Security Council

Topic B: Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict

"It may seem sometimes as if a culture of peace does not stand a chance against the culture of war, the culture of violence and the cultures of impunity and intolerance. Peace may indeed be a complex challenge, dependent on action in many fields and even a bit of luck from time to time. It

may be a painfully slow process, and fragile and imperfect when it is achieved. But peace is in our hands. We can do it." -- Kofi Annan

The protection of civilians during armed conflicts is an issue that dates back to the very beginnings of the United Nations. Over the years, Member States have often deliberated on how to address civilians being harmed or killed during a situation of conflict. Due to international law favoring sovereignty, and geopolitical situations, it was difficult for member states to decisively act on this issue, particularly in the Security Council. With conflict changing from a war between states to a war between non-recognized groups, the United Nations has taken more notable action in protecting civilians during times of violence, most prominently during civil wars. The Security Council itself has found common ground on protecting civilians. In the last three years, this particular topic has been looked into, starting with two SC resolutions, S/RES/2175 (2014), and S/RES/2222 (2015). These resolutions are important as they establish the protection of humanitarian aid workers and journalists in areas experiencing conflict. Even now, numerous ideas are being conceptualized to protect civilians from human rights abuses and atrocities. The means of implementing such ideas has however been contentious amongst Member States, with disagreement over concepts, such as when or if conflict intervention should take place.

Background

Armed Conflict Defined

In a general sense, armed conflict can be defined as: a strife of the mastery; hostile contest; battle; struggle; fighting.1 Universally, armed conflict still remains a relatively abstract concept with varying definitions. International organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, have worked to provide interpretation of what constitutes armed conflict in international law. Article 2 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions highlights that:

“In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. The Convention

1 Webster’s Online Dictionary. < http://www.webster-dictionary.net/>

1

shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance."2

This article provides framework of how armed conflict should generally be viewed by States party to the Geneva Conventions, which are largely universal. In addition to international law, numerous civil society and academic organizations have attempted to provide input on what constitutes armed conflict. One of the most well known institutes for the study of armed conflict is the Uppsala University Department of Peace and Conflict Research. The institution provides its own interpretation of what constitutes an armed conflict.3 Such information is useful to help practitioners decipher the complexity of determining what makes an armed conflict.

Many of these interpretations are however focused exclusively on belligerency between recognized Member States. As seen in the past decade, global conflicts are becoming increasingly asymmetrical. This means that conflict is becoming more complex and often involves numerous non-state actors that are not affiliated with a recognized government.

By the end of October 2005, A/Res/60/1, World Summit Outcome, was adopted and established.4 Among the various sections with this document, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), received much of attention. R2P stipulates that all Member States of the UN, particularly those within the Security Council, are held responsible to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity;5 among other forms of armed conflict. R2P is meant as a possible working solution towards the growing complexity of armed conflict.

Humanitarian Intervention and Sovereignty

It is important for delegates to understand that Chapter I of the Charter of the United Nations indicates that a state has the right to sovereignty, meaning that it is illegal to forcefully coerce the internal affairs of any state. This concept is important to understand as it is the main principle as to why the movement for humanitarian intervention was, and still is, highly contested. We see that many Member States were not willing to such a concept as it could set a precedent for violating sovereignty and allow meddling in their internal affairs. However, with the rise of civil wars and the prominence of peacekeeping missions, humanitarian intervention has been accepted as a possible action that can be utilized within the confines of the Charter of the United Nations.

Since the 1990’s, Humanitarian Intervention has become the new method, in which the international community has utilized to protect civilians in an armed conflict. The concept itself

2 International Committee of the Red Cross < https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/opinion-paper-armed-conflict.pdf>3 Uppsala University < https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/opinion-paper-armed-conflict.pdf>4 United Nations Document. A/res/60/1. < http://www.un.org/womenwatch/ods/A-RES-60-1-E.pdf>5 United Nations Document. A/res/60/1. < http://www.un.org/womenwatch/ods/A-RES-60-1-E.pdf>

2

was carried out by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the Balkan War, in which allies carried out airstrikes against Serbian targets in response to their attacks on civilians and peacekeeping personnel. This concept has since evolved into a more concrete idea after the World Summit Outcome. Member States listed vague criteria to justify when an intervention should be carried out. Such justification surrounded the violation of human rights, acts of genocide and war crimes.

When to carry out humanitarian intervention seems to be a point of contention with many Member States. For example, the United Nations, with mandate from the Security Council, carried out an offensive attack against the M23 Rebels in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The militaristic nature of this operation had many characterize it as an intervention on part of the international community to prevent atrocities committed by the rebel militia group. However, as with procedure in peacekeeping operations, the national government has to consent to such action being taken. Since the national government of the DRC approved of such action, the Security Council was able to agree such a mandate.

Other forms of intervention to protect civilians have also arisen since the World Summit Outcome. For example, the international community decided to mildly intervene in Libya during the Arab Spring. Security Council resolution S/RES/1973 imposed a no-fly zone in Libya to curb the national government’s ability to carry our airstrike against its populace. The operation involved targeting Libya’s air force and was predominately carried out by members of NATO.

Current Situation

Syrian Civil War

In Syria, what started out with pro-democratic anti-political movements had quickly turned into a civil war that is raging on to this very day. Back in March of 2011, protesters had agitated the current governing regime to a point that state-security forces opened fire on many protesting groups, killing several. This only escalated the political protesting movement to the precipice of civil war, by July 2011. Monitored by the United Nations, by June 2013, the UN said 90,000 people had been killed in the conflict. However, by August 2014 that figure had more than doubled to 191,000 - and continued to climb to 220,000 by March 2015, according to activists and the UN.6

By February 2014, a UN Security Council resolution 2139 (2014), demanded all parties end the "indiscriminate employment of weapons in populated areas."7 However, since then, 6,000+ civilians have been killed by barrel bombs dropped by government aircraft on rebel-held areas;

6 BBC News. “Syria: The Story of the Conflict”. Middle East; 12 March, 2015. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868>

7 United Nations Document. “Resolution 2139 (2014)”.< http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2139(2014)>

3

the UN says in some instances, civilian gatherings have been deliberately targeted, constituting massacres.8

Most negotiations aiming to take decisive action, such as sanctions, against the Syrian Arab Republic was met with resistance, on the grounds of it violating national sovereignty. However this did not deter some Member States from deciding to seek action for what it considered were war crimes being carried out by the Syrian national government. This included talks of military action being taken against the Syrian national government in light of claims that it used chemical weapons in civilian areas. This contention was however negotiated peacefully when Syria agreed to become party to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which some humanitarian advocates consider a success as it would work to reduce chemical weapons usage during the warm, thus helping to protect civilians.

Situation in Ukraine

Moving from the Middle-East, towards Eastern Europe, the state of Ukraine has been a highly disputed issue within the Security Council. Since 2014, after the Euro Maiden protests, the Ukrainian parliament successfully ousted then President Viktor Yanukovych after widespread allegations of corruption. His ousting resulted in the Russian Federation, a P5 member of the Security Council, deciding to annex and take control of the Crimea region in Ukraine.

Though many in the international community accused Russia of taking a militaristic attitude, Russia cited in the General Assembly that it was merely acting to protect citizens, specifically those of Russian decent, who were facing imminent danger after the onset of an illegal coup against Yanukovych. Since then, Ukraine has been actively engaged in a civil war concentrated in the eastern half of the country, where many ethnic Russians are forming a separatist movement.

Some Member States have criticized Russia for its action against Crimea and have accused the country of arming the separatists. They have stated that Russia’s actions are belligerent and aim to cause harm and disruption in Ukrainian society. Russia, which has indicated sympathy for the separatists, has denied military involved in eastern Ukraine and has also claimed that Ukraine has failed to protect its own populace and is violating the right for ethnic Russian minorities to represent themselves. Moreover, Russia has argued that the focus of blame should be on the current Ukrainian government because of its failures to protect minorities within the country and because of the military campaign it currently exercises in the eastern half of the country.

Future Outlook

8 BBC News. “Syria: The Story of the Conflict”. Middle East; 12 March, 2015. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868>

4

With many of the Member States being in support of democratic ideologies, and the problems that arise when trying to address the questions pertaining to the protection of civilians in armed conflicts, there is a need to further define how armed conflicts can occur while protecting civilians in the process. The perceptions of who are the enemies are purely in the eyes of the beholder; anti-political protesters are seen as rebels (combatants) by that nation-states governing body, if not also by some of the states citizens (such as Syria or Ukraine). Yet, those outside that nation-state see those rebels as peaceful protesters or non-combatants.

Focus Questions

1. Has humanitarian intervention been used more and more as a political strategy, more than a way to aid and protect civilians during armed conflict?

2. Why has it taken the Security Council sixty-nine years to address that there is an issue with protecting civilians during armed conflicts?

3. If it is possible that democratic ideologies are in direct conflict with other nation-state ideologies, such as Islamic ideologies, then why does the SC adopt democratically based theories within its resolutions?

4. Within the SC mandate, it states, “to take military action against an aggressor”, could this be considered a sanctioned UN armed conflict, in which civilians will be harmed in the process?

5. Is it possible to protect civilians during armed conflicts, or does the idea behind the Just War Theory, that collateral damage is an acceptable concept?

Works Cited

5

Ashford, Douglas E. “Ideology and Participation.” Sage library of social research, Beverly Hills, Calif. Sage Publications, c1972, v. 3

Barth, Hans. “Truth and ideology.” Berkeley: University of California Press, c1976.

Bell, Duncan, ed. “Ethics and World Politics.” New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

BBC News. “Japan PM Abe offers 'deep repentance' over war with US”. US & Canada; 28 April, 2015. Last updated at 14:05 ET.<http://www.bbc.com/news/32522234>

BBC News. “Syria: The Story of the Conflict”. Middle East; 12 March, 2015. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868>

BBC News. “Ukraine Crisis: Timeline”. Europe; 14 November, 2014. <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26248275>

Goldman, David P. “How Civilizations DIE”. Washington D.C., 2011

Huntington, Samuel P. “The Clash of Civilizations?”. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Summer, 1993), pp. 22-49.

International Committee of the Red Cross. “How is the term Armed Conflict is defined in International Humanitarian Law?” (2008)

Jones, Adam. “Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction”. Routledge, 2011; (2nd Ed.).

Machiavelli, N. "The Prince (trans: CE Detmold)(Ware: Wordsworth Editions Limited)." (1997).

Magstadt, Thomas M, Ph D. “Understanding Politics, Ideas, Institutions, and Issues 9 th Edition .” Wadesworth: Cengage Learning, 2009.

Schweller, Randall L. “Domestic Structure and Preventive War: Are Democracies More Pacific?”. Cambridge University Press; World Politics, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Jan., 1992), pp. 235-269.

United Nations Official Website. “United Nations Security Council”. <http://www.un.org/en/sc/>

United Nations Official Website. “Functions and Powers of the United Nations Security Council”. < http://www.un.org/en/sc/about/functions.shtml>

6

United Nations Official Website. “Structure of the United Nations Security Council”. < http://www.un.org/en/sc/about/structure.shtml>

United Nations Document. “2005 World Summit Outcome”. (24 October, 2005).< http://www.un.org/womenwatch/ods/A-RES-60-1-E.pdf>

United Nations Document. “Resolution 2139 (2014)”. (22 February 2014).< http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2139(2014)>

United Nations Document. “Resolution 2175 (2014)”. (29 August 2014).< http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2175%20(2014)>

United Nations Document. “Resolution 2222 (2015)”. (27 May 2015).< http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2222(2015)>

Uppsala University Department of Peace and Conflict Research. Definition of Armed Conflict.

Viotti, Paul R., and Mark V. Kauppi. International Relations Theory. Longman, 2012; (5th Ed.).

Webster’s Online Dictionary. < http://www.webster-dictionary.net/>

7