Security Council A

Welcome to SUNS 2009!

Committee: The Security Council

Topic A: The legality of military actions by permanent members not authorized by the Security Council

Director: Sebastian Zepeda Castellanos

Mo Moderator: Mariana Estrada Jose

History of the Security Council

Since the formation of the Security Council and remarked at the UN charter in its VII chapter indicates that the Security Council would be formed of five permanent members which were the victors of WWII (United States, UK, France, Republic of China and the USSR) and other 5 countries this gave a total of ten members. However the Sec. Council has suffered changes in its internal structure: The Chinese Civil war which resulted in the formation of the Republic of China (Taiwan). But even though that China suffered a change in its government the membership of the S.C was granted to Taiwan where the supporters of the former government where exiled to. In 1971 the People’s Republic of China achieved to obtain the permanent membership of Taiwan due that they proved that now the majority of the Chinese people lived in the PRC. The other change the S.C under went was the break down of the USSR when in 1991 it disappeared but it was established that the country that will continue the Soviet Union’s labors would be the Russian Federation. Also the S.C admitted a resolution to increase its members from 10 to 15. The S.C is commended to maintain Int. peace and order and to identify any threat that could alter the peaceful order. The S.C is in charge of settling Int. disputes peacefully BUT if things do not work properly the S.C is the only organ in all the UN to be authorized to the use of military force. Our committee works independently form the General Assembly, this means that the Security Council resolutions’ are passed right away in the S.C and are not subject to being voted in the G.A

WHERE, WHEN, WHY AND HOW DO THE CONFLICTS BEGIN?

Why: The causes of the actions taken by the permanent members have had many reasons of coming to be: Geographical, Political, Military, etc. The causes may vary but the effect of military action does not

Where: One of the most recognized situations was the American invasion to Afghanistan in which the United States declared the invasion to Afghanistan to search for Osama Bin Laden and to destroy the whole Al Qaeda organization, the perpetrator of the attack to the WTC. The Security Council reaffirmed its position of neutrality to the situation and did not approved that the U.S.A attacked Afghanistan but in October,7,2002 and not listening the Security Council’s advices United States entered Afghanistan with a heavy military arsenal to begin the pursuit of Osama Bin Laden. The war has costed more than 500 billion dollars for the U.S in the beginning the U.K agreed to help the United States in their search for Bin Laden. Later on 32 countries summed to the project against the Talibans, Al Qaeda and other terrorist movements. After 5 years and many humanitarian and diplomatic efforts from different peace keeping missions in the entire world several countries started to withdraw from Afghanistan. The U.K and the U.S have both withdrew troops along the past 2 years but have not fully retired insisting in the search of Bin Laden and the Al Qaeda Organization. Other countries such as Denmark and South Korea had fully retired from Afghanistan

How: As it has been stated in the UN charter the mission of the S.C is to maintain international peace and security. But when countries do no t agree in solving a problem the five veto powers tend to propose and sometimes even take in action their ideas with the advantage that they can hardly receive a warning. In the Case of the war in Afghanistan United States along with the U.K proposed an invasion to afghan lands to search for Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The majority of the by-then members of the Security Council (including Russia, France and China) were against the idea of attacking Afghanistan. The resolution did not pass but the two countries agreed in attacking Afghanistan. The Security Council later on recognized the invasion to Afghanistan as legal.

When: The place may vary. But it often happens on the invaded or in-dispute territory.

VERY IMPORTANT FACTS:

-The United States is not the only country who has invaded other countries without the S.C approbation.

-Tibet (China in 1950) Chechnya ( Russia in 1994,1996 and 1999 ) are other famous cases of illegal invasion

When an invasion is recognized by the S.C is now considered as legal

-Any other country that decides to attack that is not a veto power WILL BE SANCTIONED by the S.C

-Actually there have been campaigns to depose the Veto Vote and the military capability to the veto powers when int. peace is at sake

POINTS OF VIEW

-USA: Since the beginning the U.S has defended its position when realizing a military intervention. The country clearly states that when an invasion takes place is not with the intention of damaging national security. George Bush in 2001 said that the United States would never attempt to break the peace in the entire world. They said they would never attempt to break the order in which the world lives. Even though the United States have faced many crossed opinions about how the resolve at war, The United States have always tried to amend their image.

-UK: The U.K established that: When the S.C dictations are not respected it is considered an insult to the authority of the Security Council. The UK has strongly dedicated to make the S.C authority count with all the weight it should have. The UK recommended that when international peace is at sake. The S.C should not hesitate in applying all of its force, because this will show decision and strength in the S.C. In every case that has threatened peace and order, the U.K has fought to make unity and to fortify the common agreements of the members of the S.C

-Russia: Russia in 1994 invaded ILLEGALLY the region of Chechnya which in that moment was in campaigns to become an independent country after the dissolution of the USSR. Boris Yeltsin opposed the movement and tried to make Chechnya a part of the Russian Federation. A war out broke in December, 11, 1994 and ended in 1996 when the same Yeltsin signed a cease fire treaty which ended the first Chechen war. The same year Chechnya won its independence. Russia admits that every dictation fro the S.C has to be followed and any country has the right to not do so.

-France: France has declared that it will not act without the S.C consciousness. France is against the action taken with no authorization, and has promoted publically that countries like the same U.S or other veto countries should be sanctioned. What France is not in favor of: Is to lost or to give away their permanence in the S.C

-China: The only country that keeps its problems without the necessity of employing military. China keeps in frequent dialogues with the Tibet, the territory in dispute, China had been accused before entering in dialogues China secretly attacked Tibet. This has not been yet proved and China has declared to the UN that if negotiations go in a good manner China would leave the Tibet by the good way. By the other half China as well as France is in favor of applying sanctions to the veto powers when they ignore the S.C dictations.

-Burkina Faso: The African country stated that they will support any movement which support international peace keeping. Burkina Faso is not in favor neither against the removal of the veto vote

-Costa Rica: This country is also neutral to the removal of the veto vote. But has stated that if the vote is an obstruction to maintain order, its removal should be considered

-Croatia: Croatia has affirmed they would follow any program that is committed to maintain peace. Actually Croatia has not proposed any initial programs to maintain peace

-Libya: Afraid of the situation that has overthrew Afghanistan, Libya suggested to the S.C that measures should be taken to avoid same situation there should be an internal regulation system in which the veto powers would have to agreed to use military weapons

-Vietnam: Vietnam, suffered from the same situation when the S.C did not managed in time the situation Vietnam’s only proposal is to limit the veto powers function in the S.C

-Austria: Austrian government has not yet started a motion to but Austria is in favor of the removal of the veto vote because Austria considers it as an unfair advantage of the veto powers.

-Japan: Japan plays a very important role because it represents the renewal of the S.C, the Japanese representative said that the power the veto powers have is excessive and so this is why only five countries can hold it. Japan is in a group called the G-4 which are four countries in search of the permanence in the S.C this countries generally tend to search equality in the S.C and to implement rightful sanctions to the veto powers.

-Mexico: Mexico was in turn in the S.C when the war out broke in Afghanistan. Mexico qualified the acts of the U.S inadequate and reaffirmed that they will not enter the war. Mexico also suggested that the S.C would be the one deciding in common agree when military action should be taken and to not let the five members take action until the S.C agreed to

-Turkey: Turkey considers the legality of military action not authorized to be as illegal as the war in Iraq resulted to be. Turkey commented that is denigrating and insulting to the U.N allowing this to happen, insisting that the illegal military action could bring severe consequences to the world such as a third world war, Turkey also as Japan, Mexico and other countries that they will search for equality in the SC

-Uganda: Uganda as a country far from a problem of territorial dispute. Even though Uganda has expressed it deep concern that an error in the management of an illegal invasion could bring many dangerous things, Uganda has not yet defined its clear position even though such as Burkina Faso, Uganda will put all of its efforts to maintain peace and to prevent more illegal military action.

SUMMING UP

The legality of military action means that the five veto powers can act military if they see the situation requires it, although this is not well seen by other countries which claim that the attacks are done without any minimum of respect and the brutality is in a high index. Countries that claim for an order suggest that the veto power and the military freedoms should be regulated to prevent any other cases of illegal military action. The veto powers defend their right to have the veto power and they claim that the intention is only to maintain peace and order. The problem is that no side seems to have the complete reason and there are not any way to arrange an agreement in which both parts can seem to be beneficiated.

QUESTIONS FOR THE DELEGATE:

-Does your country support action not authorized by the S.C?

-Has your country have been involved in a similar situation?

-What can your country suggest to stop the not authorized military

action?

-Why did your country decided to invade certain country even

though the S.C did not authorized it? (P.M)

-Is your country willing to pay from the damages it caused? (P.M)

What can your country suggest to do when the members of the

S.C do not agree at all?

-Is your country in favor or against sanctioning military action not

authorized by the S.C?