RIVER VALLEY
MODEL UNITED NATIONS
2017
UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL (UNSC)
Study Guide
CHAIRS
AGENDA
Shi Pei Yun
[email protected]
Voon Jung
[email protected]
Arctic Conflict
Instability in North Korea
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
The Role of the UNSC
According to the UN Charter, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has the responsibility to
maintain international peace and stability. Apart from this, the UNSC also has the roles to develop
friendly relationships between countries, to cooperate in solving international problems, to promote
respect for human rights, and to coordinate actions undertaken by nations.
A key difference between the UNSC and the other UN organs is the fact that UN decisions are legally
binding. This means that countries belonging to the UN have to follow through on UNSC decisions,
and the UNSC has mechanisms (like sanctions) to encourage compliance and punish noncompliance.
To maintain the SCs powers in peacekeeping, the UNSC is authorised to utilise peacekeeping forces,
under special circumstances. Peacekeeping forces were previously used in armed conflict between
countries and territories (Like in the Third Arab-Israeli war and the Second Turkish Invasion of
Cyprus) as well us civil conflict (the Yugoslav wars and the Rwandan Civil War).
The UNSC comprises 5 Permanent Members known as the P5: United States, Great Britain, Russia,
France and China. Apart from these P5 nations, 10 other countries are elected on 2-year terms to
the UNSC. Resolutions made in the UNSC are passed by a 2/3 majority, or at least 10 votes.
However, the UNSC is also subject to veto powers of the P5 nations; if any of the P5 nations vote no
on a resolution, it will automatically fail. In the context of this MUN, observer states do not have
substantive voting rights (for resolutions or amendments) but are allowed to vote in terms of
procedural matters.
1
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
ARCTIC CONFLICT
2
Image Source: Asia Times (http://www.atimes.com)
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Arctic Conflict
CONFLICT OVERVIEW
Unbeknownst to most, the conflict between the West and Russia extends beyond the Crimean
region, manifesting in tensions in the Arctic, which is home to a vast amount of wealth and
resources1. Additionally, trade routes within that region, like the Northwest Passage and the
Northern Sea Route are important to international trading operations. This is why even tropical
countries like Singapore and India have signed up to be observer states in the Arctic Council.
The Arctic Conflict concerns territorial disputes and disagreements between countries that currently
have territories in the Arctic region. These territorial disputes not only concern the national
securities of these countries, but untapped wealth and resources, as has been mentioned earlier.
The potential for the ignition of conflict is thus a serious possibility.
The Arctic Conflict involves the following states: Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia, United States, all
of which are members of the Arctic Council and are geographically approximate to the Arctic Circle
and North Pole. Other Nordic countries (Finland, Iceland and Sweden) and members of the Arctic
Council are also directly involved in the issue.
Even though the Arctic Council has and continues to be a stakeholder institution for Arctic issues, it
focuses primarily on Arctic conservation, commerce and research. This means that they are not fullyequipped to handle issues that are political in nature or involve conflict resolution, necessitating the
need for the involvement of the Security Council2.
1
“Frozen Conflict”, published by The Economist in 2014.
Extracted from "The Arctic Council, a Backgrounder". The Arctic Council’s working groups are geared towards
Arctic monitoring, the assessment of contamination and conservation.
2
3
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
While the possibility of a large-scale military conflict is very low, if tensions between countries were
to rise, and the military build-up of vessels and naval base continues, this would mean that
altercations between Arctic States will not be an unlikely matter. If this indeed happens, the
blockade of key Arctic trade routes would spell trouble for much of the world3, especially countries
reliant on trade. The Arctic conflict could also escalate tensions between countries like the USA and
Russia, which could spill over to neighbouring regions, causing geopolitical and economic instability.
3
“Arctic Shipping Volume Rises as Ice Melts”, written by Dawson and Chester, published by The Wall Street
Journal 2014. Arctic trade routes currently ship millions of tons in mostly oil-based products.
4
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Figure 1: Map of the Arctic Region in 1855, showing national borders and boundaries
5
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
In 1822, Russia declared its ownership of the Arctic regions to the United States, claiming “the rights
to Russia to the extent of the North-West Coast”4.
Subsequent territorial claims to the whole of or part of the Arctic region have been made variously
by Canada (1909, 1925), Russia (1926) and the United States (1945)5 6 7 8.
National policies and diplomatic measures extend beyond establishing territorial claims. Countries
have sought to work with one another in the Arctic region before. The United States has, in the late
1960s and early 1970s, repeatedly tried to engage Russia and Canada in talks and agreements over
the state of the Arctic. This is especially apparent in its vision of a Northlands Compact9. The
Northlands Compact is a hypothetical treaty based on the pre-existing Antarctic Treaty whose focus
lies mainly in scientific and environmental preservation10. This also can be seen in the internal
policies of the United States in 197111.
Other multilateral outreach measures have proven more successful. For instance, 1973 saw an
agreement between Denmark and Canada delineating the boundaries between their two national
territories. 12
4
Head, Ivan Leigh, OC QC. "Canadian Claims to Territorial Sovereignty in the Arctic Regions." McGill Law
Journal 9, no. 3 (1962-63): 200-26.
5
Francis, Daniel. "Joseph-Elzéar Bernier." The Canadian Encyclopedia. February 01, 2008.
6
Lalonde, Suzanne, and Ted L. McDorman. International Law and Politics of the Arctic Ocean: Essays in Honor
of Donat Pharand.
7
Timtchenko, Leonid. "The Russian Arctic Sectoral Concept: Past And Present." Arctic 50, no. 1 (March 01,
1997): 29-35.
8
“Executive Order 9633." Executive Orders Harry S. Truman 1945-1953.
9
Rothwell, Donald R. "The Polar Regions and the Development of International Law (Cambridge Studies in
International and Comparative Law) First Edition".
10
Ko, Swan Sik, M.C.W. Pinto, and J.J.G. Syatauw, eds. African Yearbook of International Law,1996. Vol. 6.
Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1996.
11
United States of America. National Security Decision Memorandum 144. By Henry Alfred Kissinger.
12
"Agreement between the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark and the Government of Canada Relating
to the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Greenland and Canada."
6
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Figure 2: Delineation of Denmark-Canada border - Hans Island lies in the middle
7
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
UNCLOS
UNCLOS, or United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is a maritime convention officially
open for signature in 1982. Its purpose is to create a law governing behaviour on the seas, (e.g.
which flags to raise on the open seas, and what activities are permitted in which certain areas).
UNCLOS is also responsible for the delineation of maritime boundaries13.
A clause pertinent to the scope of debate is Part V, governing the creation of an Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ), a region of radius 200 nautical miles (Article 57) from the territorial waters of each
coastal country. In this EEZ, a country has sovereign autonomy over any resources14, and the ability
to build installations and structures in these territories (Article 60). The territorial boundaries a
country has are described in Section 2 of Part II.
Signatories to UNCLOS can thus submit disputes to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental
Shelf (CLCS) regarding cases where they feel that their EEZ extends beyond the 200 nautical miles
from the territorial waters. This mainly happens because their continental shelf (the underwater part
of a country’s landmass) extends beyond the boundaries of the EEZ.
To date, signatories to UNCLOS involved in the Arctic Conflict are Russia, Denmark, Canada and
Norway. The US has not ratified the UNCLOS.
13
14
"Overview - Convention & Related Agreements." United Nations.
UNCLOS Article 56, 1a “sovereign right for the purpose of exploring and exploiting… resources”.
8
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Figure 3: Illustration of how the continental shelf extends beyond boundaries
9
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
28 July 1985
Denmark raises flag on Hans Island, leaving behind a bottle of whisky.
This opens up a decades-old dispute between Canada and Denmark
over the ownership of Hans Island.
31 July 1984
USA passes Arctic Research Policy Act and sets up Arctic Research
Commission, citing the Arctic as “critical to national defence”.
29 July 1985
Explorer ship Polar Sea passes through the Northwest Passage without
Canada’s consent. This caused uproar in Canada. Opinion on the
Northwest Passage differed, with Canada viewing the area to be of
“internal waters” while USA holds the position that the Northwest
Passage is international waters15.
11 January 1988
Agreement on Arctic Cooperation signed between USA and Canada.
Although the agreement managed to diffuse the tensions between the
two countries, the issue of the ownership of the Northwest Passage has
not been solved. This is as “Nothing in this agreement affects… the
respective positions” (Clause 4).
16 November 1994
UNCLOS comes into effect, meaning that parties that have ratified
UNCLOS now need to abide by its rules and can utilise its institutions
and mechanisms.
24 June 1996
Norway ratifies UNCLOS and can thus utilise the CLCS to submit
territorial claims.
19
September The Arctic Council is formed, as a means for “promoting cooperation,
1996
coordination and interaction among Arctic states”16, among its other
missions.
12 March 1997
Russia ratifies UNCLOS.
15
Howson, Nicholas C. "Breaking the Ice, the Canadian-American Dispute over the Arctic’s Northwest
Passage." Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 26, no. 337 (January 1, 1986): 337-75.
16
"Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council." Global Affairs Canada. May 15, 2013.
10
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
20 December 2001
Russia submits claim to the CLCS that the outer limits of the continental
shelf belonging to Russia (Lomonosov ridge) extend beyond 200
nautical miles from the extent of the territorial sea17 (i.e. Russia
deserves an extension of territory and EEZ).
Norway claims that the territory in question is under dispute18, whereas
the US believes that the submission has “major flaws”19.
7 November 2003
Canada ratifies UNCLOS.
16 November 2004
Denmark ratifies UNCLOS.
13 July 2005
Canadian forces take down Danish flag from Hans Island and replace it
with a Canadian flag. Canadian Defence Minister Bill Graham later
landed on the island on 20 July, provoking a strong reaction from
Denmark20.
27 November 2006
Norway submits case to CLCS detailing its claims to 3 areas: the Loop
Hole in the Barents Sea, the Western Nansen Basin in the Arctic Ocean
and the Banana Hole in the Norwegian Sea21.
1 December 2006
Norway publishes its High North Strategy, detailing its plans for the
Arctic. Norway also reiterates its priorities in the Arctic, and stresses the
building of “good neighbourly relations” with Russia22.
17
United Nations. Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf. "Russian Federation First to Move to Establish
Outer Limits of Its Extended Continental Shelf." News release, December 21, 2001.
18
"Norway: Notification regarding the Submission Made by the Russian Federation to the Commission on the
Limits of the Continental Shelf." Permanent Mission of Norway to the United Nations to Kofi Annan, the
Sceretary-General of the United Nations. March 20, 2002.
19
"United States of America: Notification regarding the Submission Made by the Russian Federation to the
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf." John D. Negroponte to Hans Corell, Under-SecretaryGeneral for Legal Affairs, United Nations. February 28, 2002.
20
"Canada Island Visit Angers Danes." BBC News. July 25, 2005.
21
"Continental Shelf - Submission to the Commission by Norway." United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs
and the Law of the Sea.
22
"The Norwegian Government's High North Strategy." Statsministerens Kontor.
11
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
2 August 2007
Russia plants flag on the sea bed near the North Pole during its Arkitka
expedition,23 showing clearly Russian desires for the area near the
Lomonosov Ridge.
28 May 2008
Ilulissat Declaration between US, Russia, Canada, Denmark and Norway
to abide by pre-existing international laws (like UNCLOS) to settle
peacefully matters like territorial disputes24.
7 July 2010
Treaty signed between Russia and Norway, to settle their territorial
disputes in the Barents Sea25.
22 August 2011
Denmark publishes its Strategy for the Arctic 2011-2020,26 in which
Denmark emphasises its commitment to UNCLOS as a legal framework
to govern the Arctic region. At the same time, Denmark also intends to
file a claim to extend its continental shelf.
6 December 2013
Canada submits partial claim to CLCS to extend continental shelf to
beyond 200 nautical miles27.
15 December 2014
Denmark submits claim to CLCS to claim ownership of Lomonosov
Ridge, which directly goes against Russia’s 2001 claim.
23
"Russia Plants Flag under N Pole." BBC News. August 02, 2007.
"The Ilulissat Declaration." OceanLaw.org. May 28, 2008 - “We remain committed to this legal framework
and to the orderly settlement of any overlapping claims”.
25
"Treaty between the Kingdom of Norway and the Russian Federation concerning Maritime Delimitation and
Cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean." Statsministerens Kontor.
26
"Kingdom of Denmark Strategy for the Arctic 2011-2020." United Settlement.
27
"Continental Shelf - Submission to the Commission by Canada." United Nations.
24
12
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Figure 4: Map of Territorial Claims in the Arctic
13
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
SCOPE OF DEBATE
1. Militarisation of the Region
Increasingly, countries in this region are beginning to gather forces in the Far North, with
Canada and Russia in particular being the most aggressive. The continued existence of largescale military exercises like Operation Nanook28 and ICEX (Ice Exercise), as well as military
bases continue to inflame tensions.
Parties involved in the region continue to increase their military capacities and military
activity in the region as a response to other parties’ increased amount of military activity. 29
This hence causes a cycle in which neither side (at the moment mainly NATO and Russia) is
willing to back down. The key challenge the SC faces is hence the assurance of an
enforcement of peace and security for areas under contention.
28
"Operation NANOOK." Government of Canada, National Defence. 2016.
Sergunin, Alexander, and Valery Konyshev. "Modernisation or Militarisation?" The Arctic Journal. February
18, 2016 - “March combat-readiness inspection was a response to NATO’s preceding drill in Norway”.
29
14
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Figure 5: Russian increase in military build-up in the Arctic
A central flashpoint in this military race is the Lomonosov Ridge (pictured below), which has been
the focus of Canadian, Danish and Russian interests over the years, particularly due to its wealth in
minerals and fuels30.
30
Dillow, Clay. "A Melting Arctic: The World Is Skating on Thin Ice." CNBC. September 24, 2015 - “vast oil and
gas reserves have grown … luring both governments and energy companies”.
15
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Figure 6: Territorial Claims over the Lomoosov Ridge
16
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
2. Sovereignty Claims
As has already been mentioned, various countries all bear claims towards the hotly-contested region
in the Arctic Circle. It is thus the prerogative of the Security Council to construct a diplomatic
framework in which all parties are satisfied with the result.
Given the fact that countries like the US still have not ratified international treaties like UNCLOS, the
greatest challenge in a diplomatic framework would be to ensure complete participation, agreement
and adherence.
A cause of this problem could be that countries fail to communicate their national interests to other
countries. Hence, the rationale for certain issues would not be properly elucidated, resulting in
polarised views where each country only sees its own national interests (and the threats to them).
This raises the difficulty in achieving any sort of compromise.
17
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
MAJOR BLOCS
USA, Canada, Denmark
Despite differences in territorial views, (the US and Canada disagree over the ownership of the
Northwest Passage, while Canada and Denmark are still currently in dispute over Hans Island), these
3 countries can be considered allies when it comes to Arctic affairs. All 3 are members of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), a defence alliance. Their close partnership has been marked by
military exercises like Operation Nunalivut31. NATO itself has also conducted exercises as recently as
2015, where it saw off the Arctic Challenge, involving more than 4 000 people32.
NATO, being a defence-oriented organisation, would mobilise to defend any of its member states to
defend them against acts of war in the Arctic. These 3 states would hence be active in terms of
monitoring Arctic affairs and operate closely on a military level.
NATO
NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, is a bloc consisting 28 member nations in North
America and Europe. The original designation of this defensive bloc is to safeguard Europe from
Soviet attacks. Each member of the bloc has defence commitments, among which they have to
spend at least 2% of their annual GDP on defence spending.
NATO countries also cooperate on joint military exercises together, and NATO members pledge to
protect one another if hostile invasion were to occur. While noting that NATO countries do share a
defence treaty, they need not necessarily share the same views on various stances.
31
News, CBC. "Canada, Denmark Team up for Military Exercise." CBCnews. March 22, 2010.
The Associated Press. "NATO Fighter Jets Join Nordic Countries in Arctic Military Exercise." CBCnews. May
25, 2015.
32
18
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o Norway
Norway has shown itself to be an important member of NATO (it organised Arctic Challenge
2015) and a key ally for the US in the North.33 Despite its earlier willingness to rebuild and
maintain close ties with Russia, these efforts have been put on hold and their relationship has
cooled due to Russia’s annexation of Ukraine. However, Norway is still open to negotiation and
communication with Russia.34 Hence, Norway’s stance in this issue would be something close to
neutral, although its stance will definitely change in accordance with developments that
threaten its own safety and security.
o China
By its status as a manufacturing giant, China would hence wish for the internationalisation of
trade routes and economic regions. This is so that the shipping lines like the Northwest Passage
and the Northern Sea Route can be utilised, boosting China’s export potential. China has a
vested interest in the dynamic of the Arctic since they have applied and successfully gained
permanent observer status in the Arctic Council. However, they do not as yet have a strategy
and direction for its place in the Arctic, as their policy initiatives do not currently address the
Arctic region35. China’s stake in the Arctic is hence more economic than strategic or militaristic.
China’s mainly economic interest in the Arctic is characterised by its signing of a Free Trade
Agreement with Iceland,36 and the close relations China’s state-owned enterprises have with
Norwegian firms. 37
33
Ministry of Foreign Affiars. "Norway's Relationship to the US." Government.no - “Norway is seen in
Washington as a credible and reliable ally”.
34
Krever, Mick. "Norway: There's No More Normality with Russia." CNN. February 26, 2015 - “We keep our
channels open… even though we have suspended all the military cooperation.” Norway’s Defence Minister
Eriksen Søreide.
35
Kuo, Mercy A., and Angelica O. Tang. "China's Arctic Strategy: The Geopolitics of Energy Security." The
Diplomat. December 16, 2015.
36
"Free Trade Agreement between Iceland and China." Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
37
Holter, Michael. "China's Cnooc Considers Norway Exploration as Oil Trumps Nobel." Bloomberg.com.
October 23, 2014.
19
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o United Kingdom
The UK is the Arctic region’s closest neighbour, and has a key stake in Arctic issues. Its Arctic
policy is a non-militaristic one, choosing to consider rule of law and the direction of the Arctic
Council.38 When it comes to military and strategic decisions, the UK prefers to work
diplomatically with the region’s bodies rather to engage directly with their military. However, its
role as an arbitrator may be hindered by strong ties with the US and NATO, given their
involvement in this conflict. UK-Russia relations have soured over Russia’s annexation of
Crimea,39 and the UK’s opening of the inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko. As has
been emphasised previously, the UK will hence have the leeway to cooperate with other
regional actors, but its interests would align closely to that with the US.
38
39
"Adapting to Change UK Policy towards the Arctic." Gov.uk.
"Russia and Relations with the UK: Key Issues for the 2015 Parliament." Parliament.uk. 2015.
20
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o France
France is deeply concerned with affairs in the Arctic, as shown by its creation of the French
Arctic Initiative, a scientific project dedicated to further study of the Arctic along environmental,
social and economic lines.40 France has also been a long-term permanent observer in the Arctic
Council, having been inducted in 2000. As a key member of the European Union (EU), France
also has a hand in dictating EU policy proposals like developing governance and compliance
mechanisms based on international laws like UNCLOS.41 Due to France’s economic stake in the
region, France supports an opening of sea routes and increased economic cooperation.42 Due to
the economic interests that France and China share in the Arctic, mutual cooperation is not
impossible. The possibility has been bolstered by close Franco-Chinese ties43 and the EU’s
projected recognition of China as a market economy.44 In conclusion, France’s concern lies
primarily with cooperation and trade routes, and is thus willing and capable of accepting input
from a diverse range of sources, although it has condemned Russia’s annexation of Ukraine like
other EU nations.
40
"Chantier Arctique: Programme National Français De Recherche Sur Les Grands Enjeux Scientifiques De
L'Arctique, En Sciences De L'Univers, De L'environnement, Humaines, Sociales Et De La Santé." French Arctic
Initiative.
41
"Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council the European Union and
the Arctic Region." Eeas.europa.eu. November 20, 2008.
42
"Why Is France a Recognized Partner in the Ongoing Arctic Dialogue?" La France En Russie - “The prospect of
regular use of new Arctic shipping lanes is drawing closer”, France’s Ambassador to Russia.
43
"France and China." France Diplomatie: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development - “The
comprehensive strategic partnership between France and China is fuelled by an intense series of bilateral
visits”.
44
Shi, Zhiqin. "China-EU Relations: Crisis and Opportunity." The Diplomat. March 15, 2016.
21
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o
Russia
Russia lays claim to a large part of the Arctic region, as seen from their renewed claims to the
CLCS45 regarding the Arctic Shelf and the Lomonosov Ridge, which overlaps with Denmark’s
claim. Apart from the Lomonosov Ridge, Russia also claims jurisdiction over the Northern Sea
Route.46 Russia has also increased its military presence in the Arctic, ostensibly as a response to
aggression from NATO countries.47 Russia has in the past called for and declared itself ready for
international cooperation,48 but its relations with other countries in the Arctic is currently
strained, especially with the Western Arctic nations due to its annexation of Crimea.49 All in all, it
can be concluded that Russia sees the Arctic as a vital area both for its own security and for the
material wealth that it can provide. Despite its previous pledges to cooperate in Arctic issues and
its membership of Arctic organisations like the Arctic Council and the Barents Euro-Arctic
Council, relations with other Arctic nations are strained, with its closest ally being China.
45
Kramer, Andrew E. "Russia Presents a Revised Claim of Arctic Territory to the United Nations." Nytimes.com.
February 9, 2016.
46
Østreng, Willy. "The Northern Sea Route and Jurisdictional Controversy." ARCTIS | Northern Sea Route and
Jurisdictional Controversy. 2010.
47
Mandraud, Isabelle. "Russia Prepares for Ice-cold War with Show of Military Force in the Arctic." The
Guardian. October 21, 2014.
48
"Speech At the plenary Session Of the Third International Arctic Forum The Arctic – A Territory Of Dialogue."
President Of Russia. September 25, 2013 - “Russia is a major Arctic power and is ready for the closest possible
partnership”.
49
"EU Sanctions against Russia over Ukraine Crisis - Newsroom - European Commission." Newsroom European Commission. July 01, 2016.
22
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
POINTS OF CONSIDERATION FOR RESOLUTION
Escalations in Tension
As has been previously stated, states with Arctic claims are steadily increasing their arms and troop
movements in the region. Any form of perceived aggression between countries might result in the
unwitting threat to sovereignty and thus a need for retaliation. Delegates hence need to consider
mechanisms and fail-safes to stop the escalation of tensions and if need be, ways to enforce punitive
measures against offender countries.
Confrontation between and with Civilian Vessels
Though reports have not yet appeared over civilian confrontation in the Arctic, melting sea ice and
the race for resource exploitation and fisheries could see an onset of confrontation between civilian
vessels over matters related to property. Civilian vessels have been known to be enter the territorial
borders of other countries, often with disastrous consequences.50 Civilians entering the territorial
borders of other nations have been attacked by the military and shot at, sometimes even fatally. As
activity in the Arctic region becomes more frequent, clashes and confrontations involving civilian
vessels will become all the more common. It is thus essential to consider measures that regulate and
enforce civilian codes of conduct in the Arctic.
50
Perlez, Jane. "Taiwan Ends Sanctions Against Philippines Over Shooting Death." The New York Times. August
09, 2013 - “The Philippines said that the Taiwan vessel had entered waters in its exclusive economic zone and
had tried to ram a Philippine Coast Guard ship”.
23
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Military Confrontation
Military exercises in the Arctic are a frequent source of tension between states. Russia has labelled
Norway’s hosting of NATO’s Cold Response 2012 exercise a “provocation”.51 Military tensions came
to a head in 2016, when Norway called for a snap military drill near the Kola Peninsula just hours
after Russia’s troop inspection.52 With the increasing militarisation of the region, military standoffs
and confrontation (whether accidental or as a statement of intent) will become increasingly
common. Any prospective draft resolutions will need to include measures that are able to cope with
such developments.
Figure 7: Increasing depth and strength of military bases in the Arctic
51
Pettersen, Trude. "Russian Military Experts: NATO Exercise in Norway a Provocation." Barentsobserver.
March 14, 2012.
52
Nilsen, Thomas. "Norway Calls Snap Drill in North, Hours after Russia." The Independent Barents Observer.
June 14, 2016.
24
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Maritime Laws
The Arctic region is a constantly changing one, with topography and geography changing by the
season. The onset of climate change also means that pre-established maritime laws might not be
completely applicable, leading to confusion. While UNCLOS has been adopted by the Arctic
community (even the only non-signatory, the USA generally recognises its provisions), there are still
some unforeseen limitations. The drawing of straight baselines (Article 7) to demarcate territorial
waters by countries like Canada and Russia have been contested.53 Furthermore, Article 234 (the
only UNCLOS Article specifically regulating the Arctic) has been lampooned by academics as
“probably the most ambiguous, if not controversial, clause in the entire treaty”.54 It is clear then,
that UNCLOS alone is insufficient. In terms of regional legislation, laws have been “fragmented and
complex”.55
This hence means that in a prospective draft resolution, there is a need to consider the marine
legislation specific to the Arctic region that goes beyond the extent of the Ilulissat Declaration and
the Spitsbergen/Svalbard Treaty in providing unambiguous and timely decisions in Arctic affairs.
Reference to the International Maritime Organisation is strongly recommended.
53
"Limits in the Seas No. 112 United States Responses to Excessive Maritime Claims." State.gov. Canada’s
“excessive baseline” claims.
54
Lamson, Cynthia. "Arctic Shipping, Marine Safety and Environmental Protection." Marine Policy 11, no. 1
(January 1987).
55
Molenaar, Erik J. "The Arctic and the Law of the Sea." Governance of Arctic Shipping. Balancing Rights and
Interests of Arctic States and User States, Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore,
Singapore, December 10, 2015.
25
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o Ilulissat Declaration
The Ilulissat Declaration basically reaffirms the acceptance of UNCLOS with regard to delineation
of maritime boundaries. Signatories also pledge to work with each other, as well as other Arctic
bodies like the Arctic Council and Barents Euro-Arctic Council to help with research and
conservation efforts.
o Spitsbergen/Svalbard Treaty
This treaty is a treaty primarily signed between Norway and Russia claiming that the Arctic
islands of Svalbard belongs to the sovereignty of Norway, and seeks to demilitarise the region. It
also regulates business activities like the mining of oil and coal.
26
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Stakeholder Involvement
Unlike bilateral conflicts, the Arctic issue is a multifaceted one involving multiple countries. Taking
into account the effects of economic and trade potential as well as climate change, the complexity of
Arctic issues is even further increased. There is hence a need for delegates to consider the needs of
relevant stakeholders involved to achieve an effective solution. To understand the dynamics of this
situation, here are a few flashpoints to take note of:
o Norwegian and Russian border
As has been previously elaborated on, the Russian and Norwegian border is a potentially highrisk one involving the movement and gathering of large numbers of troops and armaments in
military exercises and drills. This area is a flashpoint simply due to the currently tense relations
between these two countries and the risk of a perceived provocation.
Figure 8: Exercise Joint Viking 2017, involving troop mobilisation along the Norway-Russia border
27
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o Northwest Passage
Though the US and Canada have come to an uneasy truce regarding the status of the Northwest
Passage, the matter has not been completely addressed. This is a likely flashpoint with the
melting of the polar ice caps, meaning trade volumes through the Northwest Passage will
increase. The dispute of the ownership of the Northwest Passage will thus arise, since this trade
route could mean profits in terms of trade.
Figure 9: Northwest Passage sea route
28
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o Lomonosov Ridge (see Figure 6)
EEZ status to either Russia or Denmark would mean access to large amounts of mineral and
petroleum wealth, and valuable real estate near the North Pole itself, and back-and-forth
submissions to CLCS on the part of both Russia and Denmark show the importance of the Ridge
to each country.
29
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
o Svalbard Islands
Norway and Russia have conflicting views on the status of the Svalbard Zone, a group of islands
near Norway. This is shown by Russia’s denunciation of Norway’s use of Svalbard for drilling56.
Tensions have also manifested due to Norway expression of disapproval of Russia’s Deputy
Prime Minister Dmitri Rogozin57. Tensions will likely arise due to their differences, and causing
conflict regarding the rights to usage of the archipelago.
Figure 10: Map of the Svalbard Islands
56
Pettersen, Trude. "Russia Protests Drilling in Svalbard Zone." Barentsobserver. May 5, 2015.
Pettersen, Trude. ""Norway Has No Right to Stop Anyone from Visiting Svalbard"" Barentsobserver. April 21,
2015.
57
30
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
CONCLUSION
Due to a combination of geographical, environmental, economic and political concerns, the issue of
the Arctic Conflict is very much a unique one. The Security Council will need to weigh and consider
the economic and political ramifications, and work in tandem (or even try to improve) pre-existing
diplomatic and legal institutions. Only then will the short term goal of maintaining peace and
security in the Arctic region be achieved. Moving forward, council should come together to tackle
the problems unique to the Arctic region and seek to ensure, inasmuch as possible, peace and
security in the region.
31
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "Adapting to Change UK Policy towards the Arctic." Gov.uk. Accessed December 6, 2016. “The UK
will support the Arctic Council as the pre-eminent regional forum”.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251216/Adapting
_To_Change_UK_policy_towards_the_Arctic.pdf
2. "Agreement between the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark and the Government of
Canada Relating to the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Greenland and Canada."
Delimitation Treaties Infobase, March 13, 2002. Accessed November 14, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREATIES/DNK-CAN1973CS.pdf
3. "Canada Island Visit Angers Danes." BBC News. July 25, 2005. Accessed December 06, 2016.
“Denmark promised to “hand over a complaint”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4715245.stm
4. "Chantier Arctique: Programme National Français De Recherche Sur Les Grands Enjeux
Scientifiques De L'Arctique, En Sciences De L'Univers, De L'environnement, Humaines, Sociales Et De
La Santé." French Arctic Initiative. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.chantier-arctique.fr/en/chantier_arctique.php
5. "COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE ARCTIC REGION." Eeas.europa.eu. November 20, 2008. Accessed
December 6, 2016.
http://eeas.europa.eu/archives/docs/arctic_region/docs/com_08_763_en.pdf
6. "Continental Shelf - Submission to the Commission by Canada." United Nations. December 29,
2014. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_can_70_2013.htm
7. "Continental Shelf - Submission to the Commission by Norway." United Nations Division for Ocean
Affairs and the Law of the Sea. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_nor.htm
8. "Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council." Global Affairs Canada. May 15, 2013.
Accessed December 5, 2016.
http://www.international.gc.ca/arctic-arctique/ottdec-decott.aspx?lang=eng
9. "EU Sanctions against Russia over Ukraine Crisis - Newsroom - European Commission." Newsroom
- European Commission. July 01, 2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
https://europa.eu/newsroom/highlights/special-coverage/eu_sanctions_en
10. “Executive Order 9633." Executive Orders Harry S. Truman 1945-1953. Accessed December 05,
2016.
http://trumanlibrary.org/executiveorders/index.php?pid=789
11. "France and China." France Diplomatie :: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International
Development. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files/china/france-and-china/
32
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
12. "Free Trade Agreement between Iceland and China." Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Accessed
December 06, 2016.
https://www.mfa.is/foreign-policy/trade/free-trade-agreement-between-iceland-and-china/
13. "Hans Off! Canada and Denmark's Arctic Dispute." World Facts. September 19, 2016. Accessed
December 05, 2016.
http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/hans-island-boundary-dispute-canada-denmark-territorialconflict.html
14. "Kingdom of Denmark Strategy for the Arctic 2011-2020." United Settlement. Accessed
December 5, 2016.
http://www.uniset.ca/microstates/mss-denmark_en.pdf
15. "Limits in the Seas No. 112 United States Responses to Excessive Maritime Claims." State.gov.
Accessed December 6, 2016.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/58381.pdf
16. "Norway: Notification regarding the Submission Made by the Russian Federation to the
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf." Permanent Mission of Norway to the United
Nations to Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. March 20, 2002. In United
Nations. April 2, 2002. Accessed December 5, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/rus01/CLCS_01_2001_LOS__NORtext.pdf
17. "Operation NANOOK." Government of Canada, National Defence. 2016. Accessed December 06,
2016.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/operations-canada-north-america-recurring/op-nanook.page
18. "Overview - Convention & Related Agreements." United Nations. Accessed December 05, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm
19. "Russia and Relations with the UK: Key Issues for the 2015 Parliament." Parliament.uk. 2015.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/key-issues-parliament-2015/foreignaffairs/russia/
20. "Russia Plants Flag under N Pole." BBC News. August 02, 2007. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6927395.stm
21. "Speech At the plenary Session Of the Third International Arctic Forum The Arctic – A Territory Of
Dialogue." President Of Russia. September 25, 2013. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/19281
22. "The Arctic Council, a Backgrounder." About Us. Accessed December 6, 2016.
http://www.arctic-council.org/index.php/en/about-us
23. "The Ilulissat Declaration." OceanLaw.org. May 28, 2008. Accessed December 5, 2016.
http://www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Ilulissat_Declaration.pdf
24. "The Norwegian Government's High North Strategy." Statsministerens Kontor. Accessed
December 5, 2016.
33
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/UD/Vedlegg/strategien.pdf
25. "Treaty between the Kingdom of Norway and the Russian Federation concerning Maritime
Delimitation and Cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean." Statsministerens Kontor.
Accessed December 5, 2016.
https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/ud/vedlegg/folkerett/avtale_engelsk.pdf
26. "United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea."
http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
27. "United States of America: Notification regarding the Submission Made by the Russian
Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf." John D. Negroponte to Hans
Corell, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, United Nations. February 28, 2002. In United
Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. Accessed December 5, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/rus01/CLCS_01_2001_LOS__USAtext.pdf
28. "Why Is France a Recognized Partner in the Ongoing Arctic Dialogue?" La France En Russie.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.ambafrance-ru.org/Why-is-France-a-recognized-partner-in-the-ongoing-Arctic-Dialogue
29. (Declaration on the establishment of the Arctic Council 2013)"Frozen Conflict." The Economist.
December 20, 2014. Accessed December 05, 2016.
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21636756-denmark-claims-north-pole-frozenconflict
30. Clarke, Michael, Anthony Ricketts, Vivek Prahladan, Gordon G. Chang, and Joseph A. Bosco.
"Should America Fear the China-Russia Relationship?" The National Interest. February 1, 2016.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/should-america-fear-the-china-russia-relationship-15075
31. Dawson, Chester. "Arctic Shipping Volume Rises as Ice Melts." The Wall Street Journal. 2014.
Accessed December 05, 2016.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/arctic-cargo-shipping-volume-is-rising-as-ice-melts-1414612143
32. Dillow, Clay. "A Melting Arctic: The World Is Skating on Thin Ice." CNBC. September 24, 2015.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/24/a-melting-arctic-the-world-is-skating-on-thin-ice.html
33. Francis, Daniel. "Joseph-Elzéar Bernier." The Canadian Encyclopedia. February 01, 2008.
Accessed December 05, 2016.
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/joseph-elzear-bernier/
34. Head, Ivan Leigh, OC QC. "Canadian Claims to Territorial Sovereignty in the Arctic Regions."
McGill Law Journal 9, no. 3 (1962-63): 200-26.
http://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/userfiles/other/131472-head.pdf
35. Holter, Michael. "China's Cnooc Considers Norway Exploration as Oil Trumps Nobel."
Bloomberg.com. October 23, 2014. Accessed December 06, 2016.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-10-23/china-s-cnooc-considers-norwayexploration-as-oil-trumps-nobel
34
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
36. Howson, Nicholas C. "Breaking the Ice, the Canadian-American Dispute over the Arctic’s
Northwest Passage." Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 26, no. 337 (January 1, 1986): 337-75.
http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2865&context=facpubs
37. Ko, Swan Sik, M.C.W. Pinto, and J.J.G. Syatauw, eds. African Yearbook of International Law,1996.
Vol. 6. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1996. Page 60. “umbrella type agreement…
environmental protection, health and medicine”.
38. Kramer, Andrew E. "Russia Presents a Revised Claim of Arctic Territory to the United Nations."
Nytimes.com. February 9, 2016. Accessed February 6, 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/world/europe/russia-to-present-revised-claim-of-arcticterritory-to-the-united-nations.html?_r=1
39. Krever, Mick. "Norway: There's No More Normality with Russia." CNN. February 26, 2015.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/25/world/amanpour-norway-ine-eriksen-soreide/
40. Kuo, Mercy A., and Angelica O. Tang. "China's Arctic Strategy: The Geopolitics of Energy
Security." The Diplomat. December 16, 2015. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/chinas-arctic-strategy-the-geopolitics-of-energy-security/
41. Lalonde, Suzanne, and Ted L. McDorman. International Law and Politics of the Arctic Ocean:
Essays in Honor of Donat Pharand. 1st ed. Vol. 1. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, 2015
42. Lamson, Cynthia. "Arctic Shipping, Marine Safety and Environmental Protection." Marine Policy
11, no. 1 (January 1987).
43. Mandraud, Isabelle. "Russia Prepares for Ice-cold War with Show of Military Force in the Arctic."
The Guardian. October 21, 2014. Accessed December 06, 2016.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/21/russia-arctic-military-oil-gas-putin
44. Ministry of Foreign Affiars. "Norway's Relationship to the US." Government.no. Accessed
December 06, 2016.
https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/foreign-affairs/securitypolicy/innsiktsmappe/norway_us/id448299/
45. Molenaar, Erik J. "The Arctic and the Law of the Sea." Governance of Arctic Shipping. Balancing
Rights and Interests of Arctic States and User States, Centre for International Law, National
University of Singapore, Singapore, December 10, 2015.
http://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Session-1-The-Arctic-and-the-LOS-ErikMolenaar1.pdf
46. News, CBC. "Canada, Denmark Team up for Military Exercise." CBCnews. March 22, 2010.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/canada-denmark-team-up-for-military-exercise-1.964247
47. Nilsen, Thomas. "Norway Calls Snap Drill in North, Hours after Russia." The Independent Barents
Observer. June 14, 2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2016/06/norway-calls-snap-drill-north-hours-afterrussia
35
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
48. Perlez, Jane. "Taiwan Ends Sanctions Against Philippines Over Shooting Death." The New York
Times. August 09, 2013. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/10/world/asia/taiwan-drops-sanctions-against-philippines-overfishermans-killing.html
49. Pettersen, Trude. ""Norway Has No Right to Stop Anyone from Visiting Svalbard""
Barentsobserver. April 21, 2015. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://barentsobserver.com/en/politics/2015/04/norway-has-no-right-stop-anyone-visitingsvalbard-21-04
50. Pettersen, Trude. "Russian Military Experts: NATO Exercise in Norway a Provocation."
Barentsobserver. March 14, 2012. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://barentsobserver.com/en/additional-menu/russian-military-experts-nato-exercise-norwayprovocation
51. Pettersen, Trude. "Russia Protests Drilling in Svalbard Zone." Barentsobserver. May 5, 2015.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://barentsobserver.com/en/energy/2015/05/russia-protests-drilling-svalbard-zone-05-05
52. Rethinking the Top of the World: Arctic Security Public Opinion Survey. Ekos Research Associates.
Gordonfoundation.ca. January 2011. Accessed December 5, 2016.
http://gordonfoundation.ca/sites/default/files/publications/24-05-2011
53. Rothwell, Donald R. "The Polar Regions and the Development of International Law (Cambridge
Studies in International and Comparative Law) First Edition Edition."
Sergunin, Alexander, and Valery Konyshev. "Modernisation or Militarisation?" The Arctic Journal.
February 18, 2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
54. Shi, Zhiqin. "China-EU Relations: Crisis and Opportunity." The Diplomat. March 15, 2016.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/china-eu-relations-crisis-and-opportunity/
55. The Associated Press. "NATO Fighter Jets Join Nordic Countries in Arctic Military Exercise."
CBCnews. May 25, 2015. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/nato-fighter-jets-join-nordic-countries-in-arctic-militaryexercise-1.3086264
56. Timtchenko, Leonid. "The Russian Arctic Sectoral Concept: Past And Present." Arctic 50, no. 1
(March 01, 1997): 29-35. doi:10.14430/arctic1088.
http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic50-1-29.pdf
57. United Nations. Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf. "Russian Federation First to Move to
Establish Outer Limits of Its Extended Continental Shelf." News release, December 21, 2001. United
Nations. Accessed December 5, 2016.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_rus.htm
58. United States of America. National Security Decision Memorandum 144. By Henry Alfred
Kissinger. 1.
https://fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsdm-nixon/nsdm-144.pdf
36
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
59. Østreng, Willy. "The Northern Sea Route and Jurisdictional Controversy." ARCTIS | Northern Sea
Route and Jurisdictional Controversy. 2010. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.arctis-search.com/Northern Sea Route and Jurisdictional Controversy
37
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
INSTABILITY IN NORTH KOREA
38
Image Source: The Independent (www.independent.co.uk)
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Instability in North Korea
TOPIC OVERVIEW
Since the end of the Korean War in 1953, the Korean Peninsula has been a regional and international
source of tension, causing bilateral conflict and multilateral disagreement between the East and the
West. Tensions between North and South Korea continue to build, worsening the already-strained
bilateral relationship.
Besides being a possible flashpoint between China and the United States, two large military powers;
tensions and probable conflict between both Koreas would pose a threat to peace and security to
the world at large. While South Korea does not currently possess nuclear warheads, North Korea
(DPRK) has allegedly completed its largest ever nuclear test in September 2016. Nuclear and
ballistics warfare is not an unforeseeable possibility, which would spell disaster for the East Asian
region. Fallout from nuclear war could also potentially have catastrophic and long-term
consequences.
With the possibility of conflict in the Korean Peninsula and potential spill over effects that could
destabilise the fragile peace in the international arena, it is hence imperative for the Security Council
to find a way to address the issues highlighted below58.
58
Stueck, William Whitney. The Korean War: an international history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,
1995.
39
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
HISTORICAL CONTEXT59
Korea was once under the rule of Japan. The division of Korea along the 38th Parallel was first issued
in General Order No. One by the Allied Powers shortly after Japanese surrender. Areas of Korea
north of the 38th Parallel was under the influence of the Soviet Union (now Russia), whereas areas
south of the 38th Parallel was under the influence of the United States60.
Tensions between the North and South started escalating even before the onset of the Korean War.
Both the South Korean national police and the constabulary doubled in size, providing a southern
security force of about 80,000 by 1947. In the meantime, North Korea strengthened their
Communist Party, their administrative structures and military forces. In 1948, the North Korean
military and police numbered about 100,000, reinforced by a group of southern Korean guerrillas
based at Haeju in western Korea61.
While both the USSR and the US had plans for Korean reunification in 1948, the scheme fell through
due to mutual distrust. The U.S. military remained nominally in control of the South until South
Korea’s independence in 1948, where Syngman Rhee62 was elected as South Korea’s president.
North Korea was led by Kim Il Sung from 194863.
59
"Korean War." History.com. 2009; "Korean War." Saylor Academy.
"SCAP General Order no. 1." SCAP General Order No. 1; Szeczepanski, Kallie. "How Korea Ended Up Split into
North Korea and South Korea." About.com Education. February 29, 2016.
61
"South Korea." South Korea | Countries | NTI. April 2016; Cavendish, Richard. "Troop Withdrawals from
Korea." History Today, August 2004.
62
"Syngman Rhee." Encyclopedia of World Biography.
63
"Kim Il-Sung." Encyclopædia Britannica. January 13, 2014.
60
40
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
The Korean War is basically a proxy war between the West (mainly the old NATO bloc), and the East,
consisting of the Soviet Union and China. The announcement of the Truman Doctrine in 194764 made
official the ill-will and competing influence of these 2 blocs. The international community hence by
and large interpreted the Korean War as a continuation of this battle for influence and size. This
invasion was the first military action of the Cold War. While the Cold War was cold due to the lack of
actual conflict, the proxy wars in Korea and later Vietnam involve violent conflict, and are thus
deemed to be “hot”.
The Korean War began on June 25, 1950, when 75,000 soldiers from the North Korean People’s
Army crossed the 38th parallel, the boundary between the Soviet-backed Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea to the north and the pro-Western Republic of Korea to the South. Rumour has it
that it started really immaturely, just because in 1950, Syngman Rhee (South Korea’s then president)
boasted that he was going to attack North Korea. North Korea saw it as a threat and marched 75,000
soldiers with Russian T-34 tanks down South across the border. President Truman’s appeal (USA’s
then president) led the United Nations (UN) to take ‘police action’ against the ‘unwarranted’ attack.
Hence, under the auspicious of the UN, the United States was able to send troops and forces”65 to
the North and the Korean War begun.
Two days later, after the South appealed for greater assistance, the UN Security Council passed a
resolution recommending that U.N. nations assist the South "to repel the armed attack and to
restore international peace and security to the area." A multinational force was quickly formed
under the unified command of the United States. 66
China was involved in the conflict too. Few months into the war on October 1950, those that
escaped envelopment and capture were rapidly forced back north all the way to the border with
China at the Yalu River, or into the mountainous interior. At this point, Chinese forces crossed the
Yalu and entered the war. Chinese intervention triggered a retreat of UN forces which continued
until mid-1951.
64
"The Truman Doctrine, 1947." U.S. Department of State. The Truman Doctrine was a statement of intent by
the US government, to show its willingness to halt Communist spread.
65
History of Korean War, College Term Papers.
66
UN’s role, The Heritage Foundation.
41
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
By mid-December 1950, many countries, especially the United States, decided that there needed to
be a military armistice commission of mixed membership that would supervise agreements. Both
sides would need to come to an agreement. The U.S. also desired to make a demilitarized zone that
would roughly be 20 miles wide. In June and July 1950, the UNSC passed resolutions 82 to 85
demanding a cessation of hostilities by North Korea and requesting for international aid. It has also
set up a Unified Command to aid in the relief and support of the local civilian population67.
The problem during mid-December 1950 was that all other forces, including the UN, fell back as fast
as they could with no thought of trying to establish defensible positions during a tough winter and
with the Communist forces enveloping line after line down South. Simply put, the UN was caught
unprepared and the “retreat” was a desperate flight to safety. It was only just that the UN managed
to extract their combat units south and establish defensive positions against the North. It soon
became apparent the U.N. Commission had been ineffective in reducing tensions and restoring
peace in the area. However, the UN did attempt to provide aid to ease the tensions and direct the
issue. In the same year, the President and the Secretary of State obtained the consent of Congress to
appropriate $12 billion for military action in South Korea. This act, of course, is argued as another
attempt to support Democracy and suppress Communism.
Focusing on the coast and being surrounded would have allowed the Communist forces to rampage
through the 38th parallel and disrupt operations. Supply would have been possible from the sea, but
the mind-set and operational thinking of the Americans, at the time, did not lean towards creating
cauldrons and waiting out the weather and momentum. The siege at Pusan had only just been
spared, and the memory was too fresh to attempt forces to coalesce in fixed locations with only
limited means of supply. The ports in both areas may not have been able to handle large scale
supplies, and by entrenching, the UN ceded all initiative to the Communists.
The stalemate period during 1951 to 1953 was critical, with many military acts occurring, such as the
Battle of Bloody Ridge (18 August-15 September 1951), the Battle of the Heartbreak Ridge (13
September-15 October 1951), the Battle of Old Baldy (26 June-4 August 1952), the Battle of
Kumsong (13-27 July 1953). These are just the more significant battles that occurred between the
North and South, claiming the lives of many and showing the tension between the North and the
South.
67
"United Nations Security Council Resolution 85." United Nations.
42
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
As tensions continue to escalate, in late May and early June 1951, the President of the Republic of
Korea (ROK, South Korea) Syngman Rhee opposed peace talks, believing that this would give the
chance for the complete reunification of the Korean Peninsula under the rule of the North. After
rounds of argument and compromise from all parties - 158 meetings spread over two years, the
Korean armistice agreement was formed.
On June 27, 1953, the tri-language Korean Armistice Agreement was signed.68 The Korean armistice
agreement was designed to "insure a complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force
in Korea until a final peaceful settlement is achieved." The aim of the armistice agreement was to
suspend open hostilities, withdrawing all military forces and equipment from a 4000-meter-wide
zone thereby establishing a demilitarized zone as a buffer between the forces. It also ensures that
both sides does not infringe on each other’s territorial rights. The prisoners of war are also released
and repatriated, with the final aim of establishing the Military Armistice Commission (MAC) to
discuss any violations, ensuring adherence from both parties to the truce terms. The armistice, while
stopping hostility, however, was not a permanent peace treaty between the two nations. It ended
officially on July 27, 1953, upon the signing of the Armistice. The armistice ended America’s first
experiment with the Cold War concept of “limited war”69. With no peace treaty signed, the two
Koreas are technically still at war. 70
68
"Korean War Armistice Agreement." Council on Foreign Relations; News, BBC. "The Korean War Armistice."
BBC News. 2015.
69
“Armistice Ends the Korean War”, extracted from www.history.com.
70
"Replacing the Armistice With A Peace Treaty in Korea", NAPSNet Policy Forum, March 26, 2013; Elich,
Gregory. "The Struggle for a Korean Peace Treaty”.
43
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
The danger of this not having a legitimate concrete treaty signed is that it gave rise to an
“accidental” war on the peninsula. The number of troops, weapons and bases are in close proximity
between the North and the South. Nearly a million troops - South Korean, North Korean and U.S.
soldiers - are arrayed on the two sides of the DMZ (Demilitarized Zone), with hi-tech weaponry on
numerous bases. The North and the south came close to a war when U.S. pre-emptive strikes were
threatened in 1994 and again in 2006 over the possibility of North Korea developing nuclear
weapons. Although there have been recent decrease in the numbers of American troops stationed
in South Korea, the U.S. is increasing the size and capabilities of bases like Camp Humphreys in
Pyongtaek, south of Seoul. 71 Furthermore, the U.S. and South Korea, along with Japan have recently
announced stepped up joint military exercises to “maintain regional stability.” The current peace
between the North and the South can be argued as a delusion, something translucent and can
shatter once a force comes crashing down on it.
One crucial tipping factor is that millions of Korean people have been separated from their families
and homeland due to the national division (10 million South Koreans – no less than 1/4 of the
population - have separated family members in the north). Fifty-years of division are long enough.
Many are fighting and voicing out their concerns: It’s time to bring down the wall that divides the
Koreans and reunite families. The emotional factor can be a huge driving force to tip the current
‘peace’ between North and South.
71
Korean peace treaty campaign.
44
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
KEY EVENTS
Six-Party Talks
The Six-Party Talks were established in 2003 as a multilateral forum to achieve the denuclearisation
of the Korean peninsula. Their aim was to end North Korea’s nuclear programme through a
negotiating process involving China, the United States, South and North Korea, Japan and Russia72.
There is a strong international consensus that North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
DPRK) should come into compliance with UN Security Council resolutions and abandon its nuclear
weapons program. The six-party talks have not proven successful in its aim of “dismantling North
Korea’s nuclear program”, and instead have presided over the repeated firing of test missiles by
North Korea. 73
ROK’s Cheonan Sinking and the North Korean Bombardment of Yeonpyeong
The bombardment of Yeonpyeong was an artillery engagement between the North Korean military
and South Korean forces stationed on Yeonpyeong Island on 23 November, 2010. After artillery fire
from the North, South Korea retaliated by returning fire from their F16 jets. This resulted in a freeze
between North and South Korean relations.
The ROK’s Cheonan sinking occurred on 26 March 2010, when the Cheonan, a South Korean navy
ship carrying 104 personnel, sank off the country's west coast near in the Yellow Sea, killing 46
seamen. It has been theorized that the Cheonan sinking was a result of North Korean action,
although North Korea has dismissed the claim.
It is clear that any act of provocation between North and South Korea would most likely lead to
retaliatory strikes and the possibility of a full-blown war.
72
"North Korea: Beyond the Six-Party Talks." International Crisis Group. June 16, 2015.
"China Resists Kerry Appeal for Tougher North Korea Sanctions." Bloomberg.com. January 27, 2016; "Fact
Sheets & Briefs." The Six-Party Talks at a Glance | Arms Control Association. May 2012.
73
45
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Wounding of 2 South Korean Soldiers
Two South Korean soldiers, triggered landmines placed just outside their post, within the South
Korean half of the 2.5-mile-wide Demilitarized Zone. This incident was interpreted by North Korea as
an act of provocation. South Korea has in turn accused the North of planting the mines so as to
provoke the South.
Figure 11: Map of the current Korean peninsula
46
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
1967
North Korean army forces sink South Korean patrol ship Dangpo.
Such acts are considered as military aggression, provoking the South and
prompting the South for a retaliation.
21 January, 1968
Failed assassination attempt by North Korean commandos to kill South
Korean president Park Chung Hee.
The impact of assassinations is recognised globally and this act directly
showed the displeasure from the North Koreans, proving their offensive
side. Although it failed, tensions arise as the relationship between the North
and the South de-escalates.
1972
Joint statement by North and South Korea pledging peaceful reunification.74
This act proved the attempt from both sides to overcome the
misunderstandings and mistrust. It can be seen as an act to mitigate the
tensions present between the South and the North as a consequence of
their long period of division and more importantly, to expedite unification.
However, it was obvious that it did not prove its purpose and failed terribly.
By agreeing on principles as a basis of achieving unification, the impact is not
significant and there were no implications if they were to disobey. This
reminded the need for a legitimate and concrete treaty to oversee the issue
as the joint statement is of no use to suppress the tension.
1975
South Korea ratifies the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
1983
Assassination attempt on South Korean president Chun Doo-Hwan,
suspected North Korean involvement75.
The backlash was similar to the assassination attempt conducted in 1968, as
the North further provoke the South, crossing the line in maintaining
political diplomacy.
74
"Joint Statement of North and South." Le Monde diplomatique.
Gauthier, Brandon K. "When NK Commandos Tried to Assassinate South Korea’s President." NK News - North
Korea News. January 21, 2013.
75
47
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
1985
North Korea signs the NPT.
1991
North and South Korea join the United Nations.
1992
Safeguards Agreement was signed between North Korea and the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
North Korea provided a declaration of its nuclear program, facilties and
materials and gave inspectors access.
28 April, 1994
North Korea announced that it would cease participating in the Military
Armistice Commission,
76
as a means of pressuring the United States to
replace the Armistice Agreement with a U.S.-North Korean peace
agreement, excluding South Korea. However, North Korea would continue
contact at Panmunjom through liaison officers and maintain the general
conditions of the armistice. The attempt to cease participating in the
Military Armistice Commission was rhetorical as the aims was obviously not
achieved.
1998
North Korea fires a multistage long-range rocket which flies over Japan and
lands in the Pacific Ocean.
2003
North Korea withdraws from the NPT77.
North Korea’s withdrawal also meant that she will be free from the binding
force of its Safeguards Agreement. (Refer 1992)
In 2003, China conducts six-party talks.
2006
North Korea conducts its first underground nuclear test.
76
Symonds, Peter. "Tensions Rise in Korean Peninsula: "The Armistice Agreement has been Nullified." Global
Research. March 12, 2013.
77
Kirgis, Frederic L. "NORTH KOREA'S WITHDRAWAL FROM THE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION TREATY."
Asil.org/insights. January 24, 2003; Mullen, Jethro. "North Korea Vows to End Nonaggression Pacts after UN
Vote." CNN. March 9, 2013.
48
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
May 27, 2009
North Korea announced that the 1953 Armistice Agreement was no longer
applicable. There were two isolated violent incidents in 2010, the ROK’s
Cheonan sinking (attributed to North Korea, despite denials) and the North
Korean Bombardment of Yeonpyeong78.
2013
North Korea produced numerous proposals for replacing the armistice with
a peace treaty, but there was no response from the US, being a supporter
for the south and an enemy of communism. The Military Armistice
Commission and Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission was effectively
dismantled in North Korea’s Point-of-view, paralysing the supervisory
functions of the armistice.
The annual US-South Korean exercise also threatened North Korea with
nuclear means, with the B-52 bombers flown over South Korea reaffirming
the US “nuclear umbrella” for South Korea79.
March 2013
North Korea announced that she was abolishing all non-aggression pacts
with South Korea, along with other escalations such as closing the border
and closing the direct phone line between the North and South Korea80.
March 28, 2013
U.S. sent two B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to South Korea to participate in
ongoing military exercises in the region, including the dropping of inert
munitions on a South Korean bomb range.
Following this, North Korea announced that it was readying rockets to be on
standby to attack81.
78
Kim, Hye-Eun, Greg Chaffin, and Peter Certo. "The Cheonan Incident: Skepticism Abounds - FPIF." Foreign
Policy In Focus. November 16, 2010.
79
"North Korea claims success in fifth nuclear test." BBC News. September 09, 2016; Arrouas, Michelle. "Kim
Jong Un: The Situation on the Korean Peninsula Is 'Very Grave'" Time. April 2, 2014.
80
Kane, Chen, Stephanie C. Lieggi, and Miles A. Pomper. "Arms Control Today." Time for Leadership: South
Korea and Nuclear Nonproliferation | Arms Control Association.
81
Branigan, Tania, and Ewen MacAskill. "North Korea: a deadly attack, a counter-strike – now Koreans hold
their breath." The Guardian. November 23, 2010; News, BBC. "North Korea Nuclear Tests: What Did They
Achieve?" BBC News. April 22, 2016.
49
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
August 4, 2015
Wounding of 2 South Korean soldiers by landmines in the demilitarised
zone82.
August 2016
The North Korean military had warned the South Korean side not to carry
out its live fire exercise – even directed away from North Korea – because
the North Koreans considered the area in which the South Korean shells
would land to be their territorial waters. Since the South Korean military
went ahead with their exercise, the North Korean military asserted that they
had no choice but to retaliate with their artillery barrage to “safeguard our
sovereignty.” South Koreans were alarmed that China did not condemn
North Korea’s artillery attack83.
September 2016
North Korea completes largest ever nuclear test, equivalent to more than 10
kilotons of TNT84.
82
Choe, Sang-Hyun. "South Korea Accuses the North After Land Mines Maim Two Soldier in DMZ."
Nytimes.com. August 10, 2015.
83
Haberman, Clyde. "Bomb Kills 19, Including 6 Key Koreans." New York Times, October 10, 1983; News, BBC.
"North Korean Artillery Hits South Korean Island." BBC News; Panda, Ankit. "South Korea Holds Largest-Ever
Live-Fire Artillery Drills." The Diplomat. August 19, 2016.
84
Forsythe, Michael. "North Korea’s Nuclear Blasts Keep Getting Stronger." The New York Times. September
10, 2016.
50
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
February 13 2017
Death of Kim Jong Un’s half-brother Kim Jong Nam in Malaysia’s Kuala
Lumpur International Airport85. Kim was allegedly assassinated by North
Korea due to his views on leadership succession, challenging the legitimacy
of Kim Jong Un86. An act of assassination overseas shows the intent of North
Korea, and the confidence it has in operating outside its sovereignty. Such
an international episode is also likely to further align even purportedly
neutral countries against it.
Furthermore, the agent used in his assassination is a lethal nerve agent
known as VX, classified as a Weapon of Mass Destruction by the US
government87. The use of a substance banned under multiple weapons
treaties and conventions signals North Korea’s burgeoning strength in
procuring such weapons, and heightens the need for enforced checks.
85
"Kim Jong-nam death: poison dose so high he died in '15 to 20 minutes'" The Guardian. February 26, 2017.
Ibid.
87
"Weapons of Mass Destruction." FBI. January 27, 2017.
86
51
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
SCOPE OF DEBATE
The scope of debate will firstly be on how the North and South can come to a common consensus to
preserve peace, taking into consideration the numerous factors that have contributed to the
tension. This includes DPRK’s internal political crisis, DPRK’s usage of nuclear weapons, the
difference in both countries’ ideologies and the various support both sides have been receiving.
Events such as the sinking of South Korea’s warship Cheonan and North Korea’s artillery shelling of
Yeonpyeong Island will be discussed alongside as well.
The involvement of China and US is also an extremely huge concern of the UNSC. Bearing in mind
that there is no concrete peace treaty tying countries together, what can the UNSC do to address the
problems between the country in order to set-forth a secure and peaceful Korean Peninsula? The
debate should work towards bringing countries into a consensus and producing a resolution that can
effectively address many issues brought up in this study guide.
52
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
MAJOR BLOCS
China and DPRK
China’s alliance with the DPRK dates back to the Korean War. They have trade ties and close military
links. China has a similar political ideology to DPRK88. The Six Party Talks was hosted by China in 2003
with the aim to end North Korea’s nuclear programme through a negotiating process involving
China, the United States, South and North Korea, Japan and Russia.
In 2012, China sent its top diplomat, State Councillor Dai Bingguo, to both Seoul and Pyongyang. In
his respective meetings with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak and North Korean leader Kim
Jong-il, Dai urged both Koreas to exercise restraint and resolve differences through dialogue and
negotiations. In Seoul, President Lee urged China to use its influence to deal with North Korea’s
behaviour. China is thus in the unique position of being one of the only countries close enough to
North Korea to be able to move it towards international cooperation. This can especially seen by
how South Korean and U.S. leaders have consistently been calling on China to rein in its North
Korean ally, in attempts to mediate the issue89.
88
Shen, Zhihua. Mao, Stalin and the Korean War: Trilateral Communist Relations in the 1950s (Cold War
History).
89
Kim, Jack, and Ben Blanchard. "Pressure Grows on China to Rein in North Korea; South Launches Propaganda
Barrage." Reuters. January 08, 2016; Lou, Theresa. "Is China Finally Fed Up With Kim Jong-un's North Korea?"
The Diplomat. March 10, 2016.
53
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
USA and South Korea
When the Korean War broke out, 16 member countries of the United Nations, United States
in particular, came to the defense of South Korea against the North. It was the first
significant armed conflict with extensive deployment of American and other troops. The
Republic of Korea and the United States agreed to a military alliance in 1953. Till date, USA
is still the largest and strongest military support South Korea has. Around 90% of the foreign
troops that participated in the war were from the US. The outcome of the Korean War
determined the United States to maintain large military forces to constrain communism.
There is some common ground between China and the United States with respect to North
Korea. Neither wants conflict on the peninsula. In Secretary Kerry’s (representative of US)
meeting with China’s State Councillor Yang Jiechi in Beijing, he noted that the United States
and China had underscored their joint commitment to the denuclearisation of the Korean
Peninsula in a peaceful manner.
DPRK
DPRK ruler Kim Jong Un blames the rise in tensions on the U.S. and South Korea. Kim Jong Un, “The
United States and other hostile forces, ignoring our magnanimity and goodwill, are viciously stepping
up their manoeuvres in order to annihilate our republic politically, isolate it economically and crush
it militarily,” North Korea finds itself relatively alone in the issue, since even close partners like China
are weary of overt support of the country. Indeed, even China has adopted UNSC Resolution 2270,
thought to be “some of the strongest sanctions ever adopted against Pyongyang”90.
90
Huntley, Wade L. "North Korea & the NPT - FPIF." Foreign Policy In Focus. October 02, 2005.
54
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Russia
Russia (then known as USSR) provided diplomatic support, strategic and grand tactical planning,
including the planning of the invasion of South Korea, and essential logistical support. They supplied
and trained the air forces of China and North Korea. Soviet pilots flew aircraft with Chinese or North
Korean markings and after the war claimed to have shot down over 400 UN aircraft91.
After the Korean War, the Soviet Union emerged as the main trading partner and sponsor of DPRK.
In 1988, at the peak of the bilateral relationship, about 60% of North Korea's trade was with the
Soviet Union. However, the war was a political disaster for the USSR. The unification of the Korean
peninsula under the Kim Il-Sung regime, was not achieved. Relations with communist ally China were
seriously and permanently spoiled.
While Russia’s ties with South Korea are of great economic significance, Moscow’s uneasy relations
with Pyongyang carry strategic geopolitical importance. Unlike many other nations, Russia is keen to
trade with and invest in North Korea, and in light of recent clashes with Western nations over the
annexation of Crimea, is open to the idea of cooperation.
91
Toloraya Georgy. "Russia's North Korea Conundrum." The Diplomat. March 17, 2016.
55
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Australia and New Zealand
From 1950 to 1953, there were 17,000 Australians in the Army, Navy and Air Force fighting as part of
the United Nations multinational force. As the war continued, fewer nations were willing to
contribute more ground troops. Australia, however, increased its troop strength in Korea. After the
war ended, Australians remained in Korea for four years as military observers. She gained political
and security benefits, the most important being the signing of the ANZUS Treaty with the United
States and New Zealand. New Zealand’s bilateral relationship with South Korea is founded on strong
political, economic and security links that date back to the Korean War. New Zealand responded to
the United Nations Security Council’s call for members of the United Nations to assist South Korea in
1950 with a substantial commitment of Defence personnel. New Zealand continues to take a close
interest in developments on the Korean Peninsula and to provide officers for UNCMAC. New Zealand
also supported the Six Party Talks process and UN sanctions on North Korea92.
92
"Australia's Involvement in the Korean War." North Korea, China and the USSR | The Armed Forces |
Australia's Involvement in the Korean War; "The Korean War." Australian Involvement In The Korean War.
56
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
POINTS OF CONSIDERATION FOR RESOLUTION
Resolutions needs targeted solutions to address the tensions in Korean Peninsula. They should
consider the interests of all parties, while primarily aimed at easing tensions. A good resolution
should be multi-faceted with all factors taken into consideration.
Within North Korea
Firstly, the possibility that North Korean proliferation might lead to an attack involving the use of
nuclear materials is a critical issue to be considered by the UN, especially UNSC. The power of North
Korea’s bomb is simply mind-blowing. North Korea September 2016's test has indicated a device
with an explosive yield of between 10 and 30 kilotons - which, if confirmed, would make it the
strongest nuclear test ever93. How may the North Korea react upon certain decisions made by the
UN? With this at the back of the leader's mind, we have to understand North Korea’s interest and
manipulate the situation without being threaten by their nuclear power. Furthermore, this may lead
to the transfer of knowledge across countries that encourages emerging actors to become nuclearcapable. What is the influence North Korea has on certain countries?
93
North Korea Proliferation, BBC News.
57
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Escalations in tension
As has been proven in the previous examples of the Yeonpyeong bombing and the sinking of the
Cheonan, the relationship between North and South Korea is a fundamentally unstable one. Any
perceived act of aggression is likely to draw retaliation, which would lead to a full-scale war between
the two countries.
In the very worst-case scenario, the instability caused by a conflict in the region could destabilize and
inflame other regional conflicts, like the ongoing territorial disputes in the East and South China seas.
North Korea has repeatedly threatened to use their growing stockpile of nuclear weapons, and a USbacked South Korea will very likely have the military capability to react in turn. Full scale nuclear war
in the Korean Peninsula would obviously be an unwanted situation.
To prevent the possibilities listed above, delegates have to come up with mechanisms that can deescalate, manage and ensure de-escalation and reduction of tension in the future.
Compliance with UN Resolutions
Since 1993, 8 UNSC (825, 1695, 1718, 1874, 1928, 2087, 2094 and 2270) resolutions alone have dealt
with North Korean military action and acts of aggression. North Korea has not fully complied with
any of them for sustained periods of time, thus necessitating further action and heavier punishment
each time round. It is apparent that current measures are not enough to guarantee North Korean
compliance and peace in the Korean Peninsula. It is especially worth noting that despite unanimous
support for Resolution 2270, North Korea has continued to test their nuclear devices. Delegates
hence need to consider effective ways of ensuring compliance of UN resolutions, such that any
policies enacted will have their desired effect.
58
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
Negotiations for a peace treaty
The struggle of coming up with a peace treaty between the North and the South is a pressing issue
that must be addressed. What are the limitations and why is this problem stagnating? Was there
sufficient effort contributed by both parties in order to push for a peace treaty? With the support
that the South has from USA, the military aggression was intimidating for the North, or for any
country who were to be in the situation. For instance, the US dropped more bombs in Korea
(635,000 tons, as well as 32,557 tons of napalm) than in the entire Pacific theatre during WW II94.
What impact does this have on North Korea? How will the external help affect the progress of a
peace treaty? Is it still necessary? Delegates are reminded that a peace treaty is not established and
there are no legal binding between the North and South to preserve peace.
Clash in Ideologies
As the world was separated into a bipolar rivalry due to the clash in ideology between the two major
powers, the impacts are still to be considered up-to-date. Delegates should take into consideration
their country’s stance: whether they are democratic or communist. With different ideologies and
different focus, how can UNSC come together to consider a solution that addresses both parties?
With Democracy focusing on ensuring sovereignty with majority having a say, how can communist’s
interest weave for the proposal of a solution to work together as an international body?
94
“Facts About the Korean War”, Fact Retriever, Karin Lenhardt. Published on January 24, 2017.
59
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
CONCLUSION
The council will be focusing mainly on the effects of the Korean War, with the aim of producing a
resolution to promote peace and security in the Korean Peninsula by demilitarising the region and
adopting measures for peace talks - mainly on how to reduce the geopolitical tensions. The main
picture is to address the issue of nuclear weapons, bearing in mind how the stability of the region
will be affected after one country adopts military and nuclear measures.
60
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "Australia's Involvement in the Korean War." North Korea, China and the USSR | The Armed
Forces | Australia's Involvement in the Korean War. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://korean-war.commemoration.gov.au/armed-forces-in-korea/north-korea-china-ussr.php
2. "China Resists Kerry Appeal for Tougher North Korea Sanctions." Bloomberg.com. January 27,
2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-26/kerry-push-for-north-korea-sanctions-faceshard-sell-in-beijing
3. "Fact Sheets & Briefs." The Six-Party Talks at a Glance | Arms Control Association. May 2012.
Accessed December 29, 2016.
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/6partytalks
4. "Joint Statement of North and South." Le Monde diplomatique. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/dossiers/coree/A/1905
5. "Kim Il-Sung." Encyclopædia Britannica. January 13, 2014. Accessed December 29, 2016.
https://global.britannica.com/biography/Kim-Il-Sung
6. "Kim Jong-nam death: poison dose so high he died in '15 to 20 minutes'" The Guardian. February
26, 2017. Accessed February 26, 2017.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/26/kim-jong-nam-death-poison-dose-so-high-hedied-in-15-to-20-minute
7. "Korean War." History.com. 2009. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.history.com/topics/korean-war
8. "Korean War." Saylor Academy. Accessed December 6, 2016.
https://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Korean-War.pdf
9. "Korean War Armistice Agreement." Council on Foreign Relations. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.cfr.org/north-korea/korean-war-armistice-agreement/p22481
10. "North Korea: Beyond the Six-Party Talks." International Crisis Group. June 16, 2015. Accessed
December 06, 2016.
https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/north-east-asia/korean-peninsula/north-korea-beyond-six-partytalks
11. "North Korea claims success in fifth nuclear test." BBC News. September 09, 2016. Accessed
December 29, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37314927
12. "North Korea Profile - Timeline." BBC News. September 09, 2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-15278612
13. "Replacing the Armistice With A Peace Treaty in Korea", NAPSNet Policy Forum, March 26, 2013.
http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-policy-forum/replacing-the-armistice-with-a-peace-treaty-inkorea/
61
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
14. "SCAP General Order no. 1." SCAP General Order no. 1. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.taiwandocuments.org/surrender05.htm
15. "South Korea." South Korea | Countries | NTI. April 2016. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.nti.org/learn/countries/south-korea/
16. "Syngman Rhee." Encyclopedia of World Biography. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/people/history/korean-history-biographies/syngman-rhee
17. "The Korean War." Australian Involvement In The Korean War. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://rslnsw.org.au/commemoration/heritage/the-korean-war.
18. "The Truman Doctrine, 1947." U.S. Department of State. Accessed February 26, 2017.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/truman-doctrine
19. “Timeline of tensions between North and South Korea." ABC News. August 21, 2015. Accessed
December 29, 2016.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-21/timeline-of-tensions-between-north-and-southkorea/6715732
20. "United Nations Security Council Resolution 85." United Nations. Accessed February 26, 2017.
http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S%2FRES%2F85%281950%29
21. "Weapons of Mass Destruction." FBI. January 27, 2017. Accessed February 26, 2017.
https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/wmd
22. Arrouas, Michelle. "Kim Jong Un: The Situation on the Korean Peninsula Is 'Very Grave'" Time.
April 2, 2014. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://time.com/46349/north-korea-south-korea-kim-jong-un-military-drills/
23. Branigan, Tania, and Ewen MacAskill. "North Korea: a deadly attack, a counter-strike – now
Koreans hold their breath." The Guardian. November 23, 2010. Accessed December 29, 2016.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/23/north-south-korea-crisis-conflict
24. Cavendish, Richard. "Troop Withdrawals from Korea." History Today, August 2004. "Intense
mutual suspicion kept both sides fully armed".
25. Choe, Sang-Hyun. "South Korea Accuses the North After Land Mines Maim Two Soldier in DMZ."
Nytimes.com. August 10, 2015. Accessed December 6, 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/11/world/asia/north-korea-placed-mines-that-maimed-2-southkorean-soldiers-at-dmz-seoul-says.html?_r=0
26. Davenport, Kelsey. "Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy." Fact
Sheets and Briefs. Accessed December 06, 2016
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron
27. Elich, Gregory. "The Struggle for a Korean Peace Treaty." Www.counterpunch.org. August 19,
2013. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/19/the-struggle-for-a-korean-peace-treaty/
62
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
28. Forsythe, Michael. "North Korea’s Nuclear Blasts Keep Getting Stronger." The New York Times.
September 10, 2016. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-weapons-tests.html?_r=0
29. Gauthier, Brandon K. "When NK Commandos Tried To Assassinate South Korea’s President." NK
News - North Korea News. January 21, 2013. Accessed December 29, 2016.
https://www.nknews.org/2013/01/when-nk-commandos-tried-to-assassinate-south-koreaspresident/
30. Haberman, Clyde. "Bomb Kills 19, Including 6 Key Koreans." New York Times, October 10, 1983.
Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/10/10/world/bomb-kills-19-including-6-key-koreans.html
31. Hickey, Michael. "The Korean War: An Overview." BBC History. March 21, 2011. Accessed
December 6, 2016.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/korea_hickey_01.shtml
32. Huntley, Wade L. "North Korea & the NPT - FPIF." Foreign Policy In Focus. October 02, 2005.
Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://fpif.org/north_korea_the_npt/
33. Kane, Chen, Stephanie C. Lieggi, and Miles A. Pomper. "Arms Control Today." Time for
Leadership: South Korea and Nuclear Nonproliferation | Arms Control Association. Accessed
December 29, 2016.
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2011_03/SouthKorea
34. Kim, Hye-Eun, Greg Chaffin, and Peter Certo. "The Cheonan Incident: Skepticism Abounds - FPIF."
Foreign Policy In Focus. November 16, 2010. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://fpif.org/the_cheonan_incident_skepticism_abounds/
35. Kim, Jack, and Ben Blanchard. "Pressure Grows on China to Rein in North Korea; South Launches
Propaganda Barrage." Reuters. January 08, 2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-kerry-idUSKBN0UL2DE20160108
36. Kirgis, Frederic L. "NORTH KOREA'S WITHDRAWAL FROM THE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION
TREATY." Asil.org/insights. January 24, 2003. Accessed December 6, 2016.
https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/8/issue/2/north-koreas-withdrawal-nuclear-nonproliferationtreaty
37. Lou, Theresa. "Is China Finally Fed Up With Kim Jong-un's North Korea?" The Diplomat. March
10, 2016. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/is-china-finally-fed-up-with-kim-jong-uns-north-korea/
38. Mullen, Jethro. "North Korea Vows to End Nonaggression Pacts after UN Vote." CNN. March 9,
2013. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/08/world/asia/north-korea-sanctions/
39. News, BBC. "North Korean Artillery Hits South Korean Island." BBC News. November 23, 2010.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-11818005
63
RVMUN 2017
United Nations Security Council Study Guide
40. News, BBC. "North Korea Nuclear Tests: What Did They Achieve?" BBC News. April 22, 2016.
Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-17823706
41. News, BBC. "The Korean War Armistice." BBC News. 2015. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://www.bbc.com/news/10165796
42. Panda, Ankit. "South Korea Holds Largest-Ever Live-Fire Artillery Drills." The Diplomat. August 19,
2016. Accessed December 06, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/08/south-korea-holds-largest-ever-live-fire-artillery-drills/
43. Shen, Zhihua. Mao, Stalin and the Korean War: Trilateral Communist Relations in the 1950s (Cold
War History). Translated by Neil Silver. 1st ed. Vol. 1. New York: Routledge.
44. Stueck, William Whitney. The Korean War: an international history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1995. Page 212
45. Symonds, Peter. "Tensions Rise in Korean Peninsula: "The Armistice Agreement has been
Nullified." Global Research. March 12, 2013. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/tensions-rise-on-korean-peninsula-the-armistice-agreement-hasbeen-nullified/5326326
46. Szeczepanski, Kallie. "How Korea Ended Up Split into North Korea and South Korea." About.com
Education. February 29, 2016. Accessed December 29, 2016.
http://asianhistory.about.com/od/northkorea/f/Split-North-And-South-Korea.htm
47. Toloraya Georgy. "Russia's North Korea Conundrum." The Diplomat. March 17, 2016. Accessed
December 29, 2016.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/russias-north-korea-conundrum/.
64