Southeast Asia Treaty
Organization
Lora You
Chair
Alan Lai
Chair
GSMUN XX
Delegates,
GSMUN XX
Our World, Our Future
Robin Schwartzkopf
Secretary-General
Harish Tekriwal
Director-General
Isha Gangal
Undersecretary-General for
External Communications
Jessica Kong
Charge d’Affaires
Parth Kotak
Undersecretary-General for
Logistics
Avery Gagne
Undersecretary-General for
Crisis Simulations
Annie Zhang
Director of Specialized
Agencies
Dharaa Rathi
Director of General
Assemblies
Kiersen Mather
Director of Press and
Publications
Ketty Bai
Director of Charitable
Giving
We warmly welcome you to GSMUN XX’s Southeast Asian Treaty
Organization, co-chaired by Alan Lai and Lora You. As representatives of
nations within SEATO, you all have a responsibility to address the pressing
issues that plague Southeast Asia. With problems growing bigger each day, the
cooperation of nations is imperative in order to find a common solution to the
rampant drug trade that runs throughout the region, and the widely known
South China Sea Dispute. It is the job of SEATO to cleanse corruption and
restore order throughout the region. How this is done is left in your hands, as
delegates. Though, before doing so, an introduction to your dais is necessary!
Alan Lai, a sophomore, is pleased to be a co-chair of this committee. This is his
second year of Maggie Walker’s Model UN club and his first year of chairing
for GSMUN. He participates in many other school clubs, such as Model
Congress and debate. Alan is a fan of sports, and enjoys playing basketball,
swimming, and running track. He runs with fall track club, and partakes in
spring track and field. In the winter, he plays basketball for the MLWGS JV
team. Outside of school, he plays piano and lazes about watching an unhealthy
amount of Netflix. He volunteers with the Science Museum along with the
Henrico Doctor’s Hospital in the Forrest Campus.
Approaching her final year of high school, Lora You is ecstatic to wrap up her
four-year experience in Maggie Walker’s Model UN club as your co-chair at
GSMUN. She has been a part of the Model UN club for four years, and was a
chair at GSMUN last year. Cooking and eating are two of her favorite hobbies,
and she also enjoys watching TV and spending time with friends and family.
She likes volunteering at various elementary schools tutoring students or
teaching them the piano.
Now that you’ve been introduced to your co-chairs, here are some tips and
tricks to excel at this committee meeting. It is expected of delegates to be
knowledgeable of the topic at hand, and to have research already done before
attending the meeting. The briefings that your chairs have written gives an
introductory overview of the topics, but should not be your only source of
information when writing a position paper. Delve deeper into the subjects and
learn more individually in order to be as prepared as possible. When writing a
position paper, please refer to the Chicago Manual of Style for formatting, and
remember to always cite your sources! Plagiarism is unacceptable and not
tolerated within our community. Remember that quality is superior to quantity.
Ideas that stimulate debate and provoke thought are looked favorably upon.
With this in mind, we wish you luck on writing your papers and hope that you
find success with your research! If there are any questions, comments, or
concerns, contact us at [email protected].
Best Wishes,
Andrew McCullough
Director of Technology
Mr. Max Smith
MUN Club Sponsor
Lora You
[email protected]
Alan Lai
[email protected]
Committee Overview
Signed in 1954, the Manila Pact
established the international organization
known as the Southeast Asian Treaty
Organization (SEATO) in order to provide
for a collective defense against the spread of
communist powers in Southeast Asia. For
SEATO, this power was communist China.
The nations involved were: U.S., France, New
Zealand, Australia, Philippines, Thailand,
Pakistan, and Bangladesh. While these were
the main nations, other nations, such as
Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia were granted
observer status, which meant that they were
protected nations of SEATO.
Headquartered in Bangkok, Thailand,
SEATO has few real functions. Although it
did not have an official military force of its
own, it hosted joint military exercises for the
member-states each year. Since the spread of
communism became less about conquest and
more about internal corruption, SEATO
focused primarily on strengthening the
economic and cultural foundations of its
members. It hosted a plethora of meetings
and exhibitions on cultural, religious, and
historical topics in order to teach member
nations more about the subjects. This was
considered to be SEATO’s greatest success,
as from this, many facilities were established
in its nations that were specialized in training
the future of the nations. In 1959, the
organization even established a cholera
research laboratory in Bangkok, and another
in Bangladesh. The one in Bangladesh would
later go on to be the world’s leading cholera
research facility. From engineering schools to
military camps, SEATO established a solid
base for nations to use as a stepping stone for
the future.
The organization was intended to be a
Southeast Asian form of NATO, but
ultimately was considered to be a failure due
to long-standing internal conflicts that
rendered the SEATO useless. Nations reaped
the benefits of the joint cooperation between
nations, but did little to contribute towards
the growth of the organization. This lead to
the withdrawal of many nations, and
eventually the dissolvement of SEATO on
June 30, 1977.
However, the programs, initiatives,
treaties, pacts, established by the organization
still remain in effect as of today. Many, if not
all nations, still consider the mutual defense
aspects of the organization to still be in effect,
even after its official disbanding in 1977. For
this reason, SEATO is still somewhat alive.
Since many still uphold certain agreements
made during its existence, more initiatives can
be made out of the initial agreements in order
to protect all nations involved. Although the
fight against communism was the primary
reason for the establishment of SEATO, its
new duty is to ensure the safety of its nations
in times of need. With conflicts such as the
global drug trade and South China Sea
occurring, it is left to SEATO to determine
where the pieces will go on the board.
Drug Trade in Asia
Background
In Southeast Asia, the “Golden
Triangle,” a lawless region overlapping the
countries Myanmar, Laos, and Thailand, is
one of the world’s biggest opium-producing
regions. Most of the world’s illicit opium was
originated in the Golden Triangle in the early
1950’s to mid-1990’s. These countries were
the main producers of heroin and opium
before the Golden Crescent, located in
Middle-east Asia, including Afghanistan, in
the twenty-first century. Opium bans were
enforced in Myanmar in the mid 1990’s, not
by the central government, but by armed
ethnic-based armies. In 1994, after a ceasefire agreement, the Kachin Independence
Organization in Myanmar pledged for the ban
of opium production. The United Wa State
Army (UWSA) and the Myanmar National
Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) soon
followed suit, in 1995 and 1997 respectively.
The more influential bans in particular that
helped reduce the overall opium production
were in 2003 and 2006, from the regions of
Kokang and Wa, which are both located in
the Shan state of Myanmar, where 90% of
Myanmar’s opium was produced in the early
20th century. However much the bans were
successful, they left a counterproductive
impact in many of the regions, as many
farmers lost their main and usually only
source of income, leaving them impoverished
without any compensation from the
government.
Throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s,
America played an active role in the opium
business in Southeast Asia. To fight against
communism, the CIA allegedly funded a
Chinese rebel group against the communists
of Mao Zedong. This, in turn, pushed the
local farmers to increase their production of
opium, and leads to the large-scale trade
today.
In 1962, Myanmar first enforced
prohibitionist laws against opium. The three
countries of the Golden Triangle, China, and
the United Nations International Drug
Control Program signed a Memorandum of
Understanding Drug Control and met again in
2000 to discuss solutions to drug production,
abuse, and trafficking. ASEAN launched a
commitment to make the Southeast Asian
countries drug free by 2015. Much of the
illegal opium production in the Southeast Asia
receded in the early 21st century, after many
decades of expansion. In 2006, there was an
estimated total of 60,000 acres of cultivation,
a significantly lower number from the
estimated 390,000 acres in 1998. Thailand
almost completely eradicated its cultivation,
with just 388 acres in 2006. However, opium,
methamphetamines, and heroin are back in
the markets, both in regional and global levels.
One of the factors for this increase in the
markets is due to small-scale agricultural
investors from the province of Yunnan, who
fund projects that build highways for faster
global distribution of illicit produce. Other
factors include more favorable weather and
climate, rising demand and opium prices, and
internal conflicts in Myanmar.
Current Status
Since 2006, the opium production has
nearly tripled in the Golden Triangle. It
remains a crucial part of the economy and a
major subsistence for farmers in many rural
parts of Myanmar and Laos. Although opium
production has not resumed in the Kokang
and Wa regions, Myanmar alone produces
90% of the world’s opium today, in the
southern parts of the Shan state. An estimate
of 762 tons of opium and 76 tons of heroin
were produced in the Shan state of Myanmar
in 2013. Since 2014, the trade is estimated to
be more than 16.3 billion. With the high
production rates, criminality, corruption, and
addiction rise as continuing problems in the
society.
Although Myanmar has joined many
other Southeast Asian countries in adopting
strict prohibitionist laws against drug
trafficking, the efforts remain minimal due to
corruption and lack of willingness and
commitment from the government, especially
due to the government being complicit in this
operation. Moreover, its resurgent conflicts
boost the regional production rebound from
the early 2000’s. Additionally, the mountains
and hills that overlap the regions and the lack
of transport infrastructure make them hard
for the government and anti-drug agencies to
patrol.
There do exist resistant groups against
the drug production and trade in the Golden
Triangle, the largest organized group being a
Christian vigilante group called Pat Jasan,
which has roughly 100,000 members and is
known to create extreme confrontations
against drug addicts and farmers. However,
because this group does not receive funds
from foreign nations, they are rather
powerless in successfully halting the trade and
production.
Analysis
Eradication has been one approach of
counter-narcotic efforts, by destroying the
crops with force before harvest. However,
complete eradication of drug production and
trafficking would leave millions of farmers
with a loss in their entire crop, investment,
revenue, and no viable alternatives, as many
of them live in poverty in rural regions. In
turn, this leaves a place for increase in crime
as it threatens precarious livelihoods and
farmers resort to looking for more remote
areas to continue production. Long term
solutions should address and eliminate the
problem of poverty that is driving many of
the opium growers in the Southeast Asian
countries. Additionally, there needs to be
improvement in coordination between
intelligence agencies as well as increased
funding from foreign countries to boost antidrug campaigns. Many attempts in the past
were focused on supply reduction in the
Golden Triangle; however, the demand
reduction should be lowered in order for
supply reduction to happen. In order to
attract investment in these rural areas in these
countries, expenditure on agricultural
programs and the infrastructure should
increase. Investment in alternative cash crops,
such as coffee or rubber, may help curb the
production of opium and methamphetamine.
However, these lucrative crops take a
considerably longer time to harvest, about 3-7
years. Additionally, the lack of infrastructure
and high transportation costs create problems
and less incentives discourage farmers from
other crops.
Specifically in Myanmar, advances in
the peace process to end the ongoing civil war
will subdue the high crop production. Opium
production should be approached with a
socio-economic perspective; it should be
viewed as a consequence or a coping
mechanism from poverty and low availability
of assets, rather than the approach that it is
the cause for future problems. As illegal drug
production dominate the countries’
economies and markets, proper social and
economic solutions must be found in order
for counternarcotics to be effective in the
near future.
Questions to Consider
1. What are the major drug-related
problems in different regions of SE
Asia?
2. What are some of the short-term
solutions to the increased amounts of
kidnappings and extortion cases?
3. How should Southeast Asian
countries address and reduce food
insecurity that’s largely driving illegal
drug production?
4. How should Myanmar and other SE
Asian countries work with one
another and other countries and
international organizations to decrease
drug-related activities?
5. Should the military and/or
government have a prominent role in
the fight against drug trafficking,
especially when there is corruption in
some countries?
6. Will legalizing drugs improve the
situation at hand? Should they be
legalized?
South China Sea Dispute
Background
Located in the midst of China,
Vietnam, Taiwan, Philippines, and Malaysia,
the South China Sea is home to a plethora of
businesses from all countries. The sea hosts
$5.3 trillion of trade and produces around 11
million barrels of oil annually. However, the
annual production rate is rather miniscule in
comparison to the total amount within the
sea; the U.S. Geographical Survey has
determined that there may still be 5 to 22
billion barrels of oil left, and 70 to 290 trillion
cubic feet of gas, enough to last countries for
centuries. According to the UN Food and
Agriculture Organization, Asia was
responsible for all of the 134.6 million metric
tons of fish caught in 2013, with China being
the source of 32% of this. This fishing
industry provides approximately 3% of
China’s GDP, generating up to $279 billion
per year.
Since the sea is a resource amidst so
many countries, it was distributed evenly
amongst the countries, allowing each country
to lay claim to their respective parts of the sea
in order to establish industries. By the decree
of the United Nations Convention on Law of
the Sea, a country is given an exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) in which they are
granted unconditional use to all area 200
nautical miles away from their shores. This
allows all countries to individually use the
South China Sea’s abundance of supplies,
such as fish and oil, and govern trade that
occurs within these boundaries. These
resources make the sea a coveted source of
economic stability for any country who
utilizes its resources. Although the sea was
equitably distributed amongst the countries,
border conflicts still occur, raising tensions
amongst involved nations and creating
undesired animosity.
In 1947, shortly after the end of
World War II, the “Map of South China Sea
Islands” was produced by the Republic of
China. It clearly illustrates an eleven-dashed
line that marks the ‘official’ borders of China
in the South China Sea. This eleven-dashed
line encompassed the majority of the South
China Sea, but was later reduced to the
current nine-dashed line in 1949, when the
Chinese Communist Party renovated the map
to give the Gulf of Tonkin to communist
Vietnam. However, the nine-dashed line still
stretches and covers hundreds of miles south
and east of China.
Through the next few decades, no
controversy surrounded the map, as it was
rarely spoken of. However, in 2009, using the
CCP’s 1949 version of the map as a basis,
China made a claim that they owned all lands
within the nine-dash line. As a result, China
declared themselves as sole sovereigns of the
South China Sea and the adjacent
waters/EEZs that are issued with the islands
in the sea. This stirred much unrest amongst
neighboring nations and controversy about
the validity of the map. Asides from the clear
conflict between the UNCLOS issued EEZs
and China’s nine-dashed line, a major
problem that the countries have is the sudden
claim with that infringes upon their
sovereignty.
Within the current dashed line lies
heavily disputed territories, such as the Paracel
Islands, Spratly Islands, and the Scarborough
Shoal. All three of these archipelagos are
heavily sought after due to their strategic
location, as well as the potential economic
benefit from the large deposits of oil and fish
nearby. Similarly, the UNCLOS also issued
EEZs to the islands, so whichever nation
owns one of the archipelagos also gets a large
portion of the sea along with it. Taking any of
these locations from their current owner will
put a large dent in a nation’s economy. While
disputes have arisen pertaining to all three of
these archipelagos, the most prominent is the
one between the Spratly Islands.
The Spratly Islands are positioned in
the center of the South China Sea, making it
the most valued archipelago. It also makes it
the most contentious issue within this dispute.
Trillions of dollars in trade flow through the
islands, with 50% of all merchants travelling
past the islands. However, the Spratly Islands
are located within the Philippines EEZ, so
sovereignty falls within their hands as the
rightful rulers of this area. Any conflict over
these islands would have tremendous
repercussions throughout the world. If actions
are actually taken by the nations, the world
economy will be heavily affected. Worldwide
stock markets and consumer prices would
experience radical change. The best outcome
to this situation would be no conflict, but this
is seemingly unavoidable. China, along with
the other nations, have interest in this
archipelago due to its location. Vietnam has
provided documents to show that it has
actively ruled over both the Paracels and the
Spratlys, and heavily refutes China’s claim of
sovereignty over these islands. Whichever
nation asserts control over the Spratlys Island
essentially takes control of the entire South
China Sea. Since so much maritime trade
occurs, the ruling nation would be allowed to
regulate trade of all products that pass by the
islands. The islands are also a prime position
to increase efforts for gas/oil exploration.
This agitation spread to more than just
the Spratly Islands. In 2011, China reaffirmed
its claim of the nine-dashed line and ended up
annexing the Scarborough Shoal from the
Philippines. Located as well within Philippines
EEZ, the Scarborough Shoal, like the Spratly
Islands, is a heavily contested area. This
created a standoff between the Chinese and
the Filipino military. In the end, the U.S. was
forced to intervene and negotiate a truce
between the two. Both agreed to pull back,
but China went against their word and kept
their troops in the Shoal, establishing control
over it. This prompted the Philippines to file a
case in 2013 with the United Nations’
Permanent Court of Arbitration. The case was
against China’s claims of the South China Sea,
specifically whether or not certain islands are
entitled to EEZs issued by UNCLOS or not.
Current Status
Currently, the involved nations are
China, Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan,
Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei. The source
of the dispute is still the conflict between
China’s sweeping claim of ownership, and the
EEZs of all the other nations. Fortunately, no
brawls have occurred between the countries,
but each has taken its own initiative to protect
their land. Countries have militarized, with the
Spratly Islands being the most contested still.
China has made efforts in land reclamation by
creating new artificial islands nearby by
pumping sand onto the coral reefs and paving
over it with concrete. China is attempting to
pass these artificial islands off as real land, in
order to receive EEZs from UNCLOS, which
would only expand their rule over the South
China Sea. Similarly, China has built three new
airstrips on top of the artificial islands near
the Spratlys. However, under UNCLOS, these
artificial islands do not have any maritime
rights, along with submerged reefs.
In order to mitigate territorial
disputes, the U.S. has involved themselves as
a middleman to be a deterrent for any serious
military action. They have given their support
to the Philippines, as they are the most
affected by China’s militarization of the
islands. However, when the U.S. exercised
their right to freedom of navigation by
sending a navy ship near the Spratly Islands,
they discovered that China was attempting to
create a new civilization on top of the artificial
islands. As a response, China mobilized jets
and three navy warships to force the U.S. out
of their territory. The conditions are rather
tense right now, with China, Vietnam,
Philippines, Taiwan, and Malaysia building
airstrips capable of holding cargo, surveillance
and fighter jets.
The case submitted by the Philippines
in 2013 received an official response from the
international tribunal. The tribunal declared
that the nine-dashed line could not be used by
Beijing to make their historic claims on the
South China Sea. It was deemed to have “no
legal basis” for maritime claims by the
Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague.
To say the least, Beijing was not thrilled to
hear of this. By the decree of the international
law, this decision completely illegitimized all
of China’s advances in the South China Sea
and ruined their ambitions. Shortly after, on
the same day of the decision, the Philippines
experienced a series of crippling distributed
denial of service attacks (DDoS) that took
down 68 government websites. The source of
the attacks is unknown, but the Filipinos
strongly believe that Chinese hackers were
behind this plot.
Aggravated by the decision, many
Chinese believe that the international court is
disrespecting history. In response to this,
China’s naval chief, Wu Shengli, told the U.S.
chief of naval operations that Beijing would
not halt its effort to replace the contested
South China Sea coral reefs with artificial
islands. It was said that China “will never give
up halfway” on its efforts to build the islands.
Shortly after, the Chinese sent ‘normal battle
patrols’ of bombers across the Scarborough
Shoal. Many worry that China is doing this in
order to clear way to build on the shoal. If
they militarized this island, it would not bode
well for the future, as the shoal was originally
part of the Philippines’ EEZ. This means that
a militarized island, right next to the
Philippines, would be ready to respond in case
the situations turns dire. Essentially, China has
ignored the court decision and continued on
with their operations, regardless of the
international decision that voided their basis
for the claim.
Analysis
Many thought that taking the dispute
to the International Court of Justice for an
overview and a ruling on the situation would
have ended the dispute. However, after the
international ruling on July 12th, 2016, the
contrary happened; China did not stop,
instead, they completely ignored the decision
and forged onwards. While it is only a ruling
from the court, it is backed by international
law. This also goes against their signatures of
the UNCLOS agreement in 1982; they have
not respected any of the EEZs granted to
their neighboring countries. Tensions have
risen so high that all countries are on the
brink of war. The militarization of all
countries has the entire world waiting for the
next move. Resounding repercussions will
follow if a war does break out. With China
intruding on all countries’ EEZ, many have to
adapt. China has sent in many fishing trawlers
into other countries’ territory, only to have
them extricated using their navy and coast
guard. Indonesia has made changes to prevent
the Chinese from intruding on their EEZ.
They have developed new nanosatellite
technology to detect boats fishing within
certain areas. Vietnam has even moved mobile
rocket launchers onto their islands that are
capable of destroying China’s runways and
military installations on the Spratlys. They
have yet to be armed, but are the most
updated forms of rocket launchers that
Vietnam can produce. This is also the most
defensive move that Vietnam has made during
this dispute.
This uncertainty of what will happen
next has everyone on the defensive. China has
deployed anti-ship missiles on Woody Island,
and has repeatedly denied access to
Americans asking to enter. This goes against
the UNCLOS right to free navigation, and
signifies that China has a response to any
potential attacks. While no military brawls
have occurred, the chance that one might
occur is continuously increasing. If one does
occur, many will have to pick sides in order to
end the conflict as fast as possible.
The goal is to end this conflict as
peacefully as possible. Since using
international court ruling did not work,
perhaps a development of a new law code by
the Association of Southeastern Asian
Nations (ASEAN) will smooth things out.
Whatever the case, a war must be avoided at
all costs to ensure safety of world economy.
Questions to Consider
1. How can tensions be reduced to avoid
potential clashes between the
countries’ militaries?
2. What can the countries do in order to
reach a peaceful resolution?
3. How can the already established
EEZs of each country be
reinforced/respected?
4. Should China’s efforts to create
artificial islands be stopped? How
could this be handled?
5. Should countries continue to exercise
their right to utilize their EEZs,
regardless of China’s actions?
Bibliography
Beech, Hannah. “Just Where Exactly Did
China Get the South China Sea NineDash Line From?” Time. Last
modified July 19, 2016. Accessed
August 27, 2016.
http://time.com/4412191/nine-dashline-9-south-china-sea/.
Mollman, Steve. “The Line on a 70-year-old
Map that Threatens to Set Off a War
in East Asia.” Quartz. Last modified
July 7, 2016. Accessed August 27,
2016. http://qz.com/705223/whereexactly-did-chinas-nine-dash-line-inthe-south-china-sea-come-from/.
Cohen, Zachary. “Photos Reveal Growth of
Chinese Military Bases in South China
Sea.” CNN. Last modified May 15,
2016. Accessed August 27, 2016.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/13/p
olitics/china-military-south-china-seareport/.
Piiparinen, Anni. "China's Secret Weapon in
the South China Sea: Cyber Attacks."
The Diplomat. Last modified July 22,
2016. Accessed August 27, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/07/c
hinas-secret-weapon-in-the-southchina-se a-cyber-attacks/.
Dillow, Clay. “How China’s military buildup
threatens the US.” CNBC. Last
modified October 13, 2015. Accessed
August 27, 2016.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/12/c
hinas-military-and-naval-buildup-insouth-china-sea-threatens-the-us.html.
Greer, Adam. “The South China Sea Is Really
a Fishery Dispute.” The Diplomat. Last
modified July 20, 2016. Accessed
August 27, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/07/the
-south-china-sea-is-really-a-fisherydispute/.
“Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea.”
Council on Foreign Relations. Last
modified August 9, 2016. Accessed
August 27, 2016.
http://www.cfr.org/global/globalconflicttracker/p32137#!/conflict/territorialdisputes-in-the-south-china-sea.
Kalman, Brian. “Growing Militarization of the
South China Sea, US-China
Confrontation.” GlobalResearch. Last
modified April 18, 2016. Accessed
August 27, 2016.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/growin
g-militarization-of-the-south-chinasea-us-china-confrontation/5520564.
“Why is the South China Sea Contentious?”
BBC. Last modified July 12, 2016.
Accessed August 27, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/worldasia-pacific-13748349.