Executive Board I

BUPS/ BIS Model United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 2010

Research Report / of 16

Forum: Executive Board 2 (Finance) Issue: Ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the

United States of America against Cuba Background Information - Cuba under Spanish rule Discovered by Christopher Columbus in 1492, the island of Cuba was a colony of the Spanish Kingdom for about 400 years (1511-1898) after the first western settlements started in 1511. Under the Spanish rule the indigenous people of the island were ruthlessly exploited to work for them in the fields and mines of the island to enrich the colonists. It is known that the tradition of an economy based on agriculture, mining and exports- specifically sugar, coffee and of course tobacco- was built in those days. With many European brought diseases sweeping up the indigenous population the Spanish and the British brought African slaves into the island to work for them. The independence movement unlike other Spanish colonies started much later in Cuba in the late 19th century. Although the first couple of attempts failed to succeed, Jose Marti, the founder of Cuban Revolutionary Party, drove his forces against the Spanish and carried out a successful rebellion. Marti failed to see the succession of his Party but Cuba gained her independence from the Spanish right after the Spanish- American War with the Treaty of Paris (1898) and from the Americans in 1902. - Pre-Revolutionary Cuba



After the independence was gained, the Republic of Cuba had numerous trials to set up democracy and a self-governing political system in the country but unfortunately the system repetitively failed to establish order. Starting with the Palma government of 1906 for about all of the democratically elected governments of the country faced U.S.-backed military coups that took the order from the nationalists/socialists and gave it to governors that will act accordingly to the policies and interests of United States. Cuba earlier was a colony of Spain now became the satellite state of United States and an important military base (Guantanamo Bay). The last of the consecutive coup d’états put Fulgencio Batista, later to become a ruthless dictator, into power in 1934 who was to be later elected democratically in 1940 again. Batista having lost the following two elections of 1944 and 1948, organized another military coup in 1952 taking over the office again and declaring himself the “provisional president”. During the Batista rule of 1934-1959 (incl. the 8 year period off the cabinet) the government went through the war siding with the U.S. especially against Japan and opened up its economy extending economic regulations which resulted in many economic crises and an incredible peak in the unemployment rate. Both the proletariat (working class), peasants, unemployed and the middle class were not satisfied with the economic conditions of the country. - Cuban Revolution The revolutionary movement against the Batista rule had initially started in 1953 with the “Moncada Barracks” attack of the rebel groups led by the Castro brothers Fidel and Raul. The rebellion was suppressed by the Cuban army and the rebels were imprisoned including Fidel Castro who was sentenced for 15 years. However, the political tension in the country made Batista free all the political prisoners. Castro free, flew to Mexico to join the rebellious forces aiming to overthrow the government and there met Ernesto Che Guevara and joined his militia. The successfully fought guerilla wars brought the victory to the revolutionary forces in Sierra Maestre in 1956 which became the milestone of the revolution. From this base Castro organized many attacks to Batista cities and later captured Santa Clara in 1958, following this event dictator Batista left the country and fled to Portugal. Having heard that Castro drew his forces to Havana, the capital, and declared the victory of the revolutionary forces. - Socialist Cuba Right after the revolution Fidel started the nationalization of the private property corporations and factories one by one. The American money, industry and the most importantly its influence was swept out of the country. In two years Fidel had successfully set up his system, a Proletariat Dictatorship under the rule of the Communist Party was governing, and all media, corporations and property was nationalized. The revolutionary government nationalized for about a total of $30 billion U.S. dollar property including many U.S. companies that have invested in Cuba. However, this radical act of Castro government was responded immediately by the U.S. In October 1960 U.S. declared a commercial, economic and financial embargo on Cuba. Following the embargo United States drastically cut down the import being made from Cuba that a huge scale of the economy was dependant on. The economic distress created by the embargo was comforted by the subsidization of Soviet Union to Cuban economy as USSR bought many of the import products of Cuba such as sugar and tobacco.



As Cuba made closer relations with Soviet Union and took aggressive actions against U.S. the tension between the two countries continued to build up. In January 1961 it came up to a point that U.S. government decided to close its embassy in Havana and cease all diplomatic relations with Republic of Cuba. Months after this decision was made U.S. tried to organize another coup to overthrow Castro government and control the island again. For abour 1,500 CIA trained soldiers came up to the shores of Cuban land and tried to occupy the island. The “Bay of Pigs” incident resulted in a embarrassing defeat of the American troops which led to another crisis between the two countries in the following year of 1962.

“The Cuban Missile Crisis” broke out when the two leaders Castro and Khrushchev decided to place mid-ranged ballistic missiles to ensure the safety of the island. The crisis that brought the two sides on the ridge of the war was later solved by an agreement depending on the removal of the missiles in both Cuba and Turkey that possess threat to both nations. During this crisis the violent policies of Cuba against the U.S. National Security led to the expel of Cuba from the Organization of American States (OAS). Also following the missile crisis President Kennedy put travel and trading restrictions on Cuba in 1963. These two acts were later abrogated in 1977 when the tension backed down to a much milder level.

- Cuba-United States Relations after the Collapse of the Soviet Union Even tough after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the communist system as a whole, Cuba still stands as one of the few communist regimes that survived the crisis of early 1990s. However, the collapse of the Red Bloc Communist countries and especially of USSR drastically effected the Cuban economy. Cuba having lost its primary trade partners faced an economic deadlock. The economic and political stance of the Communist regime on the island does not possess such a great threat to United States anymore although U.S. have taken measures against Cuba that contradict this fact. Following the break-down U.S. initiated the “Cuban Democracy Act” against Cuba which legalized the embargo prohibiting foreign-based subsidiaries of U.S. companies from trading with Cuba, travel to Cuba by U.S. citizens, and family remittances to Cuba. The sanctions was later reinforced by the “Helms-Burton Act” of 1996. Despite the many protest that came up from the international grounds, U.S. claimed that Cuban firms had been illegally trafficking in stole U.S. property and thus should be excluded from United States territory. Related Countries



Republic of Cuba Having been subject to the embargo for 50 years now the country has suffered drastic economic problems because of the regulations. Cuba has been the demander of the removal of the embargo since the day it was put on. The country did not feel the necessity of the removal or any negotiations of ending the embargo before the break-down of the communist bloc. The collapse of the biggest financial aiders and trade partners of Cuba left the little island communist state alone in the world financial market. Although the socialist government underlines the fact that no matter what the republic will stand on its own feet and survive; the economical conditions of the citizens in the country do very much require the abrogating of this sanctions.

Raul Castro, the prime minister of Cuba has stated that he is willing to listen to the proposals of any new status of relation between the U.S: and Cuba that may come from Barack Obama. Having said that, the primary concern of Raul should also be mentioned. Rather than depending on a never-coming solution from the American side, Raul wishes and tries to from a Latin American Trade Partnership that will support the economies of all leftist governments in the region such as Venezuela, Bolivia and Argentina along with Cuba. United States of America United States defending the embargo and its justification stands as the only nation out of the total 192 in United Nation General Assembly. Although the policies of Cold War have ceded decades ago, the “War against Terrorism” policy of United States also contains a combat that should be given ideologically against Cuba. What’s more, because of the decisive socialist stance of Cuba and its unwillingness to become a part of the Western democratic or political globalized system U.S. insists on the embargoes.



The new Obama administration had primarily showed a positive reaction towards the removal of the embargo but afterwards decided upon continuing the Bush policy on the question. European Union European Union have been one of the supporters of the anti-embargo movement since 1996 and is strongly against the Helms-Burton Act. EU believes that U.S. does not have the right to sanction any nation because of the political or economical system defended and put in action by that nation. A European Council Regulation of 2271/96 was declared against the Helms-Burton Act making it unenforceable within the borders of European Union. The regulation also covered the recovery of any damages imposed under the aforementioned Act and applied sanctions against any U.S. corporation to make Title III related complaints. EU is one of the leading organizations that puts pressure on Unites States to put an end to the embargo. Canada For Canada, Cuba has the special feature of being the first country in the Caribbean selected by Canada to have diplomatic relations which had started back in 1945 and diplomatic relationship interrupted following the 1959 Revolution. Today, Canada is one of the largest trade partners of the Republic of Cuba; on the other hand Cuba is one of the most popular touristic choices of Canadians. Canada was also one of the supporters of Canada in her combat against the embargo and the Helms-Burton Act. It is impossible for these two countries which are tied by strong energy and mining agreements to operate in both of the countries. Venezuela Venezuela is the biggest trade partner of Cuba. An alliance came up after the presidency of Hugo Chavez in 1999 was established. The bilateral relations of the two countries developed through the dialogue of Chavez and Castro. After Chavez set up his absolute democratic rule in his country he tried in going on the assignment of Soviet Union in aiding Cuban trade. The bilateral relation mainly includes development aid, joint business ventures, large financial transactions, exchange of energy resources and information technology, and cooperation in the fields of intelligence service and military. Hugo Chavez, the biggest ally of Fidel Castro in the international arena, have always been supporting the combat of Cuba against capitalism and the U.S. Starting from the day he came into power Chavez have always been criticizing the oppressing policies of United States towards the Latin America. In Cuba’s combat against the embargo Venezuela was the greatest supporter of Cuba in the debate in UN General Assembly. Russian Federation



Russian Federation and Cuba still have close ties even though the brake-down of 1991. They were especially strenghted after Putin came into power in 2000. Both Medvedev and Putin are known to publicly state the unlawfulness of the embargo and called U.S. government to cease the sanctions posed on Cuba. Possible Solutions The normalization of the relations between United States and Republic of Cuba can be a win-win case and if the possibility of the removal of the embargo comes up, the Obama administration and the Raul government should not miss that opportunity. As for both of the countries, in a world where there are no Iron Curtains nor specific economic or political blocs the exercise of an embargo by such a determining nation on an island state is not benefit of both the U.S an the Republic of Cuba. The end of the embargo would mean the economical relief of Cuba and the enrichment of the Cuban citizen since they can now be importing to the biggest market of the world and has overcome the sanctions posed by Helms-Burton Act. If the removal of the embargo is not a possible short-term solution, short-term solutions such as the reformation of the Helms-Burton Act, a reform in the tourism regulations against Cuba and the withdrawal of the Cuban Democracy Act from the constitution could be measures that might lead to a normalization of the relations. United Nations Involvement on the Issue United Nations General Assembly have been discussing the ending of the embargo on Cuba imposed by USA under the topic of “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba” since 1993. Each and every the resolution is adopted by the General with an overwhelming majority (2009: 191 in favor 1 against). However, the statements made in the council, Secretary-General’s efforts or the resolutions adopted fail get U.S. into action. (see resolutions 47/19 of 24 November 1992, 48/16 of 3 November 1993, 49/9 of 26 October 1994, 50/10 of 2 November 1995, 51/17 of 12 November 1996, 52/10 of 5 November 1997, 53/4 of 14 October 1998, 54/21 of 9 November 1999, 55/20 of 9 November 2000, 56/9 of 27 November 2001, 57/11 of 12 November 2002, 58/7 of 4 November 2003, 59/11 of 28 October 2004, 60/12 of 8 November 2005, 61/11 of 8 November 2006, 62/3 of 30 October 2007 and 63/7 of 11 December 2008)



Furthermore, the Helms-Burton Act of 1996 was condemned by officially by United Nations level by Britain, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela. Useful Links for Research

1) http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43b/index-bd.html 2) http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43b/index.html

3) http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/ar/us-cuba/libertad.htm 4) http://www.state.gov/www/regions/wha/cuba/democ_act_1992.html 5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba 6) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/us/politics/13cuba-

factsheet.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all Bibliography

1) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/cu.html 2) http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/cuba/gls/cuba_gl.pdf 3) http://edition.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/12/15/cuba.putin.02/index.html 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba–Russia_relations 5) http://www.dnaindia.com/opinion/comment_the-world-according-to-hugo-

chavez_1043203-all 6) http://clacs.uconn.edu/cuba_venez.pdf 7) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/6679 8) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada–Cuba_relations 9) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/cu.html 10) http://www2.unipr.it/~davide/cuba/HomePage.html 11) http://www.marxists.org/history/index.htm 12) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba 13) http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/washington/2007/11/19/Cuba-Embargo-

Reasons-to-End/ 14) http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bayofpigs.jpg 15) http://www.bruceruiz.net/PanamaHistory/Colon_1_Map.gif



FORUM: Executive Board 1 (External Relations) ISSUE: The debate over the peace-making role of NATO and its co-operation with the UN through it’s out of area operations with particular emphasis on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Background Information What is NATO?

NATO, short for The North Atlantic Treaty Organization , is an alliance of 28 countries from North America and Europe committed to fulfilling the goals of the North Atlantic Treaty, which was signed on the 4th of April, 1949. In accordance with the Treaty, the primary role of NATO is to safeguard the freedom and security of its member countries by political and military means. The Allies’ common values of democracy, individual liberty, the rule of law and the peaceful resolution of disputes are protected by NATO, which promotes these values throughout the Euro-Atlantic area. The Alliance embodies the transatlantic link by which the security of North America and Europe are permanently tied together.

What does NATO do?

There are four main actions which NATO takes; consultation, defence, crisis management and cooperation. NATO provides a forum in which the United States, Canada and European countries can consult together on security issues of common concern and take joint action in addressing them. The organization is determined to defend its member states against aggression or the threat of aggression to the extent that and attack against one or several members would be an attack against all. NATO has played a very big role in crisis management. It has helped to end bloody conflicts in Bosnia, Kosovo and head off a civil war in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. NATO-‐led forces are still trying to bring stability to Kosovo, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Darfur. Also, NATO is trying to overcome the divisions of the Cold War era, by dialogue and cooperation with non-‐NATO countries, which will extend security and stability well beyond NATO borders.

How does NATO work?

NATO is an intergovernmental organization. The 28 member nations retain their full sovereignty and all of the decisions are taken jointly on the basis of consensus. The most important decision making body is the North Atlantic Council which brings together representatives of the 28 Allies. The structures and mechanisms of NATO provide the framework for cooperation with partner countries, which forms and integral part of the activities of the Alliance.

Member Countries The 28 independent member countries of NATO are: Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria,

Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,



Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States. On the North Atlantic Council, each member nation is represented either by an Ambassador or by a Permanent Representative supported by a national delegation composed of advisers and officials, who represent their country on different NATO committees. The Council also meets from time to time at the level of Heads of State and Heads of Government or Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Ministers of Defence. Partner Countries

There are also 22 partner countries of NATO, these are: Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Finland, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Kyrghyz Republic, Malta, The Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Russia, Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

Partner countries are represented by Heads of Diplomatic Missions or Liaison Offices located at the NATO Headquarters. The Head and Staff of the Missions attend NATO committee meetings in cooperation formats. They also represent their countries at meetings of the Euro-‐Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), meetings of the NATO-‐Russia Permanent Joint Council or NATO-‐Ukraine Commission respectively. When Partner countries are represented by their Foreign or Defence Ministers meetings of these bodies take place at Ministerial or Summit level.

Military Structure

The military structure of NATO is a multinational force planning, organization and command system. Under the command of NATO’s strategic commanders, it provides for joint planning, training, exercising and operations.

NATO's Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan

NATO’s Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan is Ambassador Fernando Gentilini of Italy, who has been appointed in May 2008 and took office on 23rd of July. He carries forward the Alliances political-‐military objectives in Afghanistan, liaising with the Afghan Government, civil society, representatives of the international community and neighbouring countries. The Senior Civilian Representative represents the political leadership of the Alliance in Kabul officially and publicly.

The Senior Civilian Representative provides a direct channel of communication between the theatre, NATO HQ in Brussels, and the North Atlantic Council, the Alliance's principal decision-‐making body, by working closely with NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). He provides the Council with advice on the most effective means of ensuring the overall coherence of the Alliance’s relations with Afghanistan, which includes responsibilities related to upholding NATO’s public perception. He liaises with senior members of the Afghan Government and co-‐ordinates with representatives of the international community and other



international organizations engaged in Afghanistan, in particular the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan and the European Union.

The NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia

At the Summit in Istanbul in June 2004, NATO Allies agreed to place a special focus on the strategically important regions of the Caucasus and Central Asia. This special focus included the appointment of the Special Representative and two NATO Liaison Officers, one for each region.

The Secretary General appointed Robert F. Simmons as NATO’s first Special Representative in August 2004. He is responsible for applying the Alliance’s policy in the two strategically important regions of the Caucasus and Central Asia. He works closely with regional leaders to enhance their cooperation with the Alliance and provides advice to the Secretary General on how to reach NATO’s goals in the two regions. He works closely with the NATO Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan in order to ensure that NATO’s policy in Central Asia fully supports NATO’s ongoing mission in Afghanistan.

NATO’s Role in Afghanistan

NATO’s main role in Afghanistan is to assist the Afghan Government in exercising and extending its authority and influence across the country, paving the way for reconstruction and effective governance. It does this predominately through its UN-‐mandated International Security Assistance Force.

Since NATO took command of ISAF in 2003, the Alliance has gradually expanded the reach of its mission, initially limited to providing security in Kabul, to cover Afghanistan’s whole territory. The number of ISAF troops has grown accordingly from the original 5,000 to around 70,000 troops coming from 43 countries, including all 28 NATO members. The expansion was completed in four stages; north, west, south and east respectively.

The key component of the international community’s engagement in Afghanistan is ISAF, which, in accordance with all the relevant Security Council Resolutions, assists the Afghan government in the establishment of a secure and stable environment. ISAF forces have been conducting security and stability operations throughout the country together with the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) and are directly involved in the development of the Afghan National Army (ANA) through mentoring, training and equipping. ISAF is also helping the Afghan National Army (ANA) in order to bring it up to operating capability. The United States is supporting ISAF by sponsoring the overall ANA training and equipping programme through its Combined Security Transition Command Afghanistan (CSTC-‐A). ISAF is leading a number of Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams (OMLTs) which support training and deploy on operations in an advisory role. The OMLTs join ANA units after receiving initial training at the Afghan-‐led Kabul Military Training Centre (KMTC). NATO-‐ISAF nations, in addition to training and mentoring the ANA, provide



donations to help equip the Afghan army. These donations include individual equipment such as small arms, ammunition, and uniform items as well as larger equipment to include tanks and helicopters. Also, Allied Command Operations (ACO) coordinates donations on the behalf of ISAF contributing nations under the NATO Equipment Donation Programme. To cover the transportation and installation costs of the equipment donations, the purchase of equipment, the purchase of services for engineering and construction projects, and in/out-‐of-‐country training an ANA Trust Fund has also been established.

ISAF is helping the Afghan Authorities to strengthen their required institutions in order to fully establish good governance and rule of law and to promote human rights, through its Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTS). In this respect PRTs’ principal mission consists of building capacity, supporting the growth of governance structures and promoting an environment within which governance can improve.

NATO’s Role in Pakistan

The terrorism in Pakistan initially started in the 1980’s. The main reasons for the terrorist acts to commence were the religious difference between the population of the country and the militant regime (Shia and Sunni), disputes between the two groups due to economic and social factors, England not considering Pakistan as an independent state and the war between Pakistan and Afghanistan during the years 1979 to 1988. Due to religion many people joined Pakistan during the war and continued their actions even after the war ended. Pakistan continued to support these people called “Mujahideen” after the war and supported them with their needs. However, in 2001 the government separated its ways with the terrorist groups and started to cooperated with the United States of America in order to stop terrorist activities.

Pakistan is a key neighbour of Afghanistan; therefore Pakistan’s support for the efforts of NATO and the international community in Afghanistan is crucial to the success of the Alliance’s mission there. NATO and Pakistan have developed regular exchanges at various levels, including visits by senior officials and opinion leaders, as well as participation by Pakistani military officials in NATO training programmes.

Pakistan’s constructive approach towards security and stability in the region is welcomed by NATO. The issues of increasing drug cultivation in Afghanistan and dealing with refugees from that country have also been raised during political high-‐level talks. However, NATO-‐Pakistan relations go beyond the Alliance’s operational agenda in Afghanistan.

Visits of Pakistani opinion leaders to NATO HQ have been organized, military contacts have been made and NATO has agreed to open selected training and education courses to Pakistani officers. These venues have all been done to prevent misunderstandings, and to promote a culture of cooperative security focused on areas of common interest, such as regional stability and the fight against terrorism.

Related Countries

The United States of America and NATO Allies



The United States of America has supported NATO’s actions in order to help solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan by sponsoring the overall ANA training and equipping programme through its Combined Security Transition Command Afghanistan (CSTC-‐A). Also the other allies of NATO supported America’s actions and started to be involved in the military and political issues of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The United States of America has been the greatest supporter of Afghanistan and Pakistan by monetary aid, which reached over $ 4.2 billion after the events that took place on the 11th of September 2001.

Neighbourhood Countries (India, Iran, China, Tajikistan, Kyrghyz Republic, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan)

Iran is an Islamic Republic and therefore chooses not to support NATO’s actions. Furthermore, Iran is being accused of supporting fundamental terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Tajikistan, Kyrghyz Republic, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are trying to support United States and NATO’s actions. Pakistani terrorist groups such as Lashkare-‐Taiba and Jaish-‐e-‐Muhammed have been said to have held terrorist attacks in India and Kashmir over the past years, though currently India prefers to stay neutral in this issue with China.

Possible Solutions

1. Eradicating all terrorist groups, mainly El-‐Quida and Taliban, in Afghanistan and Pakistan by military forces of NATO,

2. After the elimination of terrorism constituting a government ruled by democracy which will cooperate with NATO and the United States of America

3. Encouraging all Member States to participate in the reconstruction of Afghanistan and Pakistan’s economy in all sectors, particularly rural regions, through the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) by:

a) treating Afghanistan and Pakistan as a free or preferred trading partner to encourage trade and the spread of Sub-African goods,

b) sponsoring microfinance for the Afghanistan and Pakistan Governments, and encouraging business to invest in Somalia’s reconstruction,

c) offering experts to assist in reconstruction through training and practice with Afghanistan and Pakistan’s citizens,

d) providing specific aid goods such as food, fertilizer, seeds, and practice with Afghanistan and Pakistan citizens,

e) creating programs for Afghani and Pakistanis to work towards developing their own future;

4. Requesting that the United Nations Environmental, Scientific, and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO):



a. coordinates efforts between donors and NGOs to establish a comprehensive educational system,

b. develops funds to purchase school textbooks and other necessary supplies, c. urges the creation of a permanent governmental department devoted to funding

and overseeing the educational system, d. urges the creation of a widespread scheme of vocational training available to all

Afghanistan and Pakistan’s citizens; e. abolishes school fees and funds scholarships for successful students in order to

encourage them, f. establishes satellite schools, which will primarily be located in the rural areas of

Afghanistan and Pakistan, aiming to educate the children who are not able to go to school because of the lack of transportation;

5. Calling upon the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) and the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women to restore the human rights and integrity of women by:

a. encouraging all females over 8 years to make use of the opportunity for education by disseminating information which explains their options and encourages them to obtain their education at the nearest available facility,

b. creating a committee of qualified individuals to research opportunities which help women find jobs and provide information as to where women can seek necessary medical treatment,

c. creating opportunities for women to serve in the state and future Afghanistan and Pakistan governments in order to promote the status of women as equal members of society;

6. Further proposing that the World Health Organization (WHO) and appropriate NGOs

coordinate an extensive reform of the Afghanistan and Pakistan health sector by: a. providing medical supplies such as drugs, medical equipment, vaccines, beds,

blankets, and other necessary supplies, b. improving disease containment facilities, c. ensuring that adequate resources are available for the long-term treatment of

diseases, d. establishing medical facilities in areas of serious need including rural areas in

order to decrease mortality, e. creating national immunization days to prevent the spread of disease, f. providing obstetrics care to ensure the well-being of mothers and infants, g. bringing Somali doctors abroad to provide them with training and observation

opportunities in the developed world; 7. Suggesting all governments and NGO’s, especially the MEDC’s, to co-operate and help

improve the infrastructure of Afghanistan and Pakistan by building: a. hospitals, b. schools, c. transportation systems, including a system of highways and railways, d. communication systems, particularly telephone lines, and a nationwide radio

network, e. power lines and energy generation, through the use of solar panels, f. sewage systems g. water mains and distribution systems;



UN Involvement

Key Events and Resolutions

7 October 2001: Launch of US Operation Enduring Freedom.

20 December 2001: -‐ The UN issues resolution UNSCR 1386, authorizing the deployment of a multinational force in and around Kabul to help stabilize the country and create the conditions for self-‐sustaining peace.

-‐ ISAF I is established by resolution UNSCR 1386 under the command of the United Kingdom with forces and assets from 18 other countries.

20 June 2002: ISAF II is established under the command of Turkey, on the basis of resolution UNSCR 1413

February 2003: ISAF III is established under the command of Germany and the Netherlands, on the basis of resolution UNSCR 1444.

5 July 2003: First NATO troops set off for Kabul

13 October 2003: The UN Security Council adopts resolution 1510; authorising the expansion of ISAF's operations to include operations anywhere in Afghanistan.

17 September 2004: The UN Security Council adopts resolution 1563

10 February 2005: NATO decides to expand ISAF to the west of Afghanistan.



30 January 2007: NATO and Pakistan agree on Afghanistan approach

8 May 2007: NATO and Pakistan boost cooperation



23 January 2009: NATO Secretary General visits Pakistan

20 August 2009: Afghan Presidential and Provincial Council elections

Maps



Useful Links http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/what_is_nato.htm http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_8189.htm http://www.nato.int/issues/nato_pakistan/index.html http://www.cfr.org/publication/10935/ http://issuu.com/renandincer/docs/arda?mode=a_p http://207.67.203.60/N10314UK/Search/AdvancedSearch.asp?database=ART&IsFirstDisplay=0&GoPressed=1&ShowOptions=0&selectField1=3&txtSearch1=isaf&selectBoolean1=3&selectField2=3&txtSearch2=AFGHANISTAN

Works Cited “Chair Reports - GA1.” Turkish International Model United Nations. 20 Dec. 2009 <http://issuu.com/renandincer/docs/arda?mode=a_p> “Chronology.” North Atlantic Treaty Organization - International Security Assistant Force. 26 Dec. 2009 <http://www.nato.int/isaf/topics/chronology/index.html> “NATO-Pakistan Relations.” North Atlantic Treaty Organization. 25 Dec. 2009 < http://www.nato.int/issues/nato_pakistan/index.html> “NATO’S role in Afghanistan.” North Atlantic Treaty Organization. 22 Dec. 2009 < http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_8189.htm> “Political Map of Afghanistan and Pakistan.” World Sites Atlas. 15 Dec. 2009 <http://www.sitesatlas.com/Maps/Maps/801.htm>

Executive Board I

Documents

Transcript of Executive Board I