UNAR 2016

Special Political TOPIC OVERVIEW

Extrajudicial Actions in Counterterrorism Efforts Diplomatic Asylum Management of Transboundary Aquifers in Africa Disputes in the Spratly Islands

COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION This committee will be run Harvard Style, meaning delegates should not write resolutions before the conference; doing so will result in disqualification from award contention. Also, a minimum of one position paper must be written for the delegate to be considered for any award. Position papers with bullet points or numbered lists of solutions will not be accepted. They can either be brought to committee as a hard copy to be handed in on the first day to the chairs or emailed before the conference. Keep in mind thorough research provides a strong basis for debate and allows committee to run smoothly and efficiently. The Special Political and Decolonization Committee deals with a wide range of topics. Regardless of the topic being discussed, delegates must represent the views of their assigned country and should therefore promote the best interests of that nation. Cooperation between delegates is imperative to effectively solve the following world issues!

CHAIRS

Maryam Zafar

✉

[email protected]

Hi! My name is Maryam Zafar and I will be one of your chairs of SpecPol. This will be my third year in Model UN and my second time chairing. I’m a junior at Pittsford Mendon High School, where I partake in many activities, including tennis, student council, and mock trial. In my free time I love to help teach tennis, figure skate, and watch Netflix. I am looking forward to an active, engaging committee! Please don’t hesitate to email myself or Will with any questions you may have.

Will Riedlinger

✉

[email protected]

Ahoy! I am Will Riedlinger, I enjoy knitting, Alexander Pope’s poetry, and racquetball. I will be your chair, along with Maryam, for the Special Political Committee.This is my second time chairing and my fourth year in MUN, I am a Senior at Pittsford Sutherland High School. I hope for great debate and world-changing resolutions, as well as being multifaceted and all-encompassing. Delegates, I ask from you two things only: please do research on your countries, and use your position papers to lay out not just positions, but possible solutions (remember, no pre-written resolutions, just ideas).

Extrajudicial Actions in Counterterrorism Efforts Extrajudicial killing refers to the extermination of individuals without the action of a government’s court or the permission of its authorities. These actions have been widespread for a long period of time. However, an upsurge of these actions has occurred as warfare mechanisms have advanced to become stealthier and increasingly fatal. Specifically, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, more commonly known as drones, has grown prominent in the pursuit of targets in a variety of countries from Yemen to Somalia. New technologies have figuratively and literally changed the name of the game. The lines between laws of war, human rights laws, and laws for inter-state force have been blurred. Another facet of this discussion is the question of whether the targets of extrajudicial killings deserve a trial on the international scale. Furthermore, is there a certain threshold of information required before the neutralization of a potential terror suspect is allowed? Another part of extrajudicial actions include loopholes that allow for countries to circumvent their laws, including extrajudicial transfer. In counterterrorism efforts, the use of drones for extrajudicial killings has killed more than 400 civilians out of the approximate 4,000 people killed. These deaths illuminate the need for accountability. However, even these numbers are hazy because of the disputed methods of reporting. Since no government formally tabulates the numbers of civilian and militant deaths via drones, the gaps in reporting are filled by public media outlets. Many countries view this as an irresponsible method, while many others view it as a necessity to fight terrorism. Past UN Resolutions have discussed the need for transparency and accountability for countries using drones. However, this has been opposed by many developed countries in their counterterrorism efforts post 9/11 and with the rise of Da’esh (commonly known as ISIS). Specifically in the discussion by the UNHRC in 2014, seven developed countries rejected a proposal for reforms. An additional fourteen countries abstained. Former actions are outdated and inconclusive. Extrajudicial actions have increased exponentially since 2014, and this discussion must be held to more scrutiny. As a body representing all human beings, the United Nations must address this issue, and prevent the loss of innocent human lives.

Questions

• How can countries be encouraged to increase transparency and accountability for drones? Should victims of misfired drones be compensated, and if yes, how? • Should drone use, as well as other extrajudicial actions, be regulated or restricted by the committee? Are these forms of extrajudicial actions legally and ethically responsible actions in the counterterrorism efforts?

Sources

• EIRS: Can the Use of Torture in the War on Terror Be Justified? • CQ Researcher: Torture • Human Rights Watch: Intelligence Cooperation with Countries that Torture

Transbody Aquifers in Africa Aquifers are underground reserves of water that are used by most nations to provide irrigation water, drinking water, and water for industrial purposes. Some of these aquifers are so large that they cross borders between countries. The question posed is: what laws must exist to regulate the use of these aquifers, so they are used sustainably and to prevent any violence or political (or other) turmoil? Special aquifers in Africa are especially important because water is a very scarce resource in Africa and also because of the political and tribal tangle of boundaries in some areas. 75% of the water in Morocco and 89% of the water in South Africa comes from aquifers, and 96% of all the freshwater on Earth is in underground aquifers, so these hydrologic phenomena are crucial to humanity. Because water is such a valuable resource, and will become more so in the future, wars could be fought over it; it is thus a pertinent issue to global wellbeing. Africa is composed of 54 sovereign nations, as well as hundreds of independent tribes that are dissatisfied with political borders drawn haphazardly over their own territorial boundaries. This complicates the matter, but the UN exists to solve complex issues. •

Questions

What authority can the UN use to forced jurisdiction over peoples affected by any new laws created in committee? How will national sovereignty be preserved? • What can be done to protect the environment, the rights of the nations’ people, and diplomatic relations between concerned nations?

Sources

• UN Report on Transboundary Aquifers • Reuters: Africa’s Underground Sea • International Water Law: Aquifer Agreements

Diplomatic Asylum The question of diplomatic asylum has become increasingly relevant in recent years. Whistleblowers, diplomatic missionaries, and political prisoners all require diplomatic asylum under different conditions. It is commonly agreed upon that diplomatic asylum can only be granted to those whose lives are endangered, or if the nation in question is in chaos. Diplomatic asylum is the extraterritorial asylum, or guarantee of inviolability and protection, given to an individual by a state in a consulate, embassy, or state. No guidelines concerning asylum exist in current international legislature. It is mentioned by the International Court of Justice that the “sovereignty of the receiving state” must issue the asylum, which also was agreed upon by the Organization of American States. However, this doesn’t answer the questions that arise in real cases. Issues with diplomatic asylum arise in extraterritorial asylum and impact both countries involved--the one seeking the individual and the one offering asylum. Currently, tenuous international law dictates that diplomatic asylum cannot be granted to those being indicted for a crime. However, international regulations regarding this concept end there. There is an absence of legislature addressing what diplomatic asylum truly denotes, and to what extent nations must respect it. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations enforces the inviolability of embassies. This is essentially what allows for the concept of diplomatic asylum in most nations, excluding Latin American nations, where diplomatic asylum is a widely-accepted concept. However, when a subject is holed up in an embassy in a foreign land, many questions arise about the transport of the subject in question. Additional complications include the concept of diplomatic immunity and the use of diplomatic bags to transport humans. The deficiency in international law regarding asylum has led to instances like the Assange Incident, where lack of both precedent and law produced tangled, convoluted responses by nations. This gap in legislature must be filled before irreparable diplomatic damage occurs.

Questions

• Should the United Nations regulate diplomatic asylum? Should states be required to recognize asylum when it is granted to wanted individuals? • Is the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations outdated with respect to asylum? • Who should asylum be limited to? Should regulations involving diplomatic immunity also be changed to reflect modern needs?

Sources • ASIL: Assange and the Law • Vienna Declaration • Britannica: Definition of Asylum

Disputes in the Spratly Islands Six nations (PRC, ROC, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, and Philippines) are all competing for the territory of the Spratly Islands. The territory is known by many different names in at least six different languages, and even holds different names in English; Spratly Island is sometimes called Storm Island. These islands and surrounding water and ocean features are located in the South China Sea, which has long been a contentious body of water. These islands are significant economic centers because they are located on heavily trafficked ocean trade routes. It’s quite likely that something a consumer has purchased may have passed through the Spratly Islands. In 2014, China (PRC) began dredging activities in the waters around the islands. This drew attention from around the world. Any nation who would control this area would also control much of the water around the islands. This poses a great risk to the other nations vying for control of this small but expensive piece of land. What the Special Political Committee must do is figure out how to control these islands, or, more practically, how to manage the nations trying to take it over. National sovereignty remains a concern, and China’s power from its seat in the Security Council also poses a challenge but ensuring fair international trade remains the primary goal.

• • •

Questions

What can be done to prevent malicious activity in the region? What action can be taken to reduce tension in the area? What actions can the UN take in the future to ensure sustainable, fair trade?

Sources • The Guardian: Vietnamese Outcry after Chinese Plane Lands in Spratly Islands • BBC: Past Problems in the South China Sea • Britannica: The Spratly Islands