Security Council

SECURITY COUNCIL

MUN Korea

Security Council Yale Model United Nations Korea May 17 - 19, 2013

Security Council 1

MUN Korea

Table of Contents Topic I: Establishing Peace in Syria

3

History 4

Previous Measures Taken by the U.N.

and International Organizations 7 Timeline 8

Recent Announcements from the

International Community 10 Questions to Consider 11

Suggestions for Further Reading

12

Topic II: Colombia in Conflict History 13

History of the FARC Struggle with Colombia 16 Major Issues 18 Timeline 22 Bloc Positions 31 Questions to Consider 32

Suggestions for Futher Reading

33

Glossary 35 Role of the Committee 37 Structure of the Committee 38

Security Council 2

MUN Korea

Topic I: Establishing Peace in Syria

Bashar al-Assad has ruled Syria since 2000, after his father, Hafez al-Assad, had ruled for 30 years. Under the light of the events of the Arab Spring, Assad has been a target of complaints by his people concerning major human rights violations. A widely despised emergency law had been in place since the ruling Baath Party came to power in 1963, permitting the regime a free hand to arrest people without charge and forcing the state upon the people without any restrictions. Syrians have accused Assad of economic lapses and corruption; human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also accused him of torture, murder and imprisonment of his political opponents.

The Syrians, inspired by the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, commenced peaceful protests demanding economic prosperity, political freedom and civil liberties; yet, similarly to the other Arab nations, Al-Assad has been accused of a violent crackdown on the protestors.

The climax of the early conflict occurred in April 25, 2011 – four days after Al-Assad promised reforms and lifted the state of state-of-emergency

law – when the Ba’ath government sent troops into Daraa to carry out brutalities and extreme violence. The battle of Damascus in 2012 signified a major victory for the Free Syrian Army, but the Battle of Aleppo, beginning in 2012, is still ongoing in 2013 with casualties on both sides. Leaders around the world have been irate at the situation, and several of them have called for al-Assad to step down and have imposed economic sanctions on Syria. The dissidents have organized an opposition Syrian National Council to set up the new government for when, or if, Assad steps down. As of January of 2013, the United Nations has reported a death toll that exceeds 60,000 people.

The situation in Syria has reached a critical point of nearly two years of an ongoing uprising, and it is now time for the international community to make decisions, evaluate the position of the government’s sovereignty, yet also taking into account the rights and liberties of the population.

“I want the Syrian regime to take note of what happened in Libya,” said Syrian National Council member Security Council 3

MUN Korea

Louay Safi, “Those dictators who think that they are above people and above history, (think) they can maintain repression without being called to account. That time is over now. All nations have the right to live under the rule of law and to experience democracy and free speech and freedom.”

Topic History Although its roots dig deeper in time than any of the recent occurrences, the spark for the Arab Spring was ignited by Mohamed Bouazizi, a Tunisian street vendor who set himself on fire in protest of the Tunisian regime.

Spiraling from that, a wave of protests hit the Arab world, demanding more just governments and, in most cases, ushering pleas for democracy. Syria, considered one of the most repressive countries in the Arab world, soon had its citizens join the protests in 2011, inspired by the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia. Bashar al-Assad has been Syria’s president since the year 2000, replacing his father, Hafez al-Assad, and giving continuity to the Ba’athist rule in Syria. Although he was initially hailed as a promise of reform to Syria, he soon revealed himself as a leader much like his father had been. Many previous clashes with Syria’s

government have occurred before the Arab Spring uprisings.

To understand the complexity of the Syrian issue, one must observe the several different causes for the unrest. Debate has surged as to whether this is an economic conflict – a clash of classes – or whether the sectarian nature of Syria should be to blame.

Economically, Syria had been under tension since before the protests began in March. Human rights abuses there have been committed repeatedly under the Baa’ath rule, and according to a 2010 Human Rights Watch report, Bashar al-Assad had not improved the human rights situations in the course of his 10 year-rule.

A 2007 study by the Dubai School of Government’s Wolfensohn Center for Development, “Youth Exclusion in Syria: Social, Economic, and Institutional Dimensions,” found that although Syria’s overall unemployment rate was at about 25%, which is relatively common for the area, the youth jobless rate has been more than six times higher than the rate among older adults (only 4%); this constitutes, according the study, “the highest ratio (youth-adult imbalance) among the region’s countries outside the Gulf States.” Syria is a country of 21 million people a large Security Council 4

MUN Korea

Sunni majority (74%) and significant minorities (10% each) of Christians and Alawites - the Shia sect to which Mr. Assad belongs. Assad has concentrated power in the hands of his family and members of the Alawite community, who retain a disproportionate amount of power in the Syrian government, military and business elite. Claims of corruption and nepotism have been widespread among the excluded Sunni majority. This mirrors clearly when observing the areas of tension in the uprising – generally, protests have had greater repercussion in Sunni-dominated rural areas and towns and cities.

For months, the protestors have been calling for freedom and democracy. Mr. Assad has made some concessions and promised further reform, but has not once mentioned the word “democracy” in his public statements.

Activists say that as long as people continue to be killed in the streets, his promises count for very little. The protestors have now made it clear that they want the fall of Assad’s regime, yet the president has made it clear that he has no intention to step down.

Meanwhile, some other pleas have been made – to end the 48-year-old emergency law, to cease the extrajudicial killings and torture, to have the

right for a free media, to transition to a democratic, free and pluralistic society, and to release political prisoners and detainees from the protests.

So far, Assad has revoked the emergency law – although the crackdowns are still ongoing, given amnesty to some political prisoners, and has proposed for national dialogue to review new election law, allowing other political parties than the Baath Party, and pushing for constitutional reform.

However, he has not ended the killings, and continuously sends troops into village – citing need for “security” – and holding hundreds in jail. The crackdowns have attracted world-wide attention, and the international platform has divided itself regarding the human rights violations in Syria.

Some countries, notoriously Russia and China, claim that Syria has the right to its sovereignty and that other countries should not be meddling with the politics of an internal regime. Other countries, such as the United States, have been outspoken against the actions of Bashar al-Assad, pressuring the Security Council to issue sanctions on Syria.

The Arab League became a major player when it decided to banish Syria from the Arab League while the crimes continue to be committed Security Council 5

MUN Korea inside of the country. Assad now faces heightened economic and political pressures, as Europe imposes a new round of financial sanctions and King Abdullah II of Jordan calls on the Mr. Assad to step down. However, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem says their country would take ‘tough measures’ against any country that recognizes the opposition Syrian National Council.

The full-fledged protests began on March 25th, 2011, as rallies calling for freedom in the southern border town of Deraa. The crackdowns initiated when Syrian security forces opened fire on unarmed crowds, killing several people in the protests. The unrest in Deraa quickly spread to other towns and cities. President Bashar al-Assad sent in tanks and troops to restore order, blaming “armed gangs and terrorists” for the unrest. Towns like Deraa, Homs and Douma were attacked for days. Hundreds were killed when snipers and tanks fired on unarmed protesters.

As the unrest spread to the north of the country, troops attacked the town of Jisr al-Shughour, where the government said 120 security personnel were killed. Fearing a military onslaught, more than 10,000 people fled to Turkey, where they remain in refugee camps.

Now, continuously, the Syrian army cracks down on protestors, and Syria has been a battleground ever since. The United Nations currently estimates the death toll at 5000 – a number that the Syrian government claims is too high, and that human rights group claim is too low. Avaaz, a human rights organization, estimates the number of deaths as well over 6000. A

ccusations of human rights violations have been widespread, and the constant clash between government and civilians has created sweeping fear amongst Syrians. U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay told the U.N. Security Council that Assad’s crackdowns against domestic protesters “constituted crimes against humanity,” and that Syria should be referred to the International Criminal Court. Pillay also revised the U.N. estimate for the death toll during the nine-month-old uprising, saying that more than 5,000 people had been

Security Council 6

MUN Korea

killed, including 300 children. Another 14,000 people are believed to have been arrested, while 12,400 people had fled to other countries. Pillay urged the U.N. Security Council to take “urgent, effective measures” to protect Syrian civilians, warning that failure to act would only embolden Syrian authorities to continue the crackdown.

The Security Council has yet to pass a resolution on the Syrian crisis, due to objections from Russia and China.

Previous Measures Taken by the U.N. and International Organiizations In October of 2011, Russia and China cast a rare double veto to block a U.S. and European-backed draft resolution condemning Syria for its brutal crackdown on protesters. This resolution would have been the first official international measure taken to stop the violence in Syria. The draft resolution had 9 votes in favor in the 15-member council, the bare minimum required for adoption of a resolution. Brazil, India, Lebanon, and South Africa expressed their unease with the Western press for sanctions by abstaining on the vote.

The Russian and Chinese

actions marked the defeat of months of European-led diplomatic efforts to impose sanctions on Damascus for unleashing a violent response to the demonstrations. Syria’s U.N. ambassador, Bashar Al Jafaari, later thanked the “voices of the wise” on the council who confronted what he characterized as “the colonial and military aspirations of a bloc of Western powers that is doomed to failure.”

Although some leaders predicted that NATO would interfere in Syria like it had in Libya, the tipping point for intervention actually came through the Arab League. On Dec.19th, 2011, a day when activists said more than 70 people were killed, Syria agreed to an Arab League initiative that would allow Arab observers into the country. By signing, the Syrian government attempted to show the international community that the months of bloody crackdowns were coming to an end with the monitored peace initiative. However, in January of 2012, an Arab League monitor, Anwar Malek, quit the observer mission, declaring it a “farce.” He claims that the human rights violations were blatant and revolting despite Arab League presence.

He released a public statement declaring, “The regime is not just committing one war crime, but a series of crimes against its people.”

Security Council 7

MUN Korea Timeline

Source: BBC News 2011 March “Day of Dignity” protest held in Damascus demanding release of political prisoners.

Some 35 people are arrested. At a “Day of Rage” rally in the southern city of Deraa, security forces shoot a number of people dead, triggering days of violent unrest and more civilian deaths. The government announces some conciliatory measures and releases dozens of political prisoners in an attempt to damp down the unrest. President Assad dismisses government, accuses protesters of being Israeli agents.

2011 April State of emergency - in force since 1963 - is lifted.

2011 May Army tanks enter Deraa, Banyas, Homs and suburbs of Damascus in an effort to crush anti-regime protests. US tightens sanctions in response to bloody crackdown on protests. European Union follows suit days later. President Assad announces amnesty for political prisoners.

2011 June The government says that 120 members of the security forces have been killed by “armed gangs” in the northwestern town of Jisr al-Shughour. Troops besiege the town and more than 10,000 people flee to Turkey.

President Assad pledges to start a “national dialogue” on reform.

2011 June The IAEA nuclear watchdog decides to report Syria to the UN Security Council over its alleged covert nuclear programme. The structure housing the alleged reactor was destroyed in an Israeli air raid in 2007.

Security Council 8

MUN Korea

2011 July President Assad sacks the governor of the northern province of Hama after mass demonstration there, eventually sending in troops to restore order at the cost of scores of lives. Dozens of opposition activists meet in Istanbul to form a unified opposition.

2011 August US President Barack Obama and allies call on President Assad to step down.

2011 October Newly formed Syrian National Council says it has forged a common front of internal and exiled opposition activists.

Russia and China veto UN resolution condemning Syria.

2011 November Arab League votes to suspend Syria, accusing it of failing to implement an Arab peace plan. Weeks later the League votes to impose sanctions. Army defectors target a military base near Damascus in the Free Syrian Army’s most high-profile attack since protests began. Government supporters attack foreign embassies.

2011 December Death toll in uprising exceeds 5,000, says UN. Syria agrees to an Arab League initiative allowing Arab observers into the country.

Twin suicide bombs outside security buildings in Damascus kill 44. Opposition suspects government of attacks.Thousand of protesters gather in Homs to greet Arab League monitors. State TV says more than 700 detainees freed.

2012 January Suicide bomber kills 26 in Damascus. Government vows ‘’iron fist’’ response.

Security Council 9

MUN Korea

Recent Announcements From the International Community John Kerry, US Secretary of State: “We need to address the question of President Assad’s calculation currently…I believe there are additional things that can be done to change his current perception….It may not be possible. I’m not going to stand here and tell you that’s automatic or easily achievable. There are a lot of forces that have been unleashed here over the course of the last months…But we owe it to ourselves, we owe it to the Syrian people and the region and the world to make every effort to explore ways to achieve that negotiated outcome, and we intend to do that.”

“This was a courageous offer by Mr. al-Khatib. I urge both the Syrian government and the Security Council to respond positively,” Ban said.

“It is time for a clean break from Syria’s past, and for a decisive turn toward a future where Syrians are able to express their political views freely, without fear of arbitrary arrest or killing -- a Syria where the human rights of all are protected.

The Security Council, currently divided over Syria, “must no longer stand on the sidelines, dead-locked, silently witnessing the slaughter,” said Ban.

“It must be willing, at long last, to come together and establish the parameters for the democratic transition that could save Syria.”

Ban Ki-moon urged the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad to accept an offer by the head of the opposition coalition for peace talks.

The offer by National Coalition leader Moaz al-Khatib to talk with “is an opportunity we should not miss -- a chance to switch from a devastating military logic to a promising political approach,” Ban said in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations on Monday.

Security Council 10

MUN Korea

Questions to Consider Keep in mind these questions: • Is Syria reaching the tipping point towards a civil war?

• Should the Security Council intervene in the private matters of a State? (taking into account that China and Russia have previously, in October of 2011, vetoed a resolution claiming that any interference could be a violation of sovereignty) • How to halt the human rights violations?

• Will sanctions be the only way to pressure the Syrian government to cease the crackdowns?

• Where should the Syrian refugees go?

• Should the Security Council encourage Assad to step down, and if so, what measures should be taken to ensure that peace and stability prevail as a new government leads Syria?

• In the case of a civil war, should the UN intervene, and how?

Security Council 11

MUN Korea

Suggestions for Further Research • Al Jazeera News

o www.aljazeera.com/ • Al Jazeera Syria Live Blog

o http://blogs.aljazeera.net/liveblog/Syria • BBC News

o www.bbc.co.uk • Security Council News

o http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/organizations/s/security_council/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=UN%20Security%20Council&st=cse • Syrian uprising videos on YouTube (Use the search engine. There are multiple videos.)

o www.youtube.com • Foreign Policy Magazine

o www.foreignpolicy.com/ • Human Rights Watch

o www.hrw.org • Global Policy Forum

o www.globalpolicy.org/

Security Council 12

MUN Korea

Topic II: Colombia in Conflict Topic History Since the creation of the United Nations, Colombia has been one of the greatest advocates for the elaboration and implementation of the main treaties and United Nations bodies on disarmament and international peacekeeping. Colombia takes pride in upholding the main treaties and conventions on disarmament and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons. As part of the Movement of the Non-Aligned Countries, Colombia strongly believes in the importance of nuclear disarmament in the world and is sympathetic to the foundational treaties concerning this, such as the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

In addition, Colombia is on the ratification process of the Comprehensive Nuclear-test-ban Treaty (CTBT).

Nevertheless, since Colombia has been a haven for the trade of illicit traffic of small arms and light weapons, which are abused by illegal organizations with often terrorist or criminal purposes, the country has had an

all-important role in the introduction of the production and trade of small arms and light weapons in the Disarmament International agenda.

During the 1980s, Colombia continuously pointed out this growing issue at the General Assembly of the United Nations. On September 29th, 1989, Colombian President Virgilio Barco addressed the General Assembly in a speech entitled “The International Struggle against Narco-Traffic is not a War of Words.” In effect, it was not – the drug trade was naturally multifaceted, involving the collaboration of many countries around the world. President Barco’s speech played a powerful role in exposing this reality and encouraging other countries to take a more active role in the struggle against the drug trade. Consequentially, the Colombia’s government placed itself in a directly oppositional role against the drug cartels and the latter had unleashed an armed struggle against the state with attacks, massacres, and assassinations of judges and politicians. After the reception of his speech, President Barco received a standing ovation at the General Assembly in recognition for his courage Security Council 13

MUN Korea

in confronting narco-traffic and its terrorist expressions. Just as he had stated, the world community was increasingly attacked by subversive organizations throughout the 1990s.

These were clearly international criminal organizations belonging to no single individual country and for which no law existed. For Colombia it was not a war of worlds many Colombians, including the Liberal Party presidential candidate Luis Carlos Galán, had been assassinated due to their strong commitment against drug trafficking.

Colombia continuously lobbied the importance of the global importance of the conflict, highlighting that if United Nations failed to act as a strong coalition of countries against the widespread usage of small weapons, the use of drugs and violence would grow by even greater dimensions.

In September 1989, Great Britain made great efforts to prioritize the issue of drug trafficking at the formal sessions of the Security Council. For this reason, the country prepared a resolution proposal, “Draft Security Council Resolution on the effect of International Drug Trafficking on International Peace and Security.” This draft resolution proposed that the capability of international drug cartels to intimidate and corrupt officials by violent

aggression, including death, constituted a serious threat to sovereignty and to regional and international peace.

The Colombian Delegation, however, rejected the inclusion of this issue on the agenda of the Security Council and instead preferred that the matter be discussed within the General Assembly as on previous occasions, given that notwithstanding its importance, it was something that did not place international peace and security in danger. On the other hand, Colombia rationalized this decision to take drug violence off of the Security Council agenda by arguing that to leave this issue in the responsibility of the Security Council could entail an attack on the sovereignty of other countries. This concern was said to have played part of the problem and could potentially serve as a justification for sending foreign troops to control the production and distribution of narcotics. Wishing to avoid an international militaristic intervention, Colombia then promoted a resolution proposal to hold a special session of the General Assembly on “International Cooperation against Production, Supply and Demand, Traffic and Distribution of Illicit Drugs”, which was accepted by Security Council 14

MUN Korea

the CAUCUS, a group of non-aligned countries and members of the Security Council that meets informally.

Despite the initial success of this resolution, the drug violence carried on throughout the 1990s in Colombia. Within the first couple of months of the Presidency of Cesar Gaviria, (1990-1994), Colombia addressed the General Assembly, on September 26, 1990, regarding the extreme heights that the Colombian drug conflict had taken. César Gaviria had ascended to the Presidency through a violent presidential campaign in which three presidential candidates were assassinated and another seriously injured.

Drug traffickers, as a result of the government crackdown and the war President Barco had declared against them, had turned to counter-state and often terroristic activities, such as the sabotage of a commercial airline.

When President Gaviria addressed the Assembly he listed many of the violent activities that harmed the Colombian population and which had turned “…

Colombia into the Nation that had, undoubtedly, paid the highest price in this struggle”. President Gaviria referenced the struggle that the majority of the cocaine captured and destroyed in the world had been by Colombian authorities. The President asserted

that as long as the wealthier countries did not decrease the addictions of its own population to cocaine and similar drugs, as they were the ones creating demand for such, there would always be more laboratories and increasingly powerful drug mafias.

Over the past ten years, Colombia has continued its fight against the international drug trafficking market in the United Nations. In 2001, Colombia led the first United Nations Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects. During this same time frame, coinciding with the Colombian presidency of the Security Council, the country was granted the approval for a Presidential Declaration on small weapons. Many across the world saw this as a major victory against the trade of small weapons.

Security Council 15

MUN Korea History of the FARC Struggle with Colombia In 1948, the leader of a populist movement in Colombia, Jorge Eliecer Gaitan, was assassinated; his murder was rumored to have been a target of right-wing extremists. It was likely that Gaitan would have been voted President in the coming elections.

Having lost its legitimacy, the incumbent government collapsed into a political vacuum, which triggered La Violencia, a civil war between the Colombian Conservative Party and the Colombia Liberal Party. Over ten years, there were hundreds of battles across the country over control of landed property. La Violencia is said to have taken the lives of 200,000 people.

Finally, after a decade of political violence, these two main parties in Colombia merged in 1963 as the National Front. Although the formation of the National Front brought stability to the Colombia, corruption and abuses of human rights became commonplace under its rule. In response to the lack of political plurality, several radical leftist groups emerged against the right-wing authoritarian regime, including the communist guerrilla movement, the MOEC, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of

Columbia (better known by its acronym in Spanish FARC), the Popular Liberation Army (EPL), M-19 and the National Liberation Army (ELN).

The most popular of these is FARC, a revolutionary Marxist-Leninist organization which started as a small peasant organization and has grown to have unprecedented military strength.

Over the past fifty years, these militant groups have fought an armed struggle against the authoritarian National Front and its quasi-police state. Its main goals are said to be fighting against the monopoly of the bourgeoisie elite, neo-imperialism, American interventionism in Colombia, the government’s counteractive violence against civilians, and multi-national’s exploitation of natural resources.

In the 1970s, the FARC was a relatively marginal guerrilla force, with barely nine fronts and enormous internal divisions. Support began to increase dramatically in the 1980s as many other sections of the Colombian society became discontent with the draconian rule of the National Front.

Most importantly, a few of these other guerrilla groups consolidated and joined the FARC, which established itself as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party. The growing influence of FARC played a role in the rise of cartels in Colombia. As the Security Council 16

MUN Korea

official economy struggled to grow, the underground economy began to flourish through hard drugs traffic, in particular cocaine. At one point, Colombia controlled 80% of the world’s cocaine trade. The two largest drug cartels were known as Medellin Cartel, led by the famous Pablo Escobar, and Cali Cartel. From 1970 to the end of the century, these drug cartels had immense influence in the political and economic decisions within the country. These drug cartels have manipulated the military power of FARC and other leftist guerrilla groups through financial support to further their own aims. The FARC issue is very twofaced – on one side, the American and Colombian governments have demonized its plight and placed FARC under the international spotlight as a brutal terrorist organization. This attitude has been backed up by FARC’s illegal dealings, which include expansion of drug trafficking and taking ransom foreign citizens and major international figures as a way of securing their demands with the Colombian government. A famous example was the kidnapping of Ingrid Bittencourt, an anti-corruption activist and ex-senator from Colombia, which lasted for six and half year from 2002 to 2008 and was a major source of discontent

among the international community.

On the flipside, Latin America’s long history of corrupt government, from the dictatorships to present-day Kirchner monopoly in Argentina and Worker’s Party in Brazil, seems to favor the rise of anti-government movements that promise to have in mind solely the interests of the people. It is complicated to pinpoint basic flaws in the FARC movement regarding its motive when the Colombian government itself has been so harmful at times to its own population.

From 2000 until 2010, Álvaro Uribe maintained authoritarian rule of the government. His political campaign was based on fighting the guerrillas and drug traffickers. In the day of his inauguration, leftist guerilla groups set off bombs across the country, expressing their discontent with his election. As President, Uribe established the Democratic Security Policy, which provided military resources to right-wing militia groups to terrorize Colombian peasants, thus weakening the base of FARC. This plan helped reduce drug trafficking through a severe crackdown on corrupt police officers and soldiers who had connections to the drug cartels. During the extent of Uribe’s rule, more than 21,000 military deaths were reported, and tens of thousands more civilians were killed.

Millions of Colombians, especially those Security Council 17

MUN Korea

in the countryside, have been displaced as a result of the violence and victims have been forced to leave their land and livelihoods as a result of threats, drug violence, and battles between armed groups. Many of the rebels that Uribe’s government claimed to have killed as success of their struggle were identified as innocent civilians. The brutal military rule of Uribe’s presidency earned harsh criticism from the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and countless other independent human rights non-profit organizations.

In August 2010, Juan Manuel Santos assumed power in Colombia, running on a campaign of conciliation and conflict-resolution. In his first two years of rule, he has fought to bring stability to the country and fight political corruption. Santos has also continued military conflict against FARC. The Democratic Security Policy has continued to repress other political forces in the country and restrain freedom of expression. The passage of certain legislation has given the impression that Santos’ presidency has tilted slightly from the platform of Uribe. After two years of rule, it remains to be seen whether he will be able to make lasting changes in Colombia.

Major Issues Drug Trafficking and Cartels

Drug trafficking has played a central role in the Colombian economy for the past fifty years. In fact, Colombia is the only country in the world that produces all three of the most popular plant-based drugs: marijuana, cocaine and heroin. In the 1960s and 1970s, Colombia became the major world supplier of marijuana, exporting tons of the drugs to the United States. As cocaine gained popularity in the early 1980s, supply of cocaine became more profitable, and in turn, many Colombian farmers switched from the production of one drug to the other, which led to drug cartels exporting in large quantities to the United States and Europe. Given the huge profits in the drug trafficking industry, the two main cartels, Medellin and Cali, became extremely powerful in Colombia. In many parts of Colombia, these cartels built infrastructure, invested in real estate and provided social welfare, assuming many of the responsibilities the right-wing military state failed to fulfill. At the same time, these cartels have contributed to the violence and widespread fear in Colombia, as they have been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Colombians, including important political figures, journalists,

Security Council 18

MUN Korea

soldiers and policemen.

In the 1990s, the Colombian military made strides in its war on the drug cartels, killing several leaders.

The Medellin and Cali cartels slowly lost their duopoly on the drug traffic, and many other smaller groups formed and filled the vacuum. As these smaller groups were all vying for profits, they often took to bribery and intimidation, instead of high-profile violent acts such as assassinations.

This has bred a culture of pervasive corruption in Colombia. Drugs have continued to play a large part in financing FARC, and other guerrilla factions. As cocaine became more popular, and hence the drug cartels more powerful, the wealthy land owners and drug lords would form alliances to protect themselves from the repression of the Colombian state and the subversive actions of the paramilitary guerrilla armies. As a result, drug cartels would employ paramilitary groups to protect the coca farms and the storage and transport facilities for the cocaine drug exports. This has led to an intricately complex situation where drug money supports both left and right-winged paramilitary groups, which in turn only further expands the political violence.

Relations between Paramilitary Groups and Guerrillas

“If we look to the left, we see insurgents. If we look to the right, we see the paramilitaries. If we lift our eyes to the heavens to pray to God, we see the Government’s helicopters.”

After the period of political violence known as La Violencia, in which the leftist guerrilla army FARC, and the smaller ELN, formed, the United States played a large role in financing the creation of right-wing paramilitary groups that would fight against political activists and guerrilla groups. This repression has worked to unify many of the dissenters and guerrilla factions on the left in Colombia. These groups see themselves as fighting for the rights of the impoverished class and justify their violence as protection of the peasants from government violence.

Despite their seemingly noble aspirations to protect the population, FARC has engaged in a variety of harmful illegal activities. The guerrilla army has played a crucial role in collaborating with the drug cartels, which often sponsor their violence. For these illegal activities, those on all sides of the conflict have criticized FARC, both domestically and internationally. As a tragically ironic response, many small industrialists,

Security Council 19

MUN Korea

wealthy cattle ranchers, and groups such as the American corporation Texas Petroleum and the Colombian military formed a paramilitary group known as Muerte a Secuestradores (“Death to Kidnappers”) or MAS. This group has been responsible for the deaths of 240 people, mostly community leaders, elected officials and farmers.

International Involvement

The United States has been a major supporter of the Colombian government in its fight against FARC. Under the auspices of the “War on Drugs,” several millions of dollars have been channeled to the Colombian military and have sponsored the creation of civilian paramilitary groups that often act outside of the law. FARC currently finds itself on the American list of official terrorist organizations, prohibiting any American entity to provide help to the Colombian peasant army.

In 1999, the Colombian government attempted to make peace with FARC and other prominent guerrilla groups through an American-sponsored “Plan Colombia”. These efforts led to the establishment of a demilita

rized zone. Nonetheless, the conflict continued, and the plan failed to end armed violence and drug trafficking.

While the Colombian government’s initiative reduced violence to a certain extent in the demilitarized zone, most citizens were skeptical of the plan as a legitimization of arming right-wing guerrilla groups to destroy the left-wing guerrilla groups.

On the other hand, FARC has received international support from Cuba and Venezuela. In recent years FARC received some financing, weapons and training from Hugo Chavez’s regime in Caracas. Hugo Chavez has repeatedly asked the United States to remove FARC from the list of official terrorist organizations, which would allow human rights organizations to report thoroughly on the conflict and would open up the way for outside groups to provide resources for the poor peasant farmers caught in the conflict’s crossfire. Chavez has asked the American, Colombian and other foreign governments to recognize FARC as a legitimate armed force. However, in 2008, Hugo Chavez revoked support for FARC as a result of their continued kidnappings. He has also consistently called on FARC to carry on their armed struggle without resorting to drug trafficking.

Security Council 20

MUN Korea

Peace Talks

As violence has intensified over the recent years, FARC has recently expressed interest in holding peace talks with the incumbent Colombian government. For several months, the Colombian government refused to enter into talks, arguing that it would not recognize “terrorists� and would continue to support paramilitary groups to defeat FARC. However, recently the government and FARC agreed to meet on October 17th, 2012, in Oslo, Norway to enter into a peace process.

Former Cuban leader Fidel Castro and Venezuela’s recently re-elected president Hugo Chavez have played a fundamental role in bringing the Santos government and FARC together.

Many observers have sensed a new optimism in the peace process, as parties on both sides are weary of the violence and wish to reconstruct the country, even though the vision for what a reconstructed Colombia varies greatly. On the other hand, the efforts to reach peace have been criticized by many as an opportunity for both forces to rebuild and eventually continue the violence.

Security Council 21

MUN Korea Timeline 1958 Conservatives and Liberals agree to form National Front in a bid to end the civil war; other parties banned. Guerrilla war.

1965 Leftist National Liberation Army (ELN) and Maoist People’s Liberation Army (EPL) founded.

1966 Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc, the current largest guerrilla grouping) set up.

1970 National People’s Alliance formed as a left-wing counterweight to the National Front.

1971 Left-wing M-19 guerrilla group emerges.

1978 President Julio Turbay (Liberal) begins intensive fight against drug traffickers.

1982 President Belisario Betancur (Conservative) grants guerrillas amnesty and frees political prisoners. War against drug cartels stepped up 1984 Campaign against drug traffickers stepped up following assassination of justice minister.

Security Council 22

MUN Korea

1985 Eleven judges and 90 other people killed after M-19 guerrillas force their way into the Palace of Justice; Patriotic Union Party (UP) founded. Nevado del Ruiz volcano erupts. An estimated 23,000 people are killed in four Andean towns.

1986 Virgilio Barco Vargas (Liberal) wins presidential elections by record margin. Rightwing paramilitary groups begin murder campaign against UP politicians, amid continuing violence by left-wing groups and death squads run by drugs cartels.

1989 M-19 becomes legal party after reaching peace agreement with government.Liberal and UP presidential candidates murdered during presidential election campaign, reputedly at the behest of drug cartels; Cesar Gaviria elected on anti-drug platform.

1991 New constitution legalises divorce, prohibits extradition of Colombians wanted for trial in other countries and guarantees indigenous peoples’ democratic rights, but without addressing their territorial claims.

1993 Pablo Escobar, Medellin drug-cartel leader, shot dead while trying to evade arrest.

1995 Ernesto Samper Pizano (Liberal) elected president and is subsequently charged and cleared of receiving drug-cartel money for his election campaign. Peace talks.

1998 Andres Pastrana Arango - a Conservative - elected president, begins peace talks with guerrillas.

1998 November Pastrana grants Farc a safe haven the size of Switzerland in the south-east to help move peace talks along. The zone is off-limits to the army.

Security Council 23

MUN Korea

January 1999 Peace talks formally launched but proceed in stop-start fashion. Pastrana and Farc leader Manuel “Sureshot” Marulanda meet. Powerful earthquake kills some 1,000 people. Cities of Armenia and Pereira badly hit. Plan Colombia.

July 2000 Pastrana’s “Plan Colombia” wins almost US$1 billion in mainly military aid from the US to fight drug trafficking and rebels who profit and protect the trade.

September 2000 Government freezes talks; alleges Farc harboured hijacker of plane forced to land in safe haven. Later, Farc refuses to resume talks, accuses Pastrana of not stopping paramilitary groups.

February 2001 The Farc return to peace talks after meeting between “Sureshot” and Pastrana. Pastrana extends demilitarized area for eight months.

June 2001 Farc rebels free 359 police and troops in exchange for 14 captured rebels. Farc accused of using safe haven to rearm, prepare attacks and conduct drug trade.

October 2001 Government, Farc sign San Francisco agreement, committing themselves to negotiate ceasefire. Pastrana extends life of safe haven until January 2002.

January 2002 Pastrana accepts Farc ceasefire timetable and extends safe haven until April. Talks fail.

20 February 2002 Pastrana breaks off three years of tortuous peace talks with Farc rebels, says hijacking of aircraft hours earlier is final straw. He orders rebels out of demilitarised zone.

Government declares war zone in south after rebels step up attacks.

Security Council 24

MUN Korea

May 2002 Independent candidate Alvaro Uribe wins a first-round presidential election victory, promises to crack down hard on rebel groups.

August 2002 Moments before Alvaro Uribe is sworn in as president, suspected Farc explosions rock Bogota. Twenty people are killed. Days later, Uribe declares state of emergency.

October 2003 14 out of 15 of President Uribe’s planned austerity measures and political reforms rejected by voters in referendum. Three ministers, national police chief resign.

November 2003 Fighters from right-wing United Self-Defence Forces of Colombia (AUC) begin to disarm.

May 2004 Farc’s Ricardo Palmera, the most senior Colombian guerrilla ever captured, is jailed for 35 years.

July 2004 Right-wing AUC and government begin peace talks. AUC leaders address Congress.

January 2005 Bitter 15-day dispute with Venezuela over the capture of a Farc leader on Venezuelan soil. The affair is resolved at talks in Caracas in February.

June 2005 New law offers reduced jail terms and protection from extradition for paramilitaries who turn in their arms. Rights groups say the legislation is too lenient.

Security Council 25

MUN Korea

December 2005 Exploratory peace talks with the second biggest left-wing rebel group, the National Liberation Army (ELN), begin in Cuba.

February 2006 Colombia and the US agree on a free trade deal. The agreement awaits ratification in both countries. Uribe’s second term.

March 2006 Parties loyal to President Uribe win an overwhelming victory in parliamentary elections.

May 2006 President Uribe wins a second term in office.

November 2006 Court investigates possible ties between high-ranking politicians from Sucre department and right-wing paramilitaries.

December 2006 Detained paramilitary leaders say they are pulling out of a peace process. Government says demobilisation of right-wing groups will continue.

January 2007 Ecuador turns to the Organisation of American States (OAS) for help with its challenge to Colombia’s coca crop-spraying programme along their common border.

June 2007 Government releases dozens of jailed Farc guerrillas, in hope that rebels will reciprocate by releasing hostages. Farc rejects move, saying it will only free hostages if government pulls back troops and sets up demilitarised zone.

Security Council 26

MUN Korea

July 2007 Hundreds of thousands protest in Bogota against kidnappings and conflict in the country. Hostage release talks.

September 2007 In his role as mediator, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez agrees to invite rebels for talks on hostage release deal.

November 2007 Colombia sets deadline of 31 December for President Chavez to reach deal with rebels on prisoner swap. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez withdraws his country’s ambassador to Bogota in a row over his role in negotiations between the Colombian government and rebel forces.

January 2008 The Farc releases two high-profile hostages, Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalez, as a result of Mr Chavez’s mediation. Mr Chavez calls on the US and European governments to stop treating Colombian left-wing rebel groups as terrorists, but Mr Uribe rejects the idea.

March 2008 A Colombian cross-border strike into Ecuador kills senior Farc rebel Raul Reyes and sparks a diplomatic crisis with both Ecuador and Venezuela.

May 2008 Colombia extradites 14 paramilitary warlords to the United States to stand trial on drug trafficking charges. US hails move as evidence Colombia deserves trade deal.

Colombian opposition complains the extraditions mean that the militia leaders will not reveal their alleged links to political allies of Mr Uribe. Farc announces death of its leader and founder, Manuel Marulanda.

June 2008 Colombia renews low-level diplomatic relations with Ecuador. Betancourt freed.

Security Council 27

MUN Korea

July 2008 Colombian army rescues the country’s highest-profile hostage, Ingrid Betancourt, held in captivity for six years by Farc. She was among 15 hostages freed in an operation in the southern-central region of Guaviare.

November 2008 The sudden collapse of pyramid investment schemes - used by some of the poorest savers - triggers violent protests. Several towns are put under curfew.

February 2008 Farc rebels free six high-profile hostages, including a former provincial governor held since 2001.

March 2009 Farc releases a Swedish man thought to be the group’s last foreign hostage, Erik Roland Larsson. President Alvaro Uribe offers Farc rebels peace talks if they halt “criminal activities” and declare a cease-fire.

July-August 2009 Relations with Venezuela deteriorate again after plans to allow US troops to use Colombian military bases as part of a drive to curb drug-trafficking are unveiled.

Venezuela withdraws its ambassador from Bogota and freezes relations after the Colombian government accuses Caracas of supplying arms to Farc rebels; Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez accuses Colombia of carrying out a military incursion into his country.

October 2009 Colombia and US sign deal giving the US military access to seven Colombian bases.

November 2009 Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez urges his armed forces to be prepared for war with Colombia and orders 15,000 troops to the border, amid growing tensions.

Former army Gen Jaime Humberto Uscategui is given 40-year jail sentence for his role in killing of unarmed civilians by right-wing paramilitaries. Common cause.

Security Council 28

MUN Korea

December 2009 The Marxist rebel groups - the Farc and the smaller National Liberation Army (ELN) - announce that they intend to stop fighting each other and concentrate on attacking the armed forces.

July 2010 Venezuela cuts diplomatic ties with Colombia after being accused of harbouring Farc rebels.

August 2010 Juan Manuel Santos takes over as president, having won easy victory in run-off election in June. He responds to a Farc offer of talks by insisting that the rebel group must first release all the hostages it still holds. Colombia and Venezuela restore diplomatic ties.

September 2010 Farc steps up its campaign of violence. Colombian army kills senior Farc commander Mono Jojoy in air strike in Macarena region.

February 2011 Farc releases several hostages in what it describes as unilateral “gesture of peace” to government.

May 2011 Senate approves law to compensate victims of civil conflict and return land to millions of displaced people. President Santos describes the new law as “historic”.

August 2011 President Santos outlines new tactics against rebels, who have increasingly been resorting to hit-and-run raids.

Security Council 29

MUN Korea

September 2011 Former intelligence chief Jorge Noguera - a close ally of former president Alvaro Uribe - is sentenced to 25 years in prison for collaborating with paramilitary death squads.

October 2011 US Congress passes long-delayed free trade agreement with Colombia, despite concerns over country’s poor record of labour relations.

December 2011 Country-wide protests against the Farc guerrilla group.

April 2012 Last ten police and military hostages held by Farc rebels are freed after more than a decade, encouraging hopes of peace talks.

June 2012 Congress approves a law setting up guidelines for peace talks with left-wing rebels.

Previous governments have refused to negotiate with FARC. July 2012 FARC rebels continue taking hostages after promising earlier in the year to stop political abductions.Members of Nasa tribe seize a hilltop police fort, saying they’re tired of being caught in the crossfire of the FARC-government conflict.

Security Council 30

MUN Korea

Bloc Positions The central actors of this conflict will be the United States aligned with Colombia against Venezuela, but the positions of other countries might be unexpected. Because we will have no official representative of FARC, smaller countries that have been negatively affected by American interventionism might be the ones who will rise to defend FARC’s mission. The Latin American countries will divide on this issue according to the strength of their relations with Colombia. Middle eastern countries, apart from Israel, will most likely align against the United States. Israel, the United Kingdom, and France – for their commitment to the US’s war on drugs – will most likely agree with its position.

It is important to keep in mind, however, that every nation has a voice when it comes to the Colombian conflict, whether they agree with interventionism or not.

Almost every country in the world suffers to some extent the effects of drug trafficking and drug usage, and will be able to have a firm position and voice on the issue.

Security Council 31

MUN Korea

Questions to Consider Keep in mind these questions: • Is FARC’s mission to protect the regular Colombian citizen an excuse for its belligerent activities?

• What would be the solution to FARC? Disarming it? Disbanding it? Prosecuting all individuals related to it to ensure that no more activity is continued? Let it be for the time?

• How to address the corruption and violations of the Colombian government without infringing upon its sovereignty as a nation?

• Is this a regional conflict that should be left to be decided within Colombia itself or does the international community have a say on it?

• How legitimate is the United States’ ‘War on Drugs?’

• What has the role of the United States been in the conflict between Colombia and FARC? • What do you think the prospects for peace in Colombia are, given the recent peace talks?

• Is there need for international legislation preventing the purchase of drugs in wealthier countries from the Colombian cartels?

• What should the role of regional governments, especially those of Venezuela and Cuba, be?

• Should FARC be taken off the USA’s official list of “terrorist organizations”?

• Can violence be democratic?

Security Council 32

MUN Korea

Suggestions for Further Reading • Stokes, Doug; Noam Chomsky (Foreword) (2005). America’s Other War: Terrorizing Colombia. Zed Books. ISBN 1-84277-547-2.

• Cuellar, Francisco Ramírez; Aviva Chomsky (2005). The Profits of Extermination.

Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press. ISBN 1-56751-322-0.

• Giraldo, Juan Fernando (December 2005). “Colombia in Armed Conflict?: 1946– 1985” (PDF). Papel Politico (Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Relaciones Internacionales, Universidad Javeriana) (18): 43–78.

• Zahller, Trina (2002). “Prospects for Peace:The Projected Impact of Plan Colombia” (PDF). McNair Scholars Project University of Montana 2002.

• Restrepo, Jorge A.; Michael Spagat. “The Colombian Conflict Where is it Heading?” (PDF). Javeriana University and CERAC. • Azcarate, Camilo A. (March 1999). “Psychosocial Dynamics of the Armed Conflict in Colombia”. Online Journal of Peace and Conflict Resolution.[dead link] • James Petras (July 2, 1988)). “Neglected Dimensions of Violence”. Economic and Political Weekly 23 (27): 1367. JSTOR 4378701.

• John Lindsay-Poland (January/February 2010). “Retreat to Colombia: The Pentagon Adapts Its Latin America Strategy”. NACLA Report on the Americas.

• Aviva Chomsky (2008). Linked labor histories: New England, Colombia, and the making of a global working class. Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-4190-1.

• Bushnell, David (1993). The Making of Modern Colombia, a Nation in spite of itself. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-08289-3.

Security Council 33

MUN Korea

• Dudley, Steven (January 2004). Walking Ghosts: Murder and Guerrilla Politics in Colombia. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-93303-X. • Kirk, Robin (January, 2003). More Terrible than Death: Massacres, Drugs, and America’s War in Colombia. PublicAffairs. ISBN 1-58648-104-5.

• Ruiz, Bert (October 1, 2001). The Colombian Civil War. McFarland & Company.

ISBN 0-7864-1084-1.

• Elizabeth F. Schwartz (Winter, 1995/1996). “Getting Away with Murder: Social Cleansing in Colombia and the Role of the United States”. The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 27 (2): 381–420.

• Safford, Frank and Marco Palacios (July 1, 2001). Colombia: Fragmented Land, Divided Society. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-504617-X. • Taussig, Michael (November 1, 2003). Law in a Lawless Land: Diary of a Limpieza. New Press. ISBN 1-56584-863-2.

• “America’s Other War: Terrorizing Colombia”: http://www.webcitation. org/query?url=http://www.geocities.com/travbailey/colombia.htm&date=2009-10-25+23:15:46 • “Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts”: http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/state. php?id_state=47 • “Q&A: Colombia’s Civil Conflict”: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12447532 • “Alternatives to War”: http://www.c-r.org/accord/colombia • “2007 report on Drugs”: http://www.incb.org/documents/Publications/AnnualReports/AR2007/AR_07_Chapter_III_Americas.pdf

Security Council 34

MUN Korea

Glossary • Free Syrian Army - The FSA is a paramilitary that is composed of defected Syrian Armed Forces personnel, who have been active during the uprising.

• Syria’s Ba’ath Party - Syria’s Ba’ath party is the successor of the original Ba’ath Party, now dissolved. The party’s ideology is Ba’athism, which means it supports Arab nationalism, Arab socialism, and Pan-Arabism. This party has been the led Syria’s government since 1970.

• Syria’s Emergency Law - Granted the government authority to suspend constitutional rights. Bashar al-Assad lifted the emergency law as a concession to the opposition in 2011, after being in place since 1963.

• Arab League - The Arab League is a regional organization of Arab states, currently comprised of 22 states (including Syria, whose participation was suspended in 2011). The league’s main goal is to “draw closer the relations between member States and co-ordinate collaboration between them, to safeguard their independence and sovereignty, and to consider in a general way the affairs and interests of the Arab countries.”

• Syrian National Council - The SNC is a partially recognized government in exile of Syria based in Istanbul, Turkey started as a Syrian opposition coalition created during the 2011 Syrian uprising against the government of Bashar al-Assad. After the formation, the council itself asked for international recognition, but denied seeking to play the role of a government in exile, but this changed a few months later, when violence in Syria became increasingly intense. SNC runs the Free Syrian Army.

• Alawites - The Alawite sect is an offshoot of Shiite Islam that comprises an estimated 6–12 percent of the Syrian population.

Security Council 35

MUN Korea

Glossary • FARC - Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) • Drug Cartel - Organizations of criminal activity that are largely geared towards drug trafficking and its commerce. Their sizes depend on the number of other cartels frontrolling one same region, ranging from small groups of trafficants to very large, enterprise-like organizations.

• ELN - Ejercito de Liberacion Nacional (National Liberation Army)

Security Council 36

MUN Korea

Role of the Committee The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the most powerful and principal organs of the United Nations, and is tasked with maintaining international peace and security. The UNSC is the only body within the UN that can pass resolutions binding to all of its member states; its influence therefore extends over assisting in the peaceful settlement of disputes (through establishment and oversight of peacekeeping services) and enforcing compliance between member states through the authorization of military action and international sanctions. Since its inception in 1946, the council has operated under an open agenda – its reach is therefore ever expanding. Within the Security Council there are fifteen members, only five of which are veto wielding and permanent members (China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US). The rest are elected and cycle through two-year terms.

In this situation, the United Nations Security Council is capable of investigation the situation at hand to satisfy their queries as well as any others that member states may address to them. They may recommend methods of settling the issue to member states and the international community at large, or they may themselves formulate the plans necessary to establish sanctions - which they can also call on member states to impose - in order to coerce the recalcitrant nation they are dealing with to comply with their demands. Furthermore, the United Nations Security Council is capable of referring the individuals they deal with to the International Court of Justice, or taking military action against their aggressors if there is no other way to compromise.

Security Council 37

MUN Korea

Structure of the Committee Structure of Debate Modified Parliamentary Procedure: We will use parliamentary procedure as a starting point, but expect more moderated and unmoderated caucuses than time on the speaker’s list. During the conference, we may make certain adjustments to regular parliamentary procedure in order to achieve better and fuller debate.

Security Council Documents The ultimate goal of this UNSC simulation is to pass one resolution on each topic that the committee has chosen to address. Resolution writing in this committee will not deviate in any way from traditional resolution format. For more information regarding resolution writing, you will be able to consult the Delegate Guide during the conference.

In addition to writing resolutions, foreign ministers at the UNSC will be able to write and pass communiqués, which announce a unilateral or collective position or action on any relevant issue. Communiqués effectively function as directives to a home government or to several governments; thus, they represent unilateral action on the part of an individual state, or multilateral action of a group of states that are part of the Security Council, as opposed to the UNSC as a whole. Communiqués will not be written in resolution format, but in numbered paragraph form, with each paragraph outlining the specific position or action that a government or governments are taking. Given that all delegates in the simulation will represent every nation’s foreign minister, communiqués will certainly have an impact on the course of the simulation.

Voting Procedure This simulation will follow standard UNSC voting procedure, with one note regarding communiqués. In brief, in order to achieve quorum, nine member nations must be present. To pass any procedural or substantive proposal, there must be nine votes in the affirmative. In the case of a substantive proposal, France, the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United

Security Council 38

MUN Korea

States must all vote in the affirmative or abstain so as to not exercise their veto power. No abstentions are permissible when voting on procedural matters. When calling roll, in lieu of stating “present,” a nation may classify itself as “present and voting.” This nation will forgo its right to abstain from substantive considerations for the duration of that committee session. Regarding communiqués, these documents offer the foreign ministers present at the UNSC flexibility to take unilateral or collective action on particular issues by bypassing the UN. There is no official voting procedure for communiqués, and they may be submitted by a state or a group of states at any time. Upon submission, the communiqués will have binding force on the state or states that have submitted the document.

Other Communication The UNSC simulation will naturally involve significant interaction with home governments and other international actors and institutions. All foreign ministers will have significant opportunity to seek specific information or feedback from their national governments. In addition, representatives from international institutions will be available to present reports and address the questions and needs of the Council.

Security Council 39