining the 9 Simla Agreement. Stimson Center. Accessed June 03, stimson.org/simla-agreement. 10 Kashmir: History and Background. About.com News & Issues. Accessed June 03, com/od/pakistan/a/kashmir-historybackgrounder.htm.

5 fate of Kashmir. As national delegates, in addition to each of your state s position and opinion on the issue, I urge you to consider the viewpoints of those nations directly involved with the fate of Kashmir. India believes that the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Singh in 1947 gives India full control over the Kashmir region. The nation believes that United Nations Resolution 1172 ensures that the United Nations must side with India on all issues regarding Kashmir. They argue that Pakistan has been funding militants to create instability and spread anti-indian sentiment in the region. India states that the unstable domestic political environment deems Pakistan unfit to rule Kashmir. 11 For Pakistan, Kashmir s Muslim majority validates its territorial claims for the entire region. The nation argues that India fails to follow the United Nations guidelines due to the lack of a plebiscite. Pakistan rejects India s claims of control over the region which they believe is illustrated by the numerous uprisings. It argues that India s violations of the Kashmiri s civil rights invalidate assertions of commanding power Kashmir: Paths to Peace. Chatham House. May 26, Accessed June 03, publications/papers/view/ Kashmir: Paths to Peace. Chatham House. May 26, Accessed June 03, Due to sporadic violence throughout the region, it is hard to assess the current views of the Kashmiris. Additionally, the mixed support and lack of unified voice for either position assist the continuation of the dispute. A 2010 Chatham House poll recorded 43% approval for independence with 14% arguing for the Line of Control as the permanent border. 13 However, the majority of Kashmiris resent the lack of self-determination regarding their sovereignty. Furthermore, they are unified in their call for higher democracy and human rights standards. Kashmiris feel alienated by both countries; throughout the region they are brutally repressed by Indian forces and in constant conflict with pro-pakistan militants. SpecPol s Aims It is SpecPol s responsibility to ensure peace throughout the Kashmir region. It is our goal to establish a permanent settlement that will allow for stability throughout South Asia. It is paramount to consider past India-Pakistani agreements as well as United Nations Resolutions to identify the need for change or further enforcement. SpecPol should address all human rights violations to provide victim support in addition to ensuring that these publications/papers/view/ Kashmir: Paths to Peace. Chatham House. May 26, Accessed June 03, publications/papers/view/

6 violations do not continue. As a nuclear arms race could hinder the stability of the entire international arena, it is SpecPol s duty to balance nuclear tensions between the nations. Recent Developments As you may have seen in recent international news, violent conflict has sparked yet again in the Kashmir region. Politicians on both sides of the aisle have urged the Indian government to find a solution that restores peace to the region. India continues to view Kashmir as an integral part of the nation and opposes any signs of Pakistani nationalism. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi asserted that dialogue and development are the preferred methods for achieving peace. However, clashes between police forces and Hizbul, the growing separatist group, ensure that violence persists. On July 8, 2016 the Indian Army killed Hizbul commander Burhan Wani, sparking further unrest. 14 Since Wani s death, 55 Kashmiris have died while thousands have sustained injuries. As the situation in Kashmir spirals out of control, SpecPol must consider the best method to create regional stability. Questions to Consider: 1. How should the sovereignty of Kashmir be decided? How would the various options and results impact your nation? 2. What is the impact of the human rights violations on Kashmir as well as the international community? How can we combat this issue? 3. What are the potential impacts of a nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan? How does the arms race affect your nation? Topic II: Space Security Encouraged by the closure of new frontiers on Earth, states began to explore the last known frontier: outer space. This exploration is spurred by advancements in technology, concerns over national security, and the hope of scientific discovery. Varying levels of advancement between nations incite international feuds that limit the potential for peace. As new issues arise, the global community must be ready to combat conflicts that hinder peace and security. 14 Dasgupta, Piyasree. Who Was Burhan Wani and Why is Kashmir Mourning Him? Huffington Post India. Accessed August 10, 2016.

7 History & Past United Nations Involvement The struggle for higher relative power between the United States and the Soviet Union spurred international interest in the potential uses of space. The Space Race of the 1960 s encouraged ideas about the utilization of space for communication, reconnaissance, or military action. In 1959 the General Assembly of the United Nations created the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUS) to govern the exploration and use of space for the benefit of all humanity: for peace, security and development. 15 Since its creation, COPUS has discussed various topics including technological initiatives, international space law, long-term sustainability, space objects, global health, and varying space applications. Throughout the end of the 20th century, the United Nations passed a series of treaties which established the precedent for international intervention in space. In 1967 the General Assembly passed the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, more commonly known as the Outer Space Treaty, banning the placement of weapons of 15 Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. May 25, Accessed May 28, unoosa.org/oosa/documents-andresolutions/search.jspx. mass destruction in orbit and creating an international consensus regarding the sanctuary of space. 16 During the 1970s the international community approved of treaties including the 1971 Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, the 1974 Convention on the Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, and the 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (The Moon Treaty) which formulated regulations regarding states responsibilities, capabilities, and limitations concerning the use of space for military and civilian actions. 17 However, many utilizations of space are motivated by the assurance of individual state security instead of the establishment of international peace. Since the 1950s the United States and Russia have been testing anti-satellite technology which would allow for the obliteration of satellites in space. This capability would enable individual states to harm one another based on the large reliance on satellites for routine actions. Beginning in the 1980s, states investigated the prospects of anti-ballistic 16 Garber, Stephen J. Outer Space Treaty of NASA.gov. NASA, n.d. Web. Garber, Stephen J. Outer Space Treaty of NASA.gov. NASA, n.d. Accessed May 28, Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space. UN News Center. United Nations, n.d. Accessed May 28, 2016.

8 missile defense from space systems. This research demonstrates that states worry about the violent potential of their peers offensive capabilities which instigates a security dilemma rather than a harmonious environment. Due to these concerns, the prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) has been a key issue discussed in the General Assembly. The potential conflict and security apprehensions drive many states to consider further international regulations regarding the control and usage of space. Current Situation In the modern era, space is essential for everyday functions. 130 United Nations members have space programs, 60 of which own their own satellites. Satellites regulate commerce and finance, predict weather patterns, enable telecommunications, provide navigational assistance, and facilitate military and intelligence operations. Destruction or interruption of these activities would hinder peace and stability while inhibiting intellectual progress. SpecPol needs to minimize the likelihood such events occur. As nations increase their presence in space there is an escalating concern for the accumulation of orbital debris. Space junk hinders regular activity by threatening to collide with satellites and spacecraft. Its collection threatens the launch of new satellites as well as the maneuverability of the International Space Station. The mitigation of space debris is a common concern amongst all nations. 18 Therefore, it is SpecPol s responsibility to consider the potential methods of reducing debris accumulation. Concerns over the weaponization of space harm the international system s security and stability. Although Russia, the United States, Great Britain, Japan, China, and India militarize outer space, no state has weaponized the cosmos. Militarization refers to the establishment of satellites for military actions that do not involve directly attacking other satellites or earthly targets, while weaponization indicates the placement of destructive devices in orbit. Treaties such as the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States have attempted to inhibit progression towards weaponization. Although the Outer Space Treaty restricts the placement of weapons of mass destruction in orbit, it is SpecPol s responsibility to determine if this legislation needs to be revised Slater, Alice. US Going Backward on Efforts to Ban Weapons in Space. Press TV. Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, 20 Jan Web. 19 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. U.S. Department of State. Accessed May 31, htm.

9 It is SpecPol s decision whether or not to draft legislation that would restrict any or all weaponization of space. Recent resolutions have focused on transparency of orbital actions and confidence-building in regards to safety from outer space threats. 20 This committee session may continue to follow this trend or deviate to establish new regulations in space topics yet to be discussed. Role of the United Nations Since 1982 the General Assembly has been the main forum for the negotiation and discussion of possible methods for peaceful relations in space. The United Nations remains the primary provider for treaties regarding any aspect of extraterrestrial interaction. Through the creation of offices and committees such as the Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) or the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), the United Nations aims to promote international cooperation, implement space law, and establish records of orbiting material. These departments secure the coordination of satellite orbits and radio frequencies to individual nations as well as international coordination between them. As members of SpecPol it is our 20 Documents and Resolutions. United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. May 25, Accessed May 25, documents-and-resolutions/search.jspx. prerogative to determine the extent to which the international community will work together to establish guidelines that ensure galactic peace and security. It is our responsibility to decide whether there is a necessity for international regulation regarding the use of outer space. Questions to Consider: 1. Does your nation fund or participate in space programs? To what extent? 2. What was your nation s involvement in the ratification of major space treaties? 3. Should the United Nations formally dismiss the ability to weaponize space? 4. What, if any, space activities need to be banned, limited, or monitored to ensure intergalactic security? Topic III: Polar Partition Since the early 20th century, many nations have recognized the potential value of the Arctic region, both the massive icy land mass and the surrounding ocean. 21 States are driven to acquire Arctic territory by the possibility of military, 21 Roger Howard, The Arctic Gold Rush: The New Race for Tomorrow s Natural Resources (London and New York: Continuum, 2009).

10 economic, and political gains. It is the United Nation s responsibility to ensure that the desire for territorial control of the Arctic for military, political, or economic operations does not harm the peace and stability of the international arena. History of Territorial Disputes There are five main nations involved in territorial claims over the Arctic region: the United States, Canada, Denmark, Russia, and Norway. Since the Truman Proclamation in 1945 these states have been claiming territorial extension into the Arctic based on the continuation of continental shelves. 22 These nations are driven to gain territorial holding in the region by the potential mineral wealth and control over possible trade routes. International interest in the Arctic region led to the establishment of multinational organizations meant to secure peace and stability. Beginning in the 1950s, 22 Frozen Conflict. The Economist. December 20, Accessed June 10, international/ denmark-claimsnorth-pole-frozen-conflict. nations came together during United Nations Conferences on the Law of the Seas. Since then there have been four conferences that aimed to establish regulations that would codify the law of the sea. The first two conventions failed to produce meaningful legislation regarding territorial disputes throughout the Arctic. However, in 1982, 9 years after the third conference, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was adopted. 23 This convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine resources. 24 Ratified by 161 nations, it is the baseline for territorial claims based on zones (territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone, and continental shelf) with various levels of control while ensuring limits for navigation, transit regimes, and deep seabed mining. 25 Furthermore, in 1996 eight Arctic states 23 Petkunaite, Dovile, Cooperation or Conflict in the Arctic? UNCLOS and the Barents and Beaufort Sea Disputes (2011). CUNY Academic Works 24 UNCLOS and Agreement on Part XI - Preamble and Frame Index. UN News Center. Accessed June 10, agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm. 25 United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (DOALOS). Oceans and Law of the Sea, accessed March 20, 2011, Depts/los/index.htm.

11 agreed on the creation of the Arctic Council which promotes cooperation, ensures the protection of the marine environment, guarantees the prosperity of scientific research, and develops new initiatives. 26 Territorial disputes continue to remain an issue into the 21st century. Russian explorers claim that Arctic territory has always been Russian, validating their placement of a Russian flag on the Lomonosov Ridge. 27 Many states viewed this as an aggressive act, increasing tensions and furthering the potential for conflict. Additionally, in December of 2014 Denmark staked claim to an area just north of Greenland, inciting conflict with Russia and Canada. The continued interest in territorial claims throughout the Arctic ensures that the issue remains prevalent. Economic Benefits The potential economic advancements provided by territorial holdings in the Arctic drive nations to dispute control. The Arctic is home to 1/8 of the world s untapped oil reserves as well as ¼ 26 Frozen Conflict. The Economist. December 20, Accessed June 10, international/ denmark-claimsnorth-pole-frozen-conflict. 27 Parfitt, Tom. Russia Plants Flag on North Pole Seabed. The Guardian. August 02, Accessed June 10, world/2007/aug/02/russia.arctic. of its natural gas. The potential gains from the collection of these resources encourage nations to seek territory within the Arctic. Although global warming has made these resources more accessible, drilling for natural gas and oil remains an expensive endeavor, leaving many nations to question the economic benefit. Many nations are less incentivized to tap into the economic potential due to the reduction in oil prices. However, the growing potential for new trade routes and military establishments continues to rouse international interest. 28 History of Militarization International interest in the militarization of the Arctic began during World War II. Both the Allied and Axis powers utilized the region for their strategic benefit. Between the establishment of military bases, airfields, and observation hubs, states became invested in the Arctic. Nations quickly realized the potential for additional natural resources and alternate routes to safely supply troops while avoiding enemy establishments. During the Cold War NATO and Warsaw Pact forces instituted nuclear testing and transport throughout the Arctic. Over the past two decades, the Arctic has seen an accelerated buildup of military forces and an increase in the amount of 28 Petkunaite, Dovile, Cooperation or Conflict in the Arctic? UNCLOS and the Barents and Beaufort Sea Disputes (2011). CUNY Academic Works

12 military training exercises taking place in the icy waters. For example, in 2014, Russia held additional combat exercises, reequipped bases established during the Cold War, and augmented their testing of nuclear weapons. 29 Numerous flashpoints have the potential to spark conflict in the Arctic region. Although the Barents Sea border was settled between the Cold War rivals of Norway and Russia in 2010, the recent discovery of oil reserves may reignite the conflict. China desires to utilize the Bering Strait as a trade route; however, the potential for a blockade by Russia or the United States could cause international disputes. Global warming uncovered oil-rich sections of Greenland which are attracting unwanted commercial attention from foreign firms. Hydrocarbon resources buried beneath the North 29 Mitchell, Jon. Russia s Territorial Ambition and Increased Military Presence in the Arctic. Foreign Policy Journal (2014). Web. Pole incentivize all the Arctic nations to have overlapping claims to the territory. Canada asserts sovereignty over the Northwest Passage due to its proximity, however others protest this claim, understanding the trade route to be in international waters. 30 Mission of SpecPol It is SpecPol s duty to resolve ongoing territorial disputes such as the Beaufort Strait while ensuring that prior disputes, for example the Barents Sea, do not reignite as territorial issues. It is our responsibility to guarantee that rights to resources, military conventions, and territory do not trigger conflict and increase tension within the international community. Our prerogative is to create international treaties and customary international laws that determine maritime boundaries throughout the Arctic. 31 Questions to Consider: 1. What additional territorial regulations need to be established to ensure the peace and stability of the Arctic? 30 Moss, Trefor. Frosty Relations. World Policy. April 24, Accessed June 10, Angelle C. Smith, Frozen Assets: Ownership of Arctic Mineral Rights Must be Resolved to Prevent the Really Cold War, The George Washington International Law Review 41 (2011): 661.

13 2. What territorial claims or interest does your nation have in the Arctic? 3. Should there be regulations regarding the extent of military usage of the Arctic?