Berlin Model United Nations

BERMUN - ICJ - YA - Press - Forum

Security Council

We, Charlotte von Streit and Leah Wiedenmann from the John F. Kennedy School in Berlin, will have the honor of serving as your chairs for this year’s Security Council. In order to aid you in preparing for the conference, we would like to briefly elaborate on this year’s topics and provide you with several research suggestions.

Please research both topics thoroughly so that you will be able to actively participate in the debates. This will make the conference a better experience for all. Seeing as we are the Security Council and thus a very small group, every delegate is obliged to write a draft resolution for EACH topic. This means that each resolution will include at least five perambulatory clauses and eight operative clauses. This will give us the most productive, thorough, and interesting debate possible. We speak from experience when we say that a debate is only fun when you genuinely take part and are prepared.

Since we have both attended numerous MUN conferences, we understand the great commitment and hard work which is required. Please do not hesitate to send us an e-mail if you are having trouble or if you have any questions (sc[at]bermun.de). Another great place to exchange information, ask questions, and start debating is our BERMUN forum. Not only does this forum include a special section for Security Council discussion, but it also helps you meet your co-delegates before the actual conference. Below, you will find a brief summary of our topics and a list of links that should help you jump right into your research for November.

Points to consider:

How can current initiatives be improved?
What are some ideas that you have that have not been tried yet?
While we need to be realistic about what can be done, BERMUN does not deal with monetary issues.
You cannot single out individual Member States in your resolutions, meaning you can not say: Urges Burkina Faso to give females land ownership rights.

Good Luck with you research!

See you in November,
Leah Wiedenmann & Charlotte von Streit
Presidents of the Security Council

Reviewing the Application of Economic Sanctions as an effective means to enforce United Nations Resolutions

Today, economic sanctions are a major tool of international governance, which are used to achieve particular political objectives. However, it was not until the post-Cold War era that economic sanctions became a common part of the Security Council agenda. According to the United Nations Charter, Article 16, the Security Council is entitled to impose economic sanctions in reaction to “threats of aggression” and “breaches of peace” in the global community. Between 1945 and 1990, the Security Council approved economic sanctions on only two occasions. In contrast, since 1990, the Security Council has imposed sanctions on 11 nations, including former Yugoslavia, Haiti, Somalia, Libya, Liberia, and several other nations. The increased use of economic sanctions shows that the United Nations Security Council is utilizing this powerful implement perhaps too frequently. By looking at economic sanctions in more detail it becomes apparent that the application of economic sanctions must be reviewed and questioned in its effectiveness. The former US President Woodrow Wilson stated in 1919: “A nation that is boycotted is a nation that is in sight of surrender. Apply this economic, peaceful, silent, deadly remedy and there will be no need for force. It is a terrible remedy. It does not cost life outside the nation boycotted, but it brings a pressure upon the nation which, in my judgement, no modern nation could resist.” Imposing sanctions used to be seen as a humane alternative to warfare; however, many experts now criticize the ethical and legal ambiguity of sanctions.

Economic sanctions are penalties imposed by one or more countries on another for a variety of reasons. These usually entail tariffs, import duties, trade barriers, and import and export quotas. Essentially, economic sanctions are attempts to alter a nation’s behavior by imposing economic penalties. The Security Council uses sanctions to apply pressure on a state or entity (for example the Taliban or Al-Qaeda organization) in order to maintain or restore peace and security in the world. The advantage of economic sanctions is that they do not involve direct violence, however, a large number of member nations and non governmental humanitarian organizations have uttered concerns about the possible adverse impact of economic sanctions on the least privileged parts of the population. Critics also believe that sanctions can have a very negative impact on the economy of third world countries, whereas developed nations may remain unaffected.

Especially in late historical examples, civilians of nations imposed by sanctions have strongly suffered due to a lack of resources, products, and health care products. In history, the most famous economic sanction was imposed by the United States of America on Cuba, which has been upheld since 1960. As stated by former US President Woodrow Wilson, economic sanctions seem to be peaceful and non-violent. Many critics have fallen into an uproar, especially in the past decade on account of the immense negative impact that economic sanctions have had and are still having on the civilians. A country may fall into civil tumult due to economic pressure one nation may impose on another. Although some nations impede their actions in response to the poor condition of their people, other governments ignorantly disregard the humanitarian state of their nation.

Research Links

The Question of Palestine

The Question of Palestine ascended to an international issue just after the first world war and has been a concern to the world community ever since. The conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is based on the question who the righteous land-holder of the territory that used to be Palestine in the former days is. Many problems have arisen out of the conflict so that the solving of the question has become a difficult task for the world community. Some of them include the international lawful status and the boarder of the Palestinian territory, the prospective relations of the nations including possible safety guaranties, Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territory, the rule over Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, resource management. Because Israelis and Palestinians see themselves as the people in charge, the problem is hard to be solved with an acceptable solution for both sides.

The UN dealt with the Question of Palestine and all the evolved problems numerous times and handed it over to the Security Council which passed several resolutions. Israel, as a member of the UN, is bound to "agree, accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council".

The United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) was established in 1974 following the agreed disengagement of the Israeli and Syrian forces on the Golan. UNDOF continues to supervise the implementation of the agreement and maintain ceasefire. On June 23, 2009 the Security Council decided to extend the mandate of the mission until 31st December 2009 (S/RES/1875)
Resolution 242 (November 22, 1967) tries to terminate all sorts of claims and aims to gain acknowledgement of sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area. The resolution calls for cooperation from both sides the Israeli government as well as the other Arab states and therefore is often interpreted as the resolution calling for peace in the Middle east conflict.
Several resolutions throughout the years “deplore Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.”

The world community has tried to give possible solutions which have so far been rejected. While writing your resolution you should keep in mind concerns to both parties which have to be included and solved in a way that is acceptable for both sides like boarders of the state(s), Israeli settlements, Palestine refugees, security concerns, the state of Jerusalem, water as a resource, relations between the two states, Anti-Semitic incitements, the Israeli West Bank barrier and places of worship.

One-state solution,
Combines the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and Israel in one single state with citizenship and equal rights for all inhabitants of all three territories, regardless of ethnicity or religion.
Two-state solution
Divides the former mandate territory into one Jewish and one Arab state, the new Palestine. The question of borders for the states remains as boarders of the partition plan are not the recent boarders of Israel.
Three-state solution
The three-state solution, or Egyptian-Jordanian solution, is an approach to peace through giving away control of the West Bank to Jordan and of the Gaza Strip to Egypt.

Research Links

News:

2009-07-05: Form Downloads

Form II

2009-06-17:

2009-06-01: Form Downloads

Youth Assembly Application Form 2009

2009-05-21: Form Downloads