unsc vmun 2017 background guide 1 · korean president lee to cancels his offer of food aid in...

UNSC VMUN 2017 Background Guide 1


Dear Delegates,

Congratulations on choosing to be part of the most advanced committee in the largest high school-run Model United Nations conference in North America! My name is Andrew Yun and I am very excited to be the Director of the United Nations Security Council at VMUN 2017. Currently, I am a Grade Eleven student attending Port Moody Secondary School, and have participated in Model United Nations since Grade Eight. As someone who has experienced VMUN multiple times, I can confidently tell you that you are in for an incredible weekend full of debate and diplomacy. The topics this year for the UNSC are exceedingly challenging: the steps towards reunification of Korea, and the situation in Eritrea. These topics specifically deal with two of the world’s most isolationist and dangerously nationalist countries that continue to violate basic human rights and disturb world order by engaging in conflicts. Both of these topics affect every single nation in the UN as the topics directly relate to world peace and security. In face of these arduous issues, I hope the delegates will rise to the occasion and negotiate through discussions that may, at times, sharply divide the committee. To be better prepared for heated debates, I encourage you to thoroughly research these topics before coming to the conference. I greatly enjoy Model United Nations because MUN has always been a platform where I can gain public speaking and leadership experience in an encouraging and comfortable environment; my goal as a staff member is to ensure that everyone feels the same for this upcoming conference. Further, I hope that you can help me create a safe and positive environment for all our fellow delegates as well. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns! On behalf of the dais, I would like to welcome you to UNSC - VMUN 2017. Cheers, Andrew Yun United Nations Security Council Director | VMUN 2017

Alvin Tsuei Secretary-General

Chris Pang

Chief of Staff

Eva Zhang Director-General

Arjun Mehta

Director of Logistics

Graeme Brawn USG General Assemblies

Ryan Karimi

USG Specialized Agencies

Mary Dong USG Conference

Ken Hong

USG Delegate Affairs

Isabelle Cheng USG Delegate Affairs

Jason Qu

USG Finance

Jan Lim USG Marketing

VANCOUVER MODEL UNITED NATIONS the sixteenth annual conference | January 20-22, 2017


United Nations Security Council

Position Paper Policy What is a Position Paper? A position paper is a brief overview of a country’s stance on the topics being discussed by a particular committee. Though there is no specific format the position paper must follow, it should include a description of your positions your country holds on the issues on the agenda, relevant actions that your country has taken, and potential solutions that your country would support. At Vancouver Model United Nations, delegates should write a position paper for each of the committee’s topics. Each position paper should not exceed one page, and should all be combined into a single document per delegate. Formatting Position papers should: — Include the name of the delegate, his/her country, and the committee — Be in a standard font (e.g. Times New Roman) with a 12-point font size and 1-inch document margins — Not include illustrations, diagrams, decorations, national symbols, watermarks, or page borders — Include citations and a bibliography, in any format, giving due credit to the sources used in research (not included in the 1-page limit) Due Dates and Submission Procedure Position papers for this committee must be submitted by midnight on January 8th, 2017. Once your position paper is complete, please save the file as your last name, your first name and send it as an attachment in an email, to your committee’s email address, with the subject heading as your last name, your first name — Position Paper. Please do not add any other attachments to the email or write anything else in the body. Both your position papers should be combined into a single PDF or Word document file; position papers submitted in another format will not be accepted. Each position paper will be manually reviewed and considered for the Best Position Paper award. The email address for this committee is [email protected].


Table of Contents

Steps Towards Reunification of Korea .......................................................................................... 4

Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Timeline .......................................................................................................................................................... 5

Historical Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 6

Current Situation ........................................................................................................................................... 9

Possible Solutions and Controversies .......................................................................................................... 11

Bloc Positions ............................................................................................................................................... 12North Korea ........................................................................................................................................................................ 12NATO nations & Allies of the USA (including South Korea) ..................................................................................... 12China, Russia ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12

Discussion Questions ................................................................................................................................... 12

Additional Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Works Cited .................................................................................................................................................. 13

The Situation in Eritrea ............................................................................................................... 16

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 16

Timeline ........................................................................................................................................................ 17

Historical Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 18

Current Situation ......................................................................................................................................... 19

Possible Solutions / Controversies ............................................................................................................... 21

Bloc Positions ............................................................................................................................................... 22Eritrea .................................................................................................................................................................................. 22USA and its allies ............................................................................................................................................................... 22The European Union ......................................................................................................................................................... 22African & Middle Eastern Countries .............................................................................................................................. 22

Discussion Questions ................................................................................................................................... 23

Additional Resources ................................................................................................................................... 23

Works Cited .................................................................................................................................................. 23


United Nations Security Council Topic A

Steps Towards Reunification of Korea

Overview Currently, Korea remains to be the only divided nation-state in the world. An offspring of a politically polarized Cold War, the divided Korean peninsula has been the center of global political tension created between the communist and capitalist superpowers for the past seventy years. It is still considered to be one of the most probable places a war will break out. After the division, the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have gradually moved away from each other economically, politically and socially. With open market policies and guidance from western developed nations, South Korea has evolved to become the thirteenth largest economy in the world, while North Korea, in its extreme isolation, lingers at one hundred and twelfth1; South Korea remains to be one of the most important allies of the USA and the democratic world while North Korea stays hostile towards the west; South Koreans pursue a liberal, and capitalistic society while the North Koreans live a communist one.

Figure 1: A visual representation of how the two Koreas compare.2

Unfortunately, in the midst of rapid developments after the end of the Cold War, both Koreas and the world seem to have forgotten that the two countries were meant to be one. Somehow, the international community has moved on. Frankly, many of the world’s most powerful countries do not have any incentive to see the two 1 CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html 2 South v North Korea. https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2013/apr/08/south-korea-v-north-korea-compared


Koreas merge to create a bigger, more unified nation with nuclear capabilities. More than a few benefits from the regional instability by selling arms and providing security. However, the United Nations Security Council, whose host member nations originally split the Korean peninsula, has a strong moral duty to the Korean families who were separated and banished from their hometowns by the division. The elders and the working-class generations of both countries can still recall the pain of the nation when it was split in half. In addition, it is undeniable that a world without the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) is a safer one. Even if complete reunification is impossible, by proactively working towards a reunification and opening negotiations between the two Koreas, the hostility of the DPRK will be mitigated indirectly.3 For some member nations, this Security Council session is about mending the scars of the Cold War and providing justice to the Korean families. For others, it’s about finding creative resolutions to nullify North Korean aggression and bring the world one step closer to peace. In either case, this topic prompts an invaluable discussion for the council. Timeline August 29th, 1910 – The Korean king SunJong is forced to sign the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1910, which officially starts the annexation of Korea by Imperial Japan. September 2nd, 1945 – Japan surrenders to the Allies in the Second World War, and consequently gives up all its annexed territory. In the years following, the Korean peninsula is divided at the 38th parallel by Soviet and American occupations. August 15th, 1948 – The Republic of Korea is established, with Syngman Lee as President. September 9th, 1948 – Establishment of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, with Kim Il-Sung as Premier. June 25th, 1950 – North Korea initiates the Korean War by breaking through the border drawn at the 38th parallel with tanks and armed forces. July 27th, 1953 – The Korean War is halted by the Korean Armistice Agreement that is still in force today. January 21st, 1968 – 31 handpicked North Korean Special Forces soldiers succeed in infiltrating the border with a mission to assassinate the South Korean president. They are stopped by police forces near the president’s residence (the Blue House). July 4th, 1972 – North and South Korea issue joint statement on peaceful reunification. October 1994 – North Korea and the US sign an Agreed Framework under which Pyongyang commits to freezing its nuclear program in return for heavy fuel aid and two light-water nuclear reactors. April 1996 – North Korea announces it will no longer abide by the Korean armistice and sends thousands of troops into the demilitarized zone. There were no signs of violence or escalation of conflict.4 June 13-15th, 2000 – The first ever inter-Korean summit occurs in Pyongyang between Kim Jong-Il and Kim 3 US-North Korean Relations. https://www.princeton.edu/jpia/past-issues-1/2004/6.pdf 4 North Korea Enters the DMZ http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9604/06/korea/


Dae-Jung, the South Korean president. This summit paves the way for the reopening of border liaison offices and family reunions. South Korea grants amnesty to 3500 North Korean prisoners.5 June 29th, 2002 – North and South Korean naval vessels wage a gun battle in the Yellow Sea. Some 30 North Korean and 4 South Korean sailors are killed.6 February 2005 – North Korea publicly announces that it has produced nuclear weapons for self defense.7 October 2-4th 2007 – The second inter-Korea summit occurs in Pyongyang. South Korean president Noh Moo-Hyun becomes the first South Korean leader to walk across the demilitarized zone. November 14th, 2007 – The prime ministers from both Koreas meet for the first time in 15 years to discuss numerous economic projects including a cross border rail link and the construction of the joint Kaesong Industrial complex. March-April, 2008 – North-South relations deteriorate after right-wing president Lee Myong-bak is elected as president of South Korea. North Korea expels South Korean officials from the Kaesong Industrial Park and test fires short-range missiles. July 11th, 2008 – A South Korean tourist who wandered into an army restricted zone while touring around Mount. Kumgang in North Korea is fatally shot by a North Korean officer. This incident caused the South Korean President Lee to cancels his offer of food aid in return for bilateral negotiations. Since then, all tourism going into North Korea from the south has stopped.8 March 26th 2010 – North Korea sinks South Korean warship Cheonan near sea border. October 2012 – North Korea claims it has the ballistic missile technology capable of hitting the US mainland.9 October 2014 – North Korean officials pay a surprise visit to South Korea, and agree to resume formal talks. January 2016 – The North Korean government announces its first test of a hydrogen bomb.10 Historical Analysis The fate of the Korean peninsula was completely out of the Korean People’s hands and into those of the world superpowers with the end of the Second World War. Through General Order No.1 issued by General MacArthur, Supreme Commander of the Southwest Pacific area, the Soviet Union and the US were to supervise the surrender of the Japanese forces in their sectors, divided by the 38th parallel. They agreed to establish temporary military governments until the Korean people were ready to govern themselves. The locally created “Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea” led by the reunification activist Kim Gu, sent a delegation to General John R. Hodge, the US-appointed administrator of Korean affairs, in 1945 to dissuade the US from dividing the peninsula, but was denied any address.11 In 1948, the United Nations, in the absence of the Soviet 5 North Korea profile – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-15278612 6 North and South Korean Navy Vessels Trade Fire. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/29/world/four-killed-as-north-and-south-korean-navy-vessels-trade-fire.html 7 Ibid. 8 South Korean Tourist Shot Dead in North Korea. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/11/korea 9 North Korea Warns US. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-19879935 10 North Korea Tests a Hydrogen Bomb http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/28/politics/north-korea-hydrogen-bomb-test/ 11 Division of Korea. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Division_of_Korea


Union, passed a resolution to supervise nation-wide democratic elections for the Korean people; the Soviet Union, rather than vetoing this resolution, simply boycotted the meeting and refused to recognize the agreement as binding.12 As a consequence, the UN was forced to only recognize the southern half as the Republic of Korea. Soon after in the North, Kim Il-Sung, a former Major in the Soviet Red Army, declared the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and appointed himself as Premier. The consolidation of the DPRK took place without elections, facilitated by the Soviet Union. At dawn on June 25th 1950, 135 000 North Korean army troops poured over the 38th parallel and into South Korea under the guidance and aid from the Soviet Union.13 The South Korean forces, caught off-guard, retreated far south to the Busan district. Soon however, UN forces, 90% of which were American, led by General MacArthur made an ambitious counter-attack at Incheon, a harbor city near Seoul. The UN forces continued to push back past the partition line and captured Pyongyang. China, feeling threatened, deployed more than 300 000 soldiers to fight back the UN forces.14 In this military tug-of-war Seoul changed hands four times and thousands of innocent civilians were caught in the crossfire. The UN forces were pushed back down to the 38th parallel, and the US army considered using nuclear weapons against the Chinese and North Korean forces. This recommendation was rejected by President Truman.15 In July of 1953, an armistice was signed by North Korea and China on one side, and US-led United Nations Command on the other; South Korea was not a signatory. The armistice was designed to be a temporary agreement of a ceasefire, and a permanent peace accord was to be agreed upon at the 1954 Geneva Conference. Unfortunately, such an agreement was never reached. To this day, the North-South Korea relations occur under the pretext that the two countries never officially set a peace treaty after the Korean War. In the four decades following the end of the Korean War, the two Koreas developed greatly in their independent paths. North Korea, under an iron-hard leadership of Kim Il-Sung, went through rapid industrial growth and continuously focused their efforts on developing strong nuclear and ballistic missile technologies, despite the condemnation echoed around the world. On the other hand, South Korea experienced a military coup d’état and a decade of martial law under the rule of General Park Chung-Hee. General Park, who gained power by overthrowing President Lee Syng-Man, initiated massive industrial development programs and began secret talks with the North aimed at unification.16 Unfortunately his efforts at unification were halted when he was assassinated in 1979 by his trusted chief of KCIA. Shortly after his death and another coup d’état, General Chun Doo-Hwan assumed power. He ruled until 1987, when finally, the democratic system was restored to the country along with the Sixth constitution. From 1998 to 2008, the foreign policy of South Korea towards North Korea was coined the term “The Sunshine Policy”. Derived from an Aesop’s fable, the Sunshine Policy was first implemented by South Korean president Kim Dae-Jung. The policy had three key principles: No armed provocation by the North will be tolerated; the South will not attempt to absorb the North in any way; the South actively seeks cooperation. It also had two main objectives: the separation of politics and economics, and “flexible reciprocity”. Practically, the separation of politics and economics pointed to a loosening of restrictions on private sector to invest in North Korea, so that the government minimized its involvements in giving humanitarian aid. Flexible reciprocity meant that South Korea would provide aid without expecting any immediate concessions or reciprocation, but implicitly wait for a gradual liberalization; originally, President Kim put out immediate reciprocity as a requirement, but, due to the unforeseen rigidness of North Korea, was forced to change the policy’s objective.17

12 Ibid. 13 Korean War Fast Facts. http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/28/world/asia/korean-war-fast-facts/ 14 Division of Korea. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Division_of_Korea 15 How the Korean War Almost Went Nuclear. http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/how-korean-war-almost-went-nuclear-180955324/?no-ist 16 South Korea – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-15292674 17 Sunshine Policy. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sunshine_policy


Under this policy, South Korea provided enormous sums of food and financial aid to the North. Also, North-South cooperative business developments flourished, creating an inter-Korea railroad, and the Kumgangsan Tourist Region to which several thousand South Korean tourists traveled each year. The two countries also conducted three reunions between divided families. Furthermore, in 2000, Kim Dae-Jung and Kim Jung-Il held a summit meeting, the first of its kind. Support for this policy was continued by the South Korean President Noh Moo-Hyun, who continued to provide North Korea with humanitarian aid and started the Kaesong Industrial Park. South Korea spent more than $324 million on aid to the North in 2005 alone.18 Many argue that during the time of the Sunshine Policy the atmosphere between the two countries were the most amiable and positive.

Figure 2: South Korean Park Yang-Gon and his North Korean brother Park Yang-Soo embrace during a Separated Family Reunion

Meeting.19 On the contrary, critics of the policy claim that the South Korean efforts didn’t bring the peninsula any closer to reunification or reduction of North Korean aggression.20 They point to the general unwillingness of North Korea to return its neighbor’s good favors as a sign that the country has simply used the incoming aid to bolster the regime of Kim Jong-Il rather than genuinely open up. Accordingly, it is unfortunate that in the process of supporting this policy, South Korea was forced to ignore the deaths of many of its soldiers to avoid upsetting the North, and routinely abstained from United Nations votes condemning North Korea’s human rights violations.21 From March 2008, under a newly elected right-wing President Lee Myung-Bak, South Korea announced that it would suspend all aid until the North Korean nuclear program was halted. In November 2010, the South Korean Unification Ministry officially declared the Sunshine Policy a failure, thus bringing the policy to an end.

18 Ibid. 19 North-South Family Reunion. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/teary-photos-show-north-korea-south-korea-families-divided-for-more-than-60-years-during-brief-reunion 20 Sunshine Policy. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sunshine_policy 21 Ibid.


Case Study: Reunification of Germany Many look to the reunification of Germany as an ideal model for Korea to follow. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the case of German reunification extensively. Following the Second World War, Germany was divided into the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany), occupied by France, the United Kingdom and the USA, and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), occupied by the Soviet Union. The East German Regime started to falter in 1989, with the Soviet Union going through massive reforms known as glasnost and perestroika under the rule of Gorbachev. Through the Peaceful Revolution, a series of protests by the East Germans, East Germany held their first free elections in 1990 and cultivated the Unification Treaty with West Germany. Further negotiations between the two Germanys and the four occupying powers led to the “Two Plus Four Treaty” recognizing a unified Germany as a state. This agreement was followed by twenty years of social, economic and political integration between the two countries. Although technically a “unification”, practically speaking the West absorbed its Eastern counterpart; the West German constitution was preserved to apply to the unified Germany, and the West paid large sums of money in the form of the Solidaritätszuschlag (Solidarity Surcharge) in order to compensate for the lack of infrastructure in the East.22 The unified Germany automatically remained memberships in international organizations West Germany was a part of, such as NATO and the EU, while leaving the Warsaw Pact. Current Situation Since the talks of a possible reunification shortly after the Korean War and during the era of the Sunshine Policy, the two Koreas have drifted further and further from such a concept. Currently, there is little to no development on reunification from either side. The little relations that existed between the two have been obliterated by North Korea’s continuous pursuit of its nuclear program. Therefore, the United Nations Security Council is burdened with initiating such a process rather than building upon an already-existing momentum. Before doing so, it is imperative to analyze the current political, economic and social disparities as the two countries stand today. Political Politically, the two countries could not be more incompatible. North Korea, to this day, is one of the most radically communist states in the world, while South Korea has grown to be one of the world’s leading democracies and a trusted ally of the USA. It is reasonable to believe that the United Nations will only accept a united Korea that is democratic (although maybe less capitalistic), and so the question lies in whether the communist regime of the North will either concede or collapse. Kim Jong-Un The most definitive fact about the North Korean Supreme Leader is that very little is known about him. Born in 1982, 1983, or 1984 as the second son of Kim Jong-Il’s second mistress, Kim attended two schools in Switzerland before returning to North Korea and attending Kim Il-Sung University, a prestigious officer training school in Pyongyang.23 From the time he assumed power in December 2011, he has been very interested in consolidating his power; all the pallbearers, who carried Kim Jong-Il’s coffin (aka the strongest loyalists of the elder Kim) have disappeared mysteriously or indiscreetly eliminated;24 Kim is racing to progress the country’s long-range ballistic capabilities; he has summoned the first Worker’s Party Congress since 1980. Kim seems to be engaged in what is known as the “provocation cycle”: ramping up provocative behavior, such 22 German Reunification Comes with a Price Tag. http://www.wsj.com/articles/after-fall-of-berlin-wall-german-reunification-came-with-a-big-price-tag-1415362635 23 Understanding Kim Jong Un. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/02/kim-jong-un-north-korea-understanding 24 Ibid.


as launching missiles or conducting nuclear tests, followed by charm offensives and offers to begin a dialogue. His vision of reunification has reportedly been very one-sided towards his own favor, and his offers of bilateral talks have been rejected by South Korea due to his continuous nuclear threats.25 Park Geun-Hye As the first female president of the country and a daughter of a formerly assassinated president, Park has made one thing very clear in her political platform: Korean unification is her upmost priority. This vision however has been overshadowed by Kim Jong-Un’s continuous nuclear tests, which have forced her to freeze ties with the North.26 Many Koreans criticize her lack of communication to the public and actual action to back up her initial campaign promises. In the Korean Parliamentary election of 2016, her right-wing political party lost the majority to its left-wing rivals, making it likely that when her term ends in 2018, a left-wing candidate from the Minjoo Party of Korea will be elected as president. Economic South Korea’s economy is the fourth largest in Asia. Its economic growth, which transformed the country from being one of the poorest to a high-income country in just one generation, is often shown as a role model for the African countries. Without a doubt, South Korea will have a great financial burden in the case of reunification, similar to how West Germany needed to pay for a lot of what was lacking in the East. But as Chung Chong-Wook, South Korea’s former ambassador to China points out, “The more we do before reunification actually arrives ... the less expensive the reunification will be.”27 North Korea’s economic infrastructure is heavily concentrated in urban centers like Pyongyang. Therefore, the loyalists who have the privilege of living in cities suffer less from crisis like famine than the rural population does. Under Kim Jong-Un, two important economic reforms occurred. Firstly, Kim has set up economic regions inside his country and started to approve money as an incentive for people to achieve prosperity, rather than ideological purity.28 This means that citizens can now buy their way into nicer neighborhoods and own bigger property, whereas before, the only way to do so was through the approval of the regime. Secondly, Kim has allowed farmers to keep between 40-60% of the crops they farm.29 The farmland is still owned by the state; however, a farming family as a “production team” can now be sharecroppers and not slaves. Social The young generation of South Koreans is living through an age of increased social liberalization and social justice movements. It is only recently that discourse on sexual education has reached the mainstream media through means such as TV programs, and LGBTQ rights are getting slowly absorbed by the population. Most are still oblivious to the conditions of the North Korean society, as many are taught in school to simply alienate the North as an impoverished, starving nation. North Korean society is extremely conservative compared to the rest of the world. Although it seems like all North Koreans are brainwashed into believing incredible fables about their leader, the loyalists inhabiting around Pyongyang are the main ones educated in such a manifesto; many living in poorer rural areas, are

25 Kim Jong Un Offers Talks. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3600832/N-Korea-urges-South-accept-Kim-Jong-Un-talks-offer.html 26 President Park’s Unification Strategy. http://www.usak.org.tr/en/expert-analysis/president-park-geun-hye-s-korean-peninsula-unification-strategy 27 Costly and Complicated. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/09/why-many-koreans-cant-face-reunification 28 Understanding Kim Jong Un. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/02/kim-jong-un-north-korea-understanding 29 Ibid.


skeptical and disloyal, but fearful of the regime.30 Past UN / International Involvement The United Nations has stayed largely uninvolved in the work towards Korean reunification. In 2007, when an inter-Korea summit was arranged for the second time, the UN General Assembly strongly advocated this occasion, passing resolution (A/RES/62/5) to show support for economic and political cooperation between the two countries.31 The secretary general of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, a South Korean himself, voiced optimism that the inter-Korean peace process will contribute to peace and security, not just on the Peninsula, but in the region and beyond. Unfortunately, the General Assembly has not had an occasion to congratulate the two Koreas ever since. Other than encouraging the talks between the North and the South, the UNSC has passed seven resolutions in the past five years on the topic of non-proliferation of the DPRK.32 Most of these documents were proven to be ineffective, as the DPRK seemed not bothered by various condemnations and sanctions given by the United Nations. This is why it’s especially important for the UNSC to practically get involved in the situation and start a discussion on the steps towards reunification and nullifying North Korean aggression. With some of its pro-DPRK permanent members slowly changing their stances, there is renewed hope of what the UNSC can accomplish. Possible Solutions and Controversies Solution 1: Another Nuclear Deal One of the main obstacles stopping South Korea and the international community from engaging with North Korea on any diplomatic level is North Korea’s continued nuclear development. Therefore, the UNSC could create a goal and a timeline to establish a nuclear deal, similar to the one with Iran, with North Korea. There are two important things to consider in this case. Firstly, the USA and the international community need to stop antagonizing North Korea as an “axis of evil”. This is shown to be possible when looking at the miraculous improvement of relations between Iran and the USA. Secondly, it is important to note that the DPRK is not harmed as much from the imposed sanctions as was Iran, due to its lack of export resources and industries.33 Therefore, it may be wise to consider giving some positive aid as part of the deal rather than simply lifting the sanctions. Solution 2: Furthering sanctions and “strategic patience”. It is undeniable that the DPRK is an unstable and unsustainable country. With Kim Jong Un politically alienating Russia, and China showing weakened enthusiasm for the DPRK’s radical actions, it is possible that the country is almost at its breaking point. There are two desirable outcomes to which supporters of continued political and economic pressure point: Kim Jong-Un, fearing a collapse of his regime, may give in to the pressure and open up the country economically and make political concessions, or the already impoverished population of the country may rise up against the government, unable to survive under complete economic isolation. 30 What North Koreans really think of Kim Jung-Un. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/9191998/What-North-Koreans-really-think-of-Kim-Jong-un.html 31 Reunification on the Korean Peninsula. http://www.un.org/en/ga/62/plenary/korea/bkg.shtml 32 UNSC Resolutions. http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/ 33 Iran Nuclear Deal. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655


Solution 3: Removal of international presence from the region. The one of the biggest propaganda that Kim’s regime use to antagonize the South is by labeling them as the “puppet of the USA”. It is possible that the DPRK’s dislike towards the South may be much less than its dislike towards the USA. It is also possible that the North’s continued investment in the nuclear technology is only because it feels threatened by the presence of superpowers near its land. If all the occupying powers, who happen to be members of the UNSC, agree to step out of the peninsula, that has been for so long a battleground of a proxy war, the DPRK may be more willing to talk to the South. Bloc Positions North Korea Although not completely closed off to the idea of reunification, it is crucial to North Korea that the reunification isn’t absorption of the North by the South. Kim Jong-Un would not want his regime to become irrelevant, and want to keep a high position of power in a united Korea. He also wants to get rid of foreign military presence in the peninsula, especially that of the USA. NATO nations & Allies of the USA (including South Korea) Under the Obama administration, the USA has kept a policy of “strategic patience” which involves isolating the DPRK until it reaches the limit of self-sustenance. Naturally, its NATO allies and South Korea have done the same. It is unclear how the change in American leadership will affect this attitude. Nonetheless, these countries have strongly emphasized that North Korea needs to give up its nuclear program before any substantive diplomatic relations are restored. China, Russia While these countries are at least moderate supporters of the DPRK, their willingness to shield North Korea from international pressure has been steadily decreasing. However, it remains to be true that the Korean peninsula is an extremely strategic position to spread influence in the Asian region. Therefore, these countries do not want a reunification that will allow the USA and its allies to dominate the whole peninsula. They prefer either a reunification that will neutralize the pro-Americanism of South Korea, or one that will allow for their influence to exist in the region to counterbalance that of the USA. If neither can be achieved, they would rather the two Koreas stay separated. Discussion Questions 1. Does the UNSC, as a committee that includes nations that have originally separated the peninsula, have a moral obligation to reunify Korea? 2. Does your country align itself more with the principles behind the Sunshine Policy or Strategic Patience when dealing with the DPRK? Is there a better alternative? 3. How does the situation in Korea differ from other countries like Germany that have succeeded at reunifying? 4. What incentive does your country have to support the reunification of Korea? Even if it doesn’t, what are some important things your country cannot give up on when constructing the unified Korea?


5. To what extent is your country involved in the peninsula? In the region? (Militarily, economically, politically…etc.) 6. How will the reunification of Korea impact the geopolitical environment of the region? The world? 7. How far away in the future does your country think reunification can practically occur? What are the steps the UNSC can take right now? Additional Sources Details on the German Reunification http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/German_reunification Details on the Iran Nuclear Deal http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655 An Economist article on the projected outcomes of Korean reunification http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/05/korea-opportunities A comprehensive guide on the DPRK dictator, Kim Jong Un http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/02/kim-jong-un-north-korea-understanding The past US policy towards North Korea http://www.cfr.org/north-korea/us-policy-toward-north-korea/p29962 An article reviewing the sentiments from Korean experts on the issue of reunification https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/09/why-many-koreans-cant-face-reunification Historical Details of the Division of Korea http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Division_of_Korea Works Cited ÇOLAKOĞLU, S. (n.d.). President Park Geun-hye’s Korean Peninsula unification strategy. Retrieved from http://www.usak.org.tr/en/expert-analysis/president-park-geun-hye-s-korean-peninsula-unification-strategy COUNTRY COMPARISON: GDP (PURCHASING POWER PARITY). (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html Division of Korea. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Division_of_Korea German reunification. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/German_reunification Grunau, S. (2004). NEGOTIATING SURVIVAL: THE PROBLEM OF COMMITMENT IN U.S.-NORTH KOREAN RELATIONS. Retrieved from https://www.princeton.edu/jpia/past-issues-1/2004/6.pdf How the Korean War Almost Went Nuclear. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from


http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/how-korean-war-almost-went-nuclear-180955324/?no-ist Iran nuclear deal: Key details. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33521655 Joint Statement of North and South. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/dossiers/coree/A/1905 Kim Jong Un too 'young, impulsive': S. Korea. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/asia/korea-han-minkoo-kim-jong-un/ Kirk, D. (2002). Four Killed as North and South Korean Navy Vessels Trade Fire. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/29/world/four-killed-as-north-and-south-korean-navy-vessels-trade-fire.html Korean crisis: What's behind the North-South divide? (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/asia/korea-north-south-tensions-explainer/ Korean War Fast Facts. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/28/world/asia/korean-war-fast-facts/ Millett, A. R. (n.d.). Korean War. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from https://www.britannica.com/event/Korean-War N. Korea urges South to accept Kim Jong-Un talks offer. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3600832/N-Korea-urges-South-accept-Kim-Jong-Un-talks-offer.html North Korea profile - Timeline. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-15278612 North Korea stages second incursion into DMZ. (1996, April 6). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9604/06/korea/ North Korea warns US on missiles after South deal. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-19879935 Phillips, T. (2015). Costly and complicated – why many Koreans can't face reunification. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/09/why-many-koreans-cant-face-reunification Rogers, S., & McCormick, M. (2013). South v North Korea: How do the two countries compare? Visualised. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2013/apr/08/south-korea-v-north-korea-compared Roth, T. (n.d.). After Fall of Berlin Wall, German Reunification Came With a Big Price Tag. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/after-fall-of-berlin-wall-german-reunification-came-with-a-big-price-tag-1415362635 Salmon, Andrew. "What North Koreans Really Think of Kim Jong-un." The Telegraph. Accessed August 20, 2016. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/9191998/What-North-Koreans-really-think-of-Kim-Jong-un.html. Security council resolutions. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from


http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/ Snyder, S. A. (n.d.). U.S. Policy Toward North Korea. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.cfr.org/north-korea/us-policy-toward-north-korea/p29962 South Korea - Timeline. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-15292674 Sunshine policy. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Sunshine_policy Teary photos show North Korea, South Korea families divided for more than 60 years during brief reunion. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://news.nationalpost.com/news/teary-photos-show-north-korea-south-korea-families-divided-for-more-than-60-years-during-brief-reunion The Korean War armistice. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/10165796 Tisdall, S. (2016). The Observer profile / Kim Jong-un: The tyrant's son who wants to be loved and feared. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/07/kim-jong-un-tyrant-son-wants-love-and-fear Top UN officials laud adoption of resolution promoting inter-Korean peace. (2007). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=24492 U.S.: North Korea may have tested hydrogen bomb parts. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/28/politics/north-korea-hydrogen-bomb-test/ Understanding Kim Jong Un, The World's Most Enigmatic and Unpredictable Dictator. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/02/kim-jong-un-north-korea-understanding United Nations General Assembly. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.un.org/en/ga/62/plenary/korea/bkg.shtml Watts, J. (2008). South Korean tourist shot dead in North Korea. Retrieved July 24, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/11/korea What North and South Korea would gain if they were reunified. (2016). Retrieved July 24, 2016, from http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/05/korea-opportunities


United Nations Security Council Topic B

The Situation in Eritrea Overview “‘The North Korea of Africa’, ‘A giant slave camp’, ‘Africa's fastest emptying country’, ‘The cursed land’, ‘Africa's most secretive and repressive state’. These are just some of the labels applied to Eritrea in recent years. The problem with labels is they stick. They become the lens through which the country is viewed,” Mary Harper, BBC News.[1] Eritrea is a country situated in the Horn of Africa and bordered by Sudan, Djibouti and Ethiopia. Out of its population, approximately 48% are Muslim, 50% are Christian.[2] There are nine major ethnic groups recognized in the country. While a lot of languages are used, no official language exists, as the country views all Eritrean languages equally. The country has experienced occupation by Italy, Britain and Ethiopia before achieving independence and gaining international recognition just twenty-five years ago. As the quote above solemnly expresses, the country faces immense challenges as of now.

Figure 1: Visual representation of the ethno-demography of Eritrea[3]

Because it has not been long since the country entered the international scene, many of Eritrea’s issues are not well-known to the general public around the world. At first glance, Eritrea seems like a reasonably competent and proper nation; its economy is amongst the fastest growing the world, and no groundbreaking issues have been heard about regarding this country on an international scale. However, the story reported by the UN is freshly shocking. The UN Human Rights Council and a Committee of Inquiry repeatedly reported that the country is suffering from “systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations.”[4] The government continues to deny these claims and wave them off as “politically motivated.”[5] Yet, the facts remain unchallengeable: there has been no democratic elections held since the country’s independence, and thousands are fleeing from the country every month. Externally, the country is still facing constant border disputes with Ethiopia, who has fought a thirty-year war


against Eritrea in the past. The two countries’ mutual hostility has reached a point where the two are supporting rebel groups in each other’s nation to destabilize the opposing governments. This type of behavior by both nations has undoubtedly raised the level of violence and tension in the region. In addition, the UN has accused Eritrea of funding Islamist rebels in Somalia, an allied nation of Ethiopia, multiple times.[6] There are two important aspects of Eritrea that make matters much worse for the UNSC when trying to improve the country’s situation: strong nationalism and the lack of transparency. Eritrea has a strong nationalistic culture that has motivated the country to reject UN peacekeepers and NGO aid from entering the country. It remains too proud to politically open up to other countries, perhaps because the country also fought for independence alone. Furthermore, Eritrea, like North Korea, lacks transparency about its internal issues. Therefore, the Security Council must carefully devise a plan to improve the country without absent-mindedly harming its national identity or pride, which may cause conflicts in the long term. Timeline 1889-1941 – Eritrea is occupied and colonized by the Kingdom of Italy during the Scramble for Africa. 1941-52 - British forces expel the Italians and take over occupation of Eritrea. 1952 – A few years after WWII, the UN decides to loosely include Eritrea as an autonomous region within Ethiopia, with its own administrative and judicial structures. 1962 – Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie annexes Eritrea, dissolving its parliament and turning it into a province; a war of independence begins, which would go on for 30 years. 1991 - Eritrean People's Liberation Front (EPLF) wins war of independence, assisted by Ethiopian rebels who succeed in toppling Ethiopian President Mengistu Haile Mariam. 1993 - Eritrea overwhelmingly votes for independence from Ethiopia in an UN-sponsored referendum and gains international recognition. It joins the UN in the same year. 1998-2000 - Eritrean-Ethiopian border clashes turn into a full-scale war, which leaves some 70,000 people dead.[7] Afterwards, the two countries and the UN create what is known as the 2000 peace plan, which outlines border agreements as well as mandates that UN peacekeepers be deployed in the region. 2005 April - World Food Programme warns of a dire food situation after a series of droughts. It extends emergency operations to help more than 840,000 people.[8] 2008 July - UN Security Council votes unanimously to end UN peacekeeping mission monitoring disputed border after Eritrea imposes lift fuel restrictions on UN peacekeepers and continuously demands the termination of the mission. December 23rd, 2009 - UN imposes sanctions on Eritrea for its alleged support of Islamist insurgents in Somalia. Eritrea's arch foe Ethiopia was arming the interim government in the country according to a UN report.[9] 2011 April - Ethiopia declares openly that it will support Eritrean rebel groups fighting to overthrow President Isaias Afewerki. 2011 July - A UN report accuses Eritrea of orchestrating a plot to attack an African Union summit in Ethiopia in January.[10]


2013 December – It is revealed that as many as 30,000 Eritreans have been abducted and taken to Egypt to be tortured and ransomed since 2007, according to a study presented to the European Union.[11] Eritrea denies any involvements. 2015 June - UN accuses the government of Eritrea of carrying out systematic human rights violations. The government dismisses the UN report as politically motivated. 2015 November - Government introduces new-design banknotes, making the old-style notes invalid. However, due to a massive flow of money in the black market of the country, only 40% of the old notes are recovered.[12] Historical Analysis Eritrea’s sovereign history is only 25 years long. Nevertheless, by analyzing its independence movement and various conflicts during those 25 years, the UNSC can obtain much insight into the country’s nationalistic culture. At the end of the Second World War, Ethiopia, who significantly contributed to the war effort of the allies, asked that Eritrea be annexed into its land. Conversely, the people of Eritrea, who were liberated from British administration, wanted an independent country for themselves. Looking to find middle ground, the UN added Eritrea as an autonomous region inside Ethiopia with its own parliament, judicial system, police force etc. In 1962, Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie decided to annex Eritrea, thus igniting Eritrea’s War of Independence. In 1974, Ethiopian Emperor Selassie was overthrown in a military coup. A Soviet-backed military junta led by Mengistu Haile Mariam seized power. From then on Ethiopia received military backing from the Soviet Union and the DPRK, until in the late 1980s when the Soviet Union withdrew support. In 1991, Eritrea recaptured the Eritrean capital Asmara and won the war of independence. The Eritreans are, to this day, fiercely proud of the fact that their country won this war despite the heavy Soviet support given to Ethiopia. A nationwide referendum was held in 1993 and President Isaias Afwerki, the leader of the People’s Front for Democracy and Justice, which was previously the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front, was elected. He promised democratic reforms and economic growth for the country.[13] However, the new constitution drawn up in 1997 was ratified but never implemented. The new presidential elections planned for the same year was never held. President Afwerki is still the president today, with no other political parties legally allowed in the country, and he shows no sign of giving the Eritreans the democratic reforms he promised. In 1995, he introduced military conscription that has since turned into a government-led platform for forced labor. Also in 1995, the Eritrean troops invaded the Yemeni-held Hanish islands at the mouth of the Red Sea. Minor conflicts occur until 1998, when the International arbitration panel designated the Greater Hanish Island to Yemen and divided other smaller islands between the two countries. That same year, the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea was rekindled and would go on for two years killing tens of thousands of civilians. In 2000, the two countries decided on a peace agreement containing clauses for a ceasefire, troop withdrawals and UN peacekeepers. Six years later, Eritrea, no longer willing to cooperate with the UN and frustrated with Ethiopia’s continuous occupation of sovereign Eritrean land, ordered the peacekeepers out of its land and moved its troops back into the buffer zone on the Ethiopian border. The latest minor violent altercations between Eritrea and Ethiopia happened in 2012. The controversial occupation of Eritrean town of Badme by the Ethiopian forces continues to this day. In June of 2008, Eritrea turned its attention on the disputed Ras Doumeira border area between Eritrea and Djibouti. Nine Djiboutian soldiers were killed in an attack in which Eritrea denies it was involved.[14] Uneasiness followed in the next few years as Eritrea continued to dig tunnels and station soldiers in the area. In 2010, Eritrea and Djibouti agreed to resolve their border conflict peacefully.


Current Situation Today, there are a multitude of problems both internally and externally in Eritrea. The UNSC must work to create a comprehensive framework to address all of the following problems and more. President Isaias Afwerki Born in Asmara, Afwerki attended the highly competitive College of Engineering at Haile Selassie I University in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. He interrupted his studies to join the Eritrean liberation struggle. He received two years of military training in China, before joining the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF). Later in 1991, he led the EPLF to victory against the Ethiopian forces. In 1993 after the nationwide referendum, he was elected president of Eritrea. As president, Afwerki promised to bring the people of Eritrea democracy as the new constitution mandated; unfortunately he has failed to deliver on his promise. He has been the leader of Eritrea for 23 years, and his political party remains to be the only governing party of Eritrea. President Afwerki denies any knowledge of human rights violations under his rule, and is outwardly unwilling to deliver democracy to his people.[15] He shows a hostile attitude to the western nations, especially the US. Freedom of the Press There are no private media outlets in Eritrea, and no foreign media is allowed in Eritrean soil. All forms of media are controlled and censored by the government. It is estimated that currently at least 23 journalists are indefinitely imprisoned without due process – the 3rd most in the world following China and Iran.[16] Eritrea is ranked last on the World Press Freedom Index created by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) for the ninth year running.[17] Refugee Crisis

Figure 2: Statistics of Eritreans fleeing the country.[18]

According to UNHCR, there are 131,660, 125,530, and 40,000 Eritrean refugees currently living in Ethiopia,


Sudan, and Israel, respectively.[19] The number of Eritrean refugees who have crossed the Mediterranean to Europe is estimated to be in the tens of thousands. Most are fleeing to avoid the compulsory national service in the country. To make matters worse, it is rumored that President Afwerki has ordered for the deserters to be shot on sight.[20] National Service In 1995, President Afwerki introduced compulsory military service and claimed it would be beneficial to the emerging nation. Conscription creates a hard-working, disciplined population, according to him. Officially, every able-bodied man and woman between the ages of 18-50 are obliged to serve in the army for 18 months, six months of which comprises of training. However, this is far from what actually happens. According to refugees who have fled the country to escape the draft, the national service lasts for an indefinite duration, with many serving for life.[21] Some are forced into harsh labor, and others are put into civilian jobs that they never wanted; all get paid only around $30 per month. While in the service, the people are not allowed to practice any religion. It is reported that 70-90% of the female conscripts experience sexual abuse and rape by the military officers.[22] To prevent widespread desertion, the government has adopted a policy of holding a family member hostage in the case that a soldier deserts the army. This national service is why thousands are fleeing the country each month, and why the UN reported of widespread human rights violations. Faltering Economy 80% of the Eritrean population are subsistence farmers.[23] However, the agriculture industry has been under duress because so much of the workforce is absent serving in the military. Other industries include manufacturing and mining. In 2015, Eritrea went through a change in currency; because so much of the old currency in circulation was illegal, only 40% of the old currency was returned to the government in exchange for the new one. Therefore, with a 60% reduction of cash in circulation, the Eritreans are suffering from a dramatic drop in work wages, though the purchasing power has remained the same.[24] Many Eritreans who flee from Eritrea and find work abroad send money home. These remittances amount to about a third of Eritrea’s GDP. With regards to financial transparency, or lack thereof, the finance minister of the country expressed that they “have not given out any information about [their] budget for seven years because [their] enemies will use it against [them]."[25] UN / International Involvement The United Nations has a long history of involvement with Eritrea. In 1993, the UN sponsored a nationwide referendum to help the nation decide if it wanted to separate from Ethiopia, which it did. Unfortunately only 7 years later, the UN had to send 1700 peacekeepers in the buffer zone between Eritrea and Ethiopia to ensure peace while the two countries resolved their border disputes.[26] Afterwards, Eritrea started strongly demanding that the any and all US presence leave the country, and imposed lift fuel restrictions on the UN peacekeepers. Its capacity compromised,, the UNSC voted unanimously to end the peacekeeping mission in Eritrea in 2008. The UN and Eritrea have not been on friendly terms ever since. In 2009, the UNSC imposed sanctions on Eritrea for supporting rebel groups in Somalia. These sanctions include an arms embargo, which the country finds particularly unjustified. In 2011, the UNSC tightened sanctions against Eritrea for continuing to support Islamists in Somalia. In addition to Somalia, Eritrea has been linked to weapons smuggling and financial aid to Hezbollah, Sudan, the DR Congo, FRUD of Djibouti, and Ginbot 7 of Ethiopia.[27] In 2015, the UN Commission of Inquiry published a harsh report on the state of human rights in Eritrea. It remarked on what seemed to be state-administered forms of forced labor and oppression of expression. Eritrea responded that the findings in this report are laughable and politically motivated. According to the country’s President Isaias Afwerki, the report is without evidence and part of an American scheme to destabilize the region and


antagonize Eritrea.[28] Regardless of the hostility between the UN and Eritrea, other international organizations are regularly providing food and monetary aid to Eritrea with the aim of supporting the Eritrean people. The World Food Programme provides for 50% of the food aid provided to Eritrea, or 33% of Eritrea’s estimated food requirement.[29] In times of serious droughts, like the one in 2005, the WFP commits its emergency operations to help as many people as possible. The European Union also gives monetary aid to the country. In the beginning of 2016, it decided to give €200 million over five years with a focus on energy and governance. In the previous years, from 2009-2013, it had funded €53.7 million to programs in Eritrea.[30] Possible Solutions / Controversies 1. Increased funding for the creation of asylums and refugee centers Obviously tending for the refugees won’t solve the heart of the problem with the Eritrean government. However, this solution may be necessary to save Eritrean lives and lessen the burden on European and African countries. Because, currently, the countries neighboring Eritrea are bearing the burden of caring for its refugees, it is important that the UNSC take initiative to help these countries. Setting up accessible asylums and refugee centers near the borders of Eritrea can save the lives of many Eritreans from either the Eritrean government or the adversities of fleeing. With the refugees well cared for, many more may be incentivized to leave the Afwerki regime, which can put immense pressure on the president who relies on the labor force of his citizens. 2. Tightening sanctions against the Eritrean government Putting further arms embargos, adding clauses of economic isolation, and stopping development aid to the country may be effective in crippling the government from being financially able to support the rebel and terrorist groups abroad. For example, the UN can freeze financial interactions between Eritrea and the diaspora from whom the government gains substantial profit through taxation. However, there is definitely a downside to this solution as well; the innocent Eritrean citizens will suffer with restrictive sanctions in the process of punishing the government. This may damage UN’s reputation and popularity amongst the Eritrean people, especially if the president targets the UN as an actor in causing the country its economic woes. 3. Applying diplomatic pressure to Ethiopia The government of Eritrea does not trust the UN and western powers mainly because of their unjust leniency towards Ethiopia. From an Eritrean citizen’s perspective, Ethiopia has been occupying sovereign Eritrean land according to the peace plan created in 2000, and should deserve punishments by the UN in place of Eritrea. Therefore, a good way to mend relations between the UN and Eritrea is to acknowledge Ethiopia’s unjustified occupation of towns like Badme. The UN can proceed to pressuring Ethiopia to concede the land belonging to Eritrea. While it doesn’t guarantee a dramatic change in attitude, cracking down on Ethiopia may be a necessary step in the process of improving the situation in Eritrea while avoiding any physical intervention.[31] With improved relations, the UN is more likely going to be able to coax the country into becoming more transparent and ceasing covert military operations abroad. 4. Military intervention by the UN The most controversial resolution to any conflict, military intervention has its clear pros and cons. To uproot the totalitarian regime of Afwerki and stop human rights violation definitely and quickly, military intervention is undoubtedly the best method. This process will be a long one, involving peacemaking forces of the UN intervening in the country, overthrowing the current regime and supervising the power vacuum until a


democratic, hopefully stable, government is installed. However, the harms of military intervention are very well known to the world as well; it is a forcible measure that will cause much violence and local backlash, it uses a lot of resources that the UNSC countries may not be willing to commit, and in the case that the process fails, the consequences will be devastating and long-lasting. Considering that Eritrea is a proud country that values its sovereignty very dearly, the intervention will be highly unwelcomed by the country’s nationalists. But even with all concerns considered, military intervention may be unavoidable as a last resort. Bloc Positions Eritrea Eritrea has a record of refusing to let in foreign investigators and media officials, and have forcibly pushed away UN peacekeepers in the past. It feels betrayed by the UN and the western nations, as they have failed to hold Ethiopia accountable for not abiding by the peace plan created in 2000 and continuing to occupy the town of Badme. Eritrea views the sanctions and arms embargo imposed by the UNSC as extremely unjustified and wants it to be lifted.[32] As a very nationalist and isolationist country, the last thing Eritrea wants is a foreign military intervention. It points to cases of failed US intervention as the cause of instability in Africa. It is important to note that there are probably a lot more countries than just Eritrea, such as Somalia and Yemen, which strongly oppose foreign intervention in the region because of the scars it leaves to the people and to the land. This means that the UNSC may face a lot of local backlash if it decides to intervene in the Eritrean region. USA and its allies In regards to the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia, these countries are reluctant to criticize Ethiopia for not abiding by the peace agreement. This is because Ethiopia has been an important and strategic ally of these countries on numerous occasions, namely in WWII and the Korean War. This leniency has caused Eritrea to especially resent these countries. Apart from the border conflict, the USA and its allies are the most vocal and aggressive when discussing the supporting of rebel and terrorist groups by Eritrea. The USA is reportedly considering officially labeling Eritrea as a “state sponsor of terrorism.”[33] So far, the Obama administration, which influences the policy of its allies greatly, has been reluctant to involve itself militarily in a foreign conflict, partly because of the lack of political will but also because of Obama’s aim to “pivot to Asia”. However, with the upcoming elections, this may be subject to drastic change. The European Union Although most of these countries are also allies of the USA, they are uniquely concerned with the refugee crisis resulting from the situation in Eritrea. Because the refugees from Eritrea significantly contribute to the influx coming into Europe, these countries are particularly motivated to help the Eritrean citizens. This is why the EU has spent hundreds of millions of euros in aid packages to the Eritrean government, which unfortunately has been viewed as an ineffective method to trickle down benefits to the citizens according to critics. Therefore, the EU nations are primarily concerned with the social and economic aspects of the situation rather than political or military ones. They would prefer not to have a military intervention, as it would create further havoc resulting in more refugees. African & Middle Eastern Countries These countries are starkly divided in position depending on if they ally with Ethiopia or Eritrea. The allies of Ethiopia welcomes sanctions to Eritrea and believes that Eritrea is the cause of much of the instability in the region through funding of terrorist organizations. On the other hand, the allies of Eritrea either turns a blind eye on Eritrea’s actions or directly benefit from its weapons smuggling.[34] They also strongly support Eritrean


sovereignty and believe that there should be no foreign intervention. Countries like Israel that have relations with both Ethiopia and Eritrea have strategic importance because they can use their leverage towards resolving Eritrea-Ethiopian conflict if they so choose.[35] Discussion Questions 1. Is your country affiliated with Eritrea? How? (Historically, politically, militarily, economically etc.) 2. How does your country view the border conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia? What are the best solutions? 3. Is Eritrea truly funding terrorist organizations and hostile countries around the world while committing widespread human rights violations, or are international organizations distorting facts to antagonize the nation? Or is it a bit of both? 4. What is the best way to deal with the overwhelming number of refugees flowing out of Eritrea? 5. Are the current sanctions imposed on Eritrea by the UNSC enough? What more needs to be done? Does the International Criminal Court need to get involved? 6. Is it necessary to impose democracy on Eritrea? If so, is foreign intervention necessary? Additional Resources CIA World Factbook Profile on Eritrea https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/er.html Report by the UN Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/CoIEritrea/Pages/commissioninquiryonhrinEritrea.aspx 2000 Peace Plan between Eritrea and Ethiopia sponsored by the UN http://www.usip.org/publications/peace-agreements-eritrea-ethiopia Information on UNSC sanctions imposed on Eritrea and Somalia https://www.un.org/sc/suborg/en/sanctions/751 An interview by Al Jazeera with the Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0uQwODNkTA Series of informative videos about Eritrea https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RdUtOQxWnk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLw6hSEyfy8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRg9HXsrt_E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBkcLvKTqaw Works Cited African Arguments. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://africanarguments.org/2014/01/17/bringing-eritrea-in-from-the-cold-we-need-to-un-break-the-us-ethiopia-eritrea-triangle-awet-t-weldemichael/


Ashine, A. (n.d.). How does Eritrea fund Al-Shabaab? Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.africareview.com/analysis/How-does-poor-Eritrea-afford-to-fund-Al-Shabaab/-/979190/1269140/-/c92y0r/-/index.html Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/CoIEritrea/Pages/commissioninquiryonhrinEritrea.aspx Demographics of Eritrea. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Eritrea Eritrea - International Cooperation and Development - European Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/countries/eritrea_en Eritrea country profile. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349078 Eritrea demands end to UN sanction, Ethiopia's occupation. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article59616 Eritrea Fact Sheet. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.unhcr.org/protection/operations/524d829b9/eritrea-fact-sheet.html Eritrea Is The Worst Place In The World To Serve In The Military. (2015). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://taskandpurpose.com/eritrea-is-the-last-place-in-the-world-you-would-want-to-serve-in-the-military/ Eritrea profile - Leaders. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349076 Eritrea profile - Timeline. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 Eritrea: Ethiopia preparing for full-scale war. (2016). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBkcLvKTqaw Eritrea: Ethiopia preparing for full-scale war. (2016). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBkcLvKTqaw Harper, M. (n.d.). Could pariah state Eritrea come in from the cold? Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36624375 Harper, M. (n.d.). Has Eritrea's self-reliant economy run out of puff? Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36786965 Miserable and useless. (2014). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2014/03/national-service-eritrea Peace Agreements: Eritrea-Ethiopia. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.usip.org/publications/peace-agreements-eritrea-ethiopia Ramani, S. (n.d.). How Israel Can Help Resolve The Ethiopia-Eritrea Conflict. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-israel-can-help-resolve-the-ethiopia-eritrea-conflict_us_57867e30e4b0b107a2403dc0


Security Council Committee pursuant to resolutions 751 (1992) and 1907 (2009). (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.un.org/sc/suborg/en/sanctions/751 Security Council Committee pursuant to resolutions 751 (1992) and 1907 (2009). (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.un.org/sc/suborg/en/sanctions/751 Security Council Imposes Sanctions on Eritrea over Its Role in Somalia, Refusal to Withdraw Troops Following Conflict with Djibouti | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.un.org/press/en/2009/sc9833.doc.htm Talk to Al Jazeera - President Isaias Afwerki. Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0uQwODNkTA The Guardian view on Eritrea: A regime of terror. (2015). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/10/guardian-view-eritrea-regime-of-terror-migration The Stream - UN accuses Eritrea of 'possible crimes against humanity' (2015). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RdUtOQxWnk The World Factbook: Eritrea. (2016). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/er.html U.S. considers putting Eritrea on terrorism list. (2007). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-eritrea-idUSN1744634320070817 UN: African Union must investigate Eritrean crimes. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/african-union-investigate-eritrean-crimes-160701174726718.html UN: Eritrea government commits crimes against humanity. (2016). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRg9HXsrt_E World Food Programme. (n.d.). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.wfp.org/content/evaluation-wfp-eritrea-relief-portfolio Zere, A. T. (2015). Eritrea's forgotten journalists, still jailed after 14 years. Retrieved July 28, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/19/eritrea-forgotten-journalists-jailed-pen-international-press-freedom

[1] Eritrea - BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36624375 [2] Eritrea – CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/er.html [3] Demographics of Eritrea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Eritrea [4] Human Rights Report on Eritrea. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/CoIEritrea/Pages/commissioninquiryonhrinEritrea.aspx [5] Eritrea Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 [6] Ibid. [7] Eritrea – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 [8] WTF Eritrea Relief. https://www.wfp.org/content/evaluation-wfp-eritrea-relief-portfolio [9] Eritrea Arms Ginbot 7. http://hornaffairs.com/en/2014/10/20/un-report-eritrea-arms-ginbot-rebel/ [10] Eritrea behind AU summit attack plot. http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE76R0AS20110728


[11] Eritrea – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 [12] Eritrea’s self-reliant economy. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36786965 [13] Eritrea profile – Leaders. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349076 [14] Eritrea – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 [15] Interview with President Afwerki. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0uQwODNkTA [16] Eritrea’s forgotten journalists. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/19/eritrea-forgotten-journalists-jailed-pen-international-press-freedom [17] Eritrea – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 [18] AU must investigate Eritrean crimes. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/african-union-investigate-eritrean-crimes-160701174726718.html [19] Eritrea Factsheet. http://www.unhcr.org/protection/operations/524d829b9/eritrea-fact-sheet.html [20] Interview with President Afwerki. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0uQwODNkTA [21] National service in Eritrea. http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2014/03/national-service-eritrea [22] Serving in the Eritrean military. http://taskandpurpose.com/eritrea-is-the-last-place-in-the-world-you-would-want-to-serve-in-the-military/ [23] Eritrea’s self-reliant economy. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36786965 [24] Ibid. [25] Ibid. [26] Eritrea – Timeline. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13349395 [27] Eritrea arms, trains Ginbot 7. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/african-union-investigate-eritrean-crimes-160701174726718.html [28] Interview with President Afwerki. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0uQwODNkTA [29] WTF Eritrea Relief. https://www.wfp.org/content/evaluation-wfp-eritrea-relief-portfolio [30] Eritrea – European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/countries/eritrea_en [31] Bringing Eritrea in from the cold. http://africanarguments.org/2014/01/17/bringing-eritrea-in-from-the-cold-we-need-to-un-break-the-us-ethiopia-eritrea-triangle-awet-t-weldemichael/ [32] Eritrea demands end to UN sanctions. http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article59616 [33] US considers putting Eritrea on terrorism list. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-eritrea-idUSN1744634320070817 [34] Eritrea funds Al-Shabaab. http://www.africareview.com/analysis/How-does-poor-Eritrea-afford-to-fund-Al-Shabaab/-/979190/1269140/-/c92y0r/-/index.html [35] How Israel can help solve the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-israel-can-help-resolve-the-ethiopia-eritrea-conflict_us_57867e30e4b0b107a2403dc0

unsc vmun 2017 background guide 1 · korean president lee to cancels his offer of food aid in...

Documents