UN Security Council

Background Guide Version 1 – 21/10/2019

Letter from The Executive Board

Respected delegates of the Security Council,

It gives us immense pleasure to welcome you all to the Scindia School Model United Nations a place where young minds interact and think of the small little ways to change the world.

The guide has been prepared to give you an idea of the functioning of the council as well as the very pertinent agendas that the council shall deal with. But this guide is merely a facilitator to help you kick start your research and you, as delegates must feel free to go beyond the scope of the guide. The purpose of this guide is only to provide you initial assistance to initiate your research.

Diplomacy is the first lesson that MUNs offer and thus, you as delegates are expected to be extremely courteous towards your fellow delegates as well as teachers and members of the Executive Board. As delegates you are expected to promote the interests of your nation but at the same point respect the differences of opinion to achieve a solution in accord and harmony.

Logic and foreign policy combined with in-depth research and knowledge are necessary to be a successful delegate. We wish that you will not be intimidated by your competitors. It’s great to win an award but its better if you don’t win but take back lessons with you which help you for a lifetime. For this one conference, let us all make winning incidental but learning purposeful. Let’s dedicate the three days of this conference to develop passion for this activity.

We now leave you with our best wishes and I hope that at the end of this three-day venture we will all emerge a little wiser. Please feel free to contact us, we will be more than happy to solve your queries.

Regards, Aman Kotecha President 9555250358

Table of Contents

How to Research...... 4

About UN Security Council...... 5 Proof/Evidence in Council...... 7

Documents, Treaties, Conventions etc. to Understand ...... 10 About the Conflict ...... 14 Key Terms...... 16

Validity of Referendum ...... 18 Committee Objective ...... 22

How to Research?

Following is a suggested pattern for researching (if required):

• Researching and understanding the United Nations and the Committee/ Council being simulated – Its Mandate, including understanding historical work done on the agenda.

• Research on the allotted country. Understanding its polity, economy, culture, and history etc. – especially those relevant to the agenda at hand.

• Comprehending the Foreign Policy of the allotted country. It includes understanding the ideology and principles adopted by the country on the agenda. It further includes studying past actions taken by the country on the agenda and other related issues –specifically analysing their causes and consequences.

• Reading the background guide thoroughly.

• Researching further upon the agenda using the footnotes and links given in the guide and from other sources such as academic papers, institutional reports, national reports, news articles, blogs etc.

• Understanding policies adopted by different blocs of countries (example: NATO, EU etc.) and major countries involved in the agenda. Including their position, ideology and adopted past actions.

• Characterizing the agenda into sub-topics and preparing speeches and statements on them. It is the same as preparing topics for the moderated caucuses and their content.

• Preparing a list of possible solutions and actions the UNSC can adopt on the issue as per your country’s policies.

• Assemble proof/evidence for any important piece of information/allegation you are going to use in committee

• Keeping your research updated using various news sources, especially news websites given in the proof/evidence section.

NOTE: This is not by any means an exhaustive list. It is only indicative of what all can be done by delegates to refine their research.

About UN Security Council

Under the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It has 15 Members, and each Member has one vote. Under the Charter, all Member States are obligated to comply with Council decisions. The Security Council takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In some cases, the Security Council can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security.

The Security Council also recommends to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and the admission of new Members to the United Nations. And, together with the General Assembly, it elects the judges of the International Court of Justice.

You are also advised to look into the practice of the UN Security Council and how the Charter affects the

same. This will be highly informative as to the inner workings of the SC and hence, debate on it.1 2 3

Also note, that this session of the UN Security Council will be a regular session. By a regular session we simply mean two things: 1. We are simulating a meeting which has been called within the regular schedule of Security Council

to discuss a matter of utmost urgency and concerning international peace and security. 4 2. Most Rules of Procedures remain the same, however certain deviations in the same may be notified by the President in order to ensure smooth functioning. Delegates shall have the right to seek Points of Enquiry on the ROP, but will not be allowed to raise Points of Order on the same as these “deviations”, if any, are done only to aid debate, and the President has the powers under

the SC Procedure Guidelines to do the same.5

1 http://www.un.org/en/sc/repertoire/actions.shtml

2 http://www.un.org/en/sc/

3 The Charter of the United Nation

4 (Please refer to Rule 1-3 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council)

Also, please remember that a regular session does not mean that the delegates will be given a crisis

situation eventually. The delegates are requested not to ask the Executive Board for the same.

Also, we request delegates not to questions the technicality and validity of the meeting itself, it is very well technical and valid under the UN Charter. Secondly, we request you not to utilize too much time discussing the ROP in case you feel that it is not the ROP you know about! The President’s decision on all matters relating to the Rules of Procedure shall be final. Furthermore, the President will, at the start of the meeting, convey to all delegates the relevant deviations in the ROP that they must take note of for this meeting.

Proof/Evidence in Council

Evidence or proof is from the following sources will be accepted as credible in the committee:

1. News Sources

a. REUTERS – Any Reuters’ article which clearly makes mention of the fact stated or is in contradiction of the fact being stated by another delegate in council can be used to

substantiate arguments in the committee.6

b. State operated News Agencies – These reports can be used in the support of or against the State that owns the News Agency. These reports, if credible or substantial enough, can be used in support of or against any country as such but in that situation, they can be denied by any other country in the council. Some examples are

i. RIA Novosti (Russia)7

ii. IRNA (Iran)8

iii. Xinhua News Agency and CCTV (P.R. China)9

6 http://www.reuters.com/

7http://en.rian.ru/

8 http://www.irna.ir/ENIndex.htm

9http://cctvnews.cntv.cn/

2. Government Reports: These reports can be used in a similar way as the State Operated News Agencies reports and can, in all circumstances, be denied by another country. However, a nuance is that a report that is being denied by a certain country can still be accepted by the Executive Board as credible information. Some examples are,

a. Government Websites like the State Department of the United States of America 10 or

the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation11

i. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of various nations like India12 or People’s Republic

of China 13.

ii. Permanent Representatives to the United Nations Reports14

iii. Multilateral Organizations like the NATO15, ASEAN16,

OPEC17 , etc.

3. Reports: All UN Reports are considered are credible information or evidence for the Executive Board of the UNGA – 1 (DISEC).

a. UN Bodies like the UNSC18 or UNGA19

b. UN Affiliated bodies like the International Atomic Energy Agency20,

World Bank21 , International Monetary Fund22, International

Committee of the Red Cross23

c. Treaty Based Bodies like the A n t a r c t i c Treaty System24, the

International Criminal Court25 ______

10 http://www.state.gov/index.h tm ; 11 http://www.eng.mil.ru/en/in dex.h tm; 12http://www.mea.gov.in/;

13 http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/ ; 14 http://www.un.org/en/members/ (Click on any country to get the website of its Permanent Representative’s Office) ; 15 http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/in dex.h tm ; 16 http://www.aseansec.org/ 17http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/ ; 18 http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/ ; 19 http://www.un.org/en/ga/ ;

20 http://www.iaea.org/ ; 21http://www.worldbank.org/ ;

22http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm ;

23http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp ; 24http://www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm

NOTE: Under no circumstances will sources like Wikipedia26, Amnesty International27, Human Rights

Watch28 or newspapers like the Guardian29, Times of India30etc. be accepted as PROOF/EVIDENCE. But they can be used for better understanding of any issue or even be brought up in debate if the information given in such sources is in line with the beliefs of a Government.

Documents, Treaties, Conventions etc. To Understand

Following is the list of documents that need to be perused by all delegates before they come to the council. Please understand that you need to know the following aspects regarding each of the mentioned documents:

• The reason why this document exists (for e.g. the Geneva Conventions were enacted to lay down the rules of war and for the treatment of all parties concerned in the wars.)

• The nature of the document and the force it carries, i.e. whether it is a treaty, a convention, a doctrine, or a universally accepted custom or norm.

• The areas where the document can be applied or has jurisdiction on (for e.g. international humanitarian law applies only to situations of armed conflict, whereas the human rights laws applies at all times of war and peace alike.)

• The contents of the document at hand. You need not memorize any articles or rules of any convention or treaty, but should know what the document has to say in various situations that may arise in the council.

The delegates must have the understanding of the following:

1. UN Charter

The Charter of the United Nations was signed on 26 June 1945 at San Francisco by the nations represented at the United Nations Conference on International Organization, most of them earlier allies in the Second World War. The allies began being referred to as the 'United Nations' towards the end of that war. The Charter came into force on October 24 1945. Since that time all members joining have had to declare themselves bound by both documents - though practice has demonstrated on too many occasions that that declaration has not been taken too seriously.

Once again, a written constitution is one thing, actual behaviour is another.31 32

31http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/

32http://research.un.org/en/docs/charter

2. Geneva Conventions

The Geneva Conventions comprise four treaties, and three additional protocols, that establish the standards of international law for the humanitarian treatment of war. The singular term Geneva Convention usually denotes the agreements of 1949, negotiated in the aftermath of the Second World War (1939–45), which updated the terms of the first three treaties (1864, 1906, 1929), and added a fourth treaty. The Geneva Conventions extensively defined the basic, wartime rights of prisoners (civil and military); established protections for the wounded; and established protections for the civilians in and around a war-zone. Moreover, the Geneva Convention also defines the rights and protections afforded to non-combatants, yet, because the Geneva Conventions are about people in war, the articles do not address warfare proper — the use of weapons of war — which is the subject of the Hague Conventions (First Hague Conference, 1 8 9 9 ; S e c o n d H a g u e C o n f e r e n c e 1 9 0 7 ) , a n d t h e b i o – chemical warfare Geneva Protocol (Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases,

and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, 1925). 33 34

3. Responsibility to Protect

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P or R to P) is an emerging norm that sovereignty is not a right, but that states must protect their populations from mass atrocity crimes—namely genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing. The R2P has three foundation "pillars":

i. A state has a responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing.

ii. The international community has a responsibility to assist the state to fulfil its primary responsibility.

33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

34https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions

iii. If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens from the four above mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.

While R2P is a norm and not a law, it is firmly grounded in international law, especially the laws relating to sovereignty, peace and security, human rights and armed conflict. R2P provides a framework for using tools that already exist, i.e. mediation, early warning mechanisms, economic sanctioning, and chapter VII powers, to prevent mass atrocities. Civil society organizations, states, regional organizations, and international institutions all have a role to play in the R2P process. The authority to employ the last resort and intervene militarily rests solely with United Nations Security Council.

Criticisms of the R2P include a "moral outrage and hysteria [that] often serve as a pretext for ‘interventions by the civilised world’ or 'the international community' and for ‘humanitarian interventions’, which often conceal the true strategic motives, and it thus becomes another name for proxy wars.”

Research Links: -

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_to_protect

• h t t p : / / e n . w i k i p e d i a . o r g / w i k i / International_Commission_on_Intervention_and_State_Sovereignty

• http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf

• http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/2010_a64864.pdf

• http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/2011_a65877.pdf • http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/unsg-report_timely-and- decisive- response.pdf

• http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/n1338693.pdf

Any other treaty or convention or custom that has relevance to the theme of armed conflict, terrorism

and/or external aggression must also be perused by the delegates in the same manner as described above.

4. Customary International Law / Customary International Humanitarian Law

Customary international law consists of rules that come from "a general practice accepted as law" and exist independent of treaty law. Customary IHL is of crucial importance in today’s armed conflicts because it fills gaps left by treaty law and so strengthens the protection offered to victims.

Research Links: -

a. https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/ customary-law

b. https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/Home

c. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/customary_international_law

5. The concept of ‘jus cogens’ or peremptory norms

6. And so on…

Please note: This is not an exhaustive list! There are many more sources that you may ﬁnd very useful as a delegate within committee proceedings. Feel free to research on them and use them as part of your arguments in the committee.

About the Conflict

In fall 2013, a series of popular protests erupted in Kyiv’s central square, the Maidan, in response to the Ukrainian president’s decision not to sign the Association Agreement with the European Union (EU) under its Eastern Partnership program. Eventually this protest movement, and the government response, turned violent, resulting in the ousting of then–Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych. A pro-Western coalition of political forces took control in the capital, organizing an interim government, while many of the ruling elites fled the country to Russia. The consequence was a sudden loss of influence for Russia in one of its most important neighbours, one that its leadership likely viewed as a major geopolitical defeat for Moscow. Rather than wait for the political situation in Ukraine to stabilize, Russian leaders sought to re- exert Moscow’s influence over Ukraine and retain the ability to control the country’s strategic orientation. The Russian response took shape in the form of two separate and concurrent military operations. First, Moscow chose to invade and annex Crimea in late February through early March 2014. At the same time, Russia fomented a political protest movement that quickly transformed into a violent insurgency in Eastern Ukraine between February and May of that year. Today, more questions than answers remain about what happened and what lessons should be drawn from Russian actions: Was Russia successful? If so, what did it seek to accomplish? Is it possible to infer military and political objectives from the operations? Are these reproducible events—a possible model of operations—or were the circumstances and conditions unique? Would Russian leadership consider them to be successful? What can we glean for the potential desire of Moscow to replicate a similar course of events elsewhere? Did the combat, social- mobilization, and information-warfare aspects of these operations appear planned or improvised? What lessons about Russia’s strategy and doctrine can we take away from the Ukrainian experience? This report seeks to address these questions by assessing the two campaigns waged by Russia in Ukraine (Figure 1.1), including its covert and conventional operations. Chapter Two examines the balance of Ukrainian and Russian forces before the conflict, the sequence of events during the invasion and annexation of Crimea, along with the successes and shortcomings of the operation. In Chapter Three, the report charts the course of conflict in Eastern Ukraine and its phases of escalation from political warfare to a hybrid approach and the eventual outbreak of

a conventional war between Russia and Ukraine by summer 2014. These critical months are not only less understood than later periods of the war but offer important insights into Russian approaches and possible objectives in the conflict.

Figure 1.1 Map of Ukraine

Key Terms Annexation

According to Hofmann Rainer, annexation is the political transition of a territory from the control of one country to another. This word can also be used to describe incorporation of an unclaimed area into a state’s sovereignty. Under International Law, annexation is considered the forcible transition of one country’s land by another country or a legal process by which a state acquires territory.

Verkhovna Rada

Verkhovna Rada in Ukrainian translates to Supreme Council and is the Ukrainian Parliament. It is located in Kiev, Ukraine’s capitol city, and is composed of 450 deputies presided by the Chairman. The main functions of the Verkhovna Rada are legislative. It appoints the Ukrainian Prime Minister, adopts laws, amends the Constitution of Ukraine, and most importantly declares war and peace among others. Supreme Council Officially named the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the Supreme Council was Crimea’s legislative body prior to the 2014 annexation by Russia.

Referendum

According to the Cambridge Dictionary, the widely accepted definition of a referendum is a direct vote in which the citizens of a country or a state are asked to give their opinion or decide on a topic that concerns an important political or social question on a national level. It is important to mention at this point that referendum need to be conducted in line with the democratic principles of fair vote, representation and free choice to be considered valid.

Euromaidan

Euromaidan refers to the wave of demonstrations and generally the civil unrest in the Ukrainian territory

that began in October/November 2013. The protests were triggered by the government’s last-minute decision to withdraw from an Association Agreement with the EU, and fuelled further by the notions of government corruption and power abuse. The protests escalated through to February 2014, resulting in the ousting of the President, Viktor Yanukovych. Crisis is considered to be a period of uncertainty during which decisive changes might be impending. As far the Crimean crisis is concerned, the crisis isn’t restricted just to the time that elapsed between Yanukovych’s ousting and the annexation of Crimea. Instead, it runs through to today, taking into account the tension between the parties involved, as well as the state of Crimea today.

Governorate

According to the Oxford Dictionary the term “Governorate” is used to describe an administrative division of a country, that is ruled by a governor.

Oblast

The word “Oblast” is used to define the governorates of the region of Russia and the former Soviet Union. New Union Treaty the Union treaty, also known as the New Union Treaty, was the attempt by the Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev of renegotiation of the terms of the initial treaty of 1922 regarding the establishment of the USSR.

Crimean Tatars

Tatars are considered to be a Turkic ethnic group. They inhabited the Crimean Peninsula during a large period of time, namely from the 13th to the 17th century. They formed the largest ethnic population of the region until 1944 when their removal was ordered by the USSR State Defence Committee. In 1989, they were allowed to return to the Crimean Peninsula and nowadays approximately 12% of Crimean population is comprised by them.

______

Timeline of Events35 36

35https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Timeline_of_the_annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

36https://www.bbc.com/n ews/wor ld-m iddle-east-26248275

Validity of the Referendum

Choices:

There were two choices to choose from on the ballot. Voters were able to choose only one of these. The choices reflected the following stances:

Choice 1: Do you support the reunification of Crimea with Russia with all the rights of the federal subject of the Russian Federation? Choice 2: Do you support the restoration of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea in 1992 and the status of the Crimea as part of Ukraine?

The reactions of many nations to the referendum—particularly of Western-nations —were addressing the matter of Crimean secession from Ukraine, whereas the Crimean referendum itself was not about secession from Ukraine, but took Crimea's secession from Ukraine to already be de facto following its government's declaration. Crimea's March 16 referendum occurred following the March 11 declaration of Crimea's independence from Ukraine made by Crimea's parliament, which was made following a controversial parliamentary vote of 78 in favour of, and 22 against Crimea's secession from Ukraine. Both of the ballot options for the March 16, 2014 Crimean referendum acknowledged that Crimea was already an independent state at that time, despite the declaration of independence occurring without a national vote in Ukraine, as the constitutions required.

The interim Ukrainian government, United States, European Union, and several other bodies stated that

any referendum held by the local government of Crimea without the express authority of Ukraine is unconstitutional and illegitimate. The interim government in Kiev and the pro-Russian Crimean faction do not recognize each other as legitimate. Additionally, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People—the unofficial political association of the Crimean Tatars—called for a boycott of the referendum.

Russia and the Crimean parliament argue that the referendum is legal, citing the UN recognized right of

self-determination and the advisory opinion on Kosovo in which the International Court of Justice declared that international law contains no prohibition against declarations of independence. Legal scholars have disputed the validity of the Kosovo analogy.

According to article 73 of the 1996 Constitution of Ukraine and article 3 of the 2012 Ukrainian law "On all-

Ukrainian referendum," territorial changes can only be approved via a referendum where all the citizens of Ukraine are allowed to vote, including those that do not reside in Crimea. The Central Election © Educis Consulting Pvt. Ltd 2019 | All Rights Reserved Page 19 of 24

Commission of Ukraine also stated that there are no judicial possibilities, according to the legislation of Ukraine, to initiate such changes.

The Venice Commission declared that the referendum was illegal under both Ukrainian and Crimean Constitutions, and violated international standards and norms. The Venice Commission stressed that self- determination was to be understood primarily as internal self-determination within the framework of the existing borders and not as external self-determination through secession. Moreover, the Venice Commission opined, any referendum on the status of a territory should have been preceded by serious negotiations among all stakeholders, and that such negotiations did not take place.

China – Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei said, "China always respects all countries' sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. The Crimean issue should be resolved politically under a framework of law and order. All parties should exercise restraint and refrain from raising the tension."

France – Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said that the referendum in Ukraine's Crimea region planned for March 16 is illegitimate and the annexation of Crimea by Russia would be illegal. French President François Hollande told his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in a phone call that the referendum planned in Crimea "has no legal basis."

Georgia – On March 16, the Foreign Ministry released a statement saying it "does not recognize the referendum" as it occurred "amid pressure from Russian armed forces, in defiance of the universally recognized norms and principles of international law, with complete disregard for the Ukrainian national laws." It added, "Russia's attempt to annex Crimea represents a blatant violation of the commitments it has undertaken both under multilateral and bilateral agreements."

Germany – Chancellor Angela Merkel called the referendum "illegal and incompatible with Ukraine's constitution."

UN Member states reaction37

International_reactions_to_the_annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

India – India stated "There are legitimate Russian and other interests involved and we hope they are

discussed and resolved." Further India made it clear that it will not support any "unilateral measures" against Russian government. "India has never supported unilateral sanctions against any country. Therefore, we will also not support any unilateral measures by a country or a group of countries against Russia."

Japan – Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida announced a set of sanctions against Russia for its recognition of Crimea as an independent state. Japan does not recognize the outcome of Crimea's referendum to split from Ukraine, saying it violates the Ukrainian constitution, and the country's sanctions to Russia involve suspension of talks on relaxing visa requirements between the two countries as well as planned talks on investment, space and military.

Poland – The Minister of Foreign Affairs Radosław Sikorski told Corriere Della Sera on March 16, 2014, that the Crimean referendum was a farce under the barrel of a gun, reminiscent of the 19th-century territorial acquisitions. Following a working visit of the Polish delegation in Kyiv, the MFA Press Office stated on April 1, that Poland have allocated nearly half a million zloty toward expert assistance for the Ukrainian regional reforms.

Russian Federation – Chairman of the Federation Council, Valentina Matviyenko, said that Russia will welcome Crimea to the Federation if the referendum passes. President Vladimir Putin has further solidified Russia's position on the matter, stating: "The steps taken by the legitimate leadership of Crimea are based on the norms of international law and aim to ensure the legal interests of the population of the peninsula." During a phone call with once deported, former leader of the Crimean Tatars Mustafa Dzhemilev President Putin informed him that the rights of this indigenous people are important to him and that he ordered to prevent any violence against the Crimean Tatars. On March 17, President Putin signed a decree recognizing Crimea as a sovereign state. The State Duma issued a statement that was supported by 441 legislators, with one abstention and said: "Welcoming the expression of will by the Crimean people at the March 16 referendum on accession of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol to Russia, the State Duma proceeds from the standpoint that the government bodies operating on the territory of Crimea will be maintaining inter-faith accord and language diversity of the republic. The State Duma will contribute to ensuring the safety of all people staying in Crimea, regardless of their citizenship, nationality, language or religion, and to observing their legitimate rights and freedoms". Mayor of Moscow, Sergey Sobyanin congratulated residents of the Republic of Crimea. He recalled that Russians had always felt unity with Crimea and Sevastopol.

Turkey – The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkey stated that, "The result of the unlawful and

illegitimate 'referendum' held in Crimea on Sunday, 16 March 2014, and the de facto situation that will prevail following the steps that will be taken in conjunction with this referendum will not bear any legal validity for Turkey and will not recognize." Also, Turkey supports and recognizes Ukraine's territorial integrity, including Crimea. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu has labelled the referendum as unhelpful in engendering a solution to the crisis.

United Kingdom – Prime Minister David Cameron has declared that any referendum vote in Crimea will be "illegal, illegitimate, and will not be recognized by the international community." Foreign Secretary William Hague said that "I condemn the fact that this referendum has taken place. The UK does not recognise the referendum or its outcome. we believe measures must be adopted that send a strong signal to Russia that this challenge to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine will bring economic and political consequences."

United States – The United States will not recognize the results of the referendum, and will continue to consider Crimea as part of Ukraine. President Barack Obama claimed that the referendum would violate Ukrainian sovereignty and international law. The United States issued limited sanctions on a number of Russian and Crimean officials.

UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/68/262

The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution on 27th March 2014, clearing the view of the UNGA regarding the actions done in the Crimean territory. It was passed by 100 Yes, 11No, 58 Abstention and 24 Absent.

The resolution clarified that there was no validity of the referendum that took place and can't be a legal

reason for any territorial change. 38

38https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/68/262

Committee Objective The committee will be sitting on 28th March 2014, the discussion will be but not limited to the following: -

• Validity of the Referendum that was conducted

• Legality of the President's letter to the Russian federation

• The presence of External forces in another country’s territory

• Role of external factors in the referendum

• Future plan of action for the territories in claim

• Role of the Russian Federation in the crisis

• Role of the UN Security Council in this crisis

• Legal flaws in the referendum that was conducted.