UNSC 1948

Honorable Delegate,

The United Nations Security Council will be called into session on Thursday, April 29th, 1948 at

the Stevens Hotel in Chicago, Illinois to discuss matters of international importance. The

following agenda items will be discussed:

Topic 1 – International Atomic Energy Framework

Topic 2 – Criteria for the Deployment of UN Personnel

Topic 3 – Questions to be Considered by the UNSC under its Mandate for the Maintenance of

Peace and International Security

For your reference, our staff archivists have compiled the following Background Guide to

provide you with relevant information regarding the topics that will be debated in the upcoming

session. You will need to read and understand the contents of this Guide in order to expand upon

their research and represent your home government accurately and effectively.

If you have any questions regarding the operations of the committee meetings being held at

Chicago International Model United Nations (CIMUN), please refer to the CIMUN MUN

Toolkit which you have been provided. Should you have any questions concerning the content of

your guide or questions on policy, you may consult with an official from the Department of

Home Government by sending an email to homegovernment@cimun.org.

Sincerely,

Walker Fountain

President of the General Assembly

UNSC 1948

2

Contents 1 Topic 1 – International Atomic Energy Framework ................................................................. 4

1.1 Topic Overview................................................................................................................. 4

1.2 Historical Background ...................................................................................................... 4

1.3 Current Situation .............................................................................................................. 7

1.4 Bloc Positions ................................................................................................................... 7

1.5 Discussion Questions....................................................................................................... 9

1.6 Key Terms ...................................................................................................................... 10

1.7 Resources ...................................................................................................................... 10

2 Topic 2 – Criteria for the Deployment of UN Personnel ....................................................... 14

2.1 Topic Overview............................................................................................................... 14

2.2 Hegemonies and their Methods ..................................................................................... 14

2.2.1 Outside-out.............................................................................................................. 17

2.2.2 Outside-in ................................................................................................................ 17

2.2.3 Inside-out................................................................................................................. 18

2.2.4 Inside-in ................................................................................................................... 18

2.3 The United Nations Peacekeeping Personnel............................................................... 19

2.4 Elements to Consider When Creating Criteria for the Deployment of UN Personnel ... 20

2.4.1 Consent of the parties ............................................................................................. 20

2.4.2 Impartiality ............................................................................................................... 21

2.4.3 Use of Force............................................................................................................ 21

2.4.4 Legitimacy ............................................................................................................... 22

2.5 Ongoing Efforts: The Opportunity to Craft the Future ................................................... 22

2.6 Discussion Questions..................................................................................................... 23

2.7 Key Terms ...................................................................................................................... 24

3 Topic 3 – Questions to be Considered by the UNSC under its Mandate for the Maintenance

of Peace and International Security.............................................................................................. 26

3.1 Topic Overview............................................................................................................... 26

3.2 Historical Background .................................................................................................... 26

3.2.1 The British Colony of India...................................................................................... 26

3.2.2 The British Mandate in Palestine ............................................................................ 27

3.2.3 The Dutch Colony of the East Indies ...................................................................... 28

3.3 Current Situation ............................................................................................................ 29

UNSC 1948

3

3.3.1 Kashmir ................................................................................................................... 29

3.3.2 Palestine.................................................................................................................. 31

3.3.3 Indonesia................................................................................................................. 33

3.4 Post-Colonial World, Right to Self-Rule, and International Security ............................. 34

3.5 Bloc Positions ................................................................................................................. 34

3.5.1 The United States ................................................................................................... 34

3.5.2 Soviet Union ............................................................................................................ 35

3.5.3 China ....................................................................................................................... 35

3.5.4 Colonial Nations (Britain, France, Belgium) ........................................................... 35

3.6 Discussion Questions..................................................................................................... 35

3.7 Keywords ........................................................................................................................ 36

3.8 Resources ...................................................................................................................... 36

3.8.1 Kashmir ................................................................................................................... 36

3.8.2 Palestine.................................................................................................................. 37

3.8.3 Indonesia................................................................................................................. 38

3.8.4 Miscellaneous ......................................................................................................... 39

UNSC 1948

4

1 Topic 1 – International Atomic Energy Framework

1.1 Topic Overview

The United Nations Security Council will be discussing

the international atomic energy framework considering the

recent development in nuclear technology and weapons. The

UNSC is the only committee capable of taking on this issue due

to its vital importance to the security of the modern world. The

goal of this committee is to conclude how this new science should be regulated on the internationa l

stage. This topic is of utter importance due to the deadly outcomes that use of atomic energy can

bring if used as a weapon. It is a primary goal of the United Nations to eliminate nuclear weapons,

and it is the duty of all of our member states to work together to find a solution to this problem.

1.2 Historical Background

Although scientific research and exploration has existed since the beginning of time, the height of

atomic energy related research endured from the years 1895-1945. During this period, atomic

radiation, atomic change, and nuclear fission evolved, most effectively from 1939-1945. The

experimentation was based around finding a source of energy until 1939-1945, when most

development was focused on the atomic bomb. The concept of an atomic bomb was brought forth

by Francis Perrin in 1939, and he provided the idea of using uranium to create a self-sustaining

release of energy which is necessary in most bombs. Following his concepts, a German scientist

began a nuclear energy project through the German Ordnance Office in order to create a military

nuclear bomb, but later abandoned the project. This project caused the United States and Britain

to invest resources in a wartime atomic bomb. The next large step towards the atomic bomb was

made in 1940 by Britain in the form of a committee called MAUD. The MAUD committee was

UNSC 1948

5

established by a group of well known British

scientists, and their legacy was the wealth of

information that they concluded about

bombs. This committee concluded that a

uranium bomb was possible and they

specified that 12kg of “active materia l”

equals 1.8k of TNT making the location

where the bomb is used to be dangerous to humans for a long amount of time. In the committee’s

second report they found that the division of uranium could serve as a source of energy for

machines or as a substitute for radium. 1

While this extensive progress was being made in Britain, a historical event occurred in

1941 at Pearl Harbor. The Japanese launched a military attack on the US which ultima te ly

provoked the United States to enter the war, from which they previously chose to be isolated, and

begin making plans to create an atomic bomb for defense purposes and additionally, for an end to

the war; this plan was named secretively, the

Manhattan Project.2 While the United States

worked on developing an atomic bomb, so

did the nations of Britain and Germany. The

move by powerful nations to start designing

deadly weapons caught the attention of

Stalin, and soon thereafter he initiated a

1http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/outline-history-of-nuclear-energy.aspx 2 http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/attack-pearl-harbor-1941

UNSC 1948

6

research program to develop an atomic bomb more quickly than the other nations. Following this

progress, the first nuclear city was built in the Soviet Union in the month of November, 1945.

While the Soviet Union continued to make advances, on July 16, 1945, the US was the first country

to successfully test an atomic device at Alamogordo in New Mexico.3

While countries continued research, the United States made a huge and historical decision

on August 6, 1945 to drop the first atomic bomb containing U-235 (an extremely powerful type of

Uranium) on Hiroshima. This attack was an attempt to persuade the Japanese to surrender and it

was an attempt to end the war; however, three days later, the US dropped a second bomb on

Nagasaki containing Pu-239 (isotope of plutonium). This deadly attack caused Japanese

Government to surrender the following day. These two bombings killed more than 200,000 people.

Following such a sobering event that shed so much

blood, the UN called for complete elimination of atomic

weapons4 to prevent further destruction of life on January 24,

1946. The United Nations were not the only ones to make a quick

response to the events, the United States government

additionally passed the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 to regulate

the usage of atomic energy. Thus the world now stands in a

position where the issue must be addressed, it is of extreme importance for the internationa l

community to figure out how to address this issue. The development of atomic energy has become

a pressing world issue due to the huge impact it can make depending on whose hands it is in. The

US is the only country to have used an atomic bomb (as of 1948), and this weapon killed

3 http://www.ushistory.org/us/51f.asp 4 http://www.icanw.org/the-facts/the-nuclear-age/

UNSC 1948

7

approximately 150,000 people in Hiroshima and 75,000 in Nagasaki.5 Any country that possesses

such technology has the power to kill hundreds of thousands of

people, thus there is a natural tendency for many world citizens

to fear the future repercussions of this weapon. As the US, Soviet

Union, Britain, and Germany work on developing more

advanced nuclear weapons, more nations will likely join this race

for ultimate superiority militarily in the future to protect

themselves.

1.3 Current Situation

In recent years there has been an immense international response to the use of nuclear

weapons in wartime by the United Nations and individual countries. The first UN resolution

created a Commission to address such weapons along with the discovery of atomic energy.6 The

main goal of this Commission was to ensure that atomic energy was only used for “peaceful

purposes.” Another ambition of the Commission was to eliminate all nuclear weapons worldwide

that are capable of immense destruction.7

1.4 Bloc Positions

The international community as a whole deplored the use of atomic weapons after the US

dropped an atomic bomb on Japan. The creation of such a weapon made most nations feel afraid

and vulnerable not knowing when or if another bomb would be dropped. In a time where the Soviet

Union worked on taking over Eastern Europe, many smaller countries feared the threat of an

atomic bomb because small countries would likely have to surrender to the threat because one

5 http://www.aasc.ucla.edu/cab/200708230009.html 6 https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/ 7 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/1(I)

UNSC 1948

8

bomb could decimate their entire population.

Both the United States and the Soviet Union continued to develop atomic weapons after

their usage in World War 2. In response to Truman’s (US President) speech stating that an Iron

curtain was separating Europe between Soviet powers and the rest

of Europe, Stalin established Comintern or the alliance between

Communist nations under the Soviet Union.8 These nations, also

known as the satellite states of the Soviet Union, agreed with the

USSR’s stance on nuclear energy and agreed that possession of this

technology allowed for military supremacy. During this time it was

Stalin’s goal to takeover Eastern Europe, thus he thoroughly

supported nuclear weapons. Possessing tested and functioning

nuclear weapons definitely make a power more intimidating and make a nation, if attacked by such

a world power, more likely to surrender.

Alternatively, the United States were advocates of atomic energy shown by the fact that

they were the first nation to use an atomic bomb. Although it was popular, the United States made

efforts to control the use of atomic energy for

future projects and development but not to

eliminate its usage completely. Prior to the

bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, President

Truman received letters and petitions from

scientists pleading that he not go through with

the atomic bomb.9 Truman did follow through with the plan and even said that the atomic bomb

8 http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir2/sovietexpansionineasterneuroperev1.shtml 9 http://www.euronews.com/2013/08/01/back-in-the-day-the-invention-of-atomic

UNSC 1948

9

was the “greatest thing in history” along with other Americans who believed it was the right thing

to do because they believed it ended the war more swiftly and it saved more American lives. There

were also many Americans who felt incredibly angry with the choice their government had made.10

In 1946 the US government reflected an intent to regulate atomic energy in the US through

the Atomic Energy Act of 1946. The main intention of this act was to put the power of nuclear

technology into the hands of US citizens rather than its military.11 After the use of such a deadly

weapon, the American people agreed that something must be done to regulate atomic weapons so

that the future would not be filled with the same results of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Not only the

United States and the Soviet Union continued to develop atomic bombs, the United Kingdom,

France12 and China13 all continued research and experiments because they all knew the military

superiority one could assert if one possessed an atomic bomb.

1.5 Discussion Questions

• Who should have the power to regulate the expansion of atomic energy? And should this

regulator be limited?

• Are the potential benefits from atomic energy as an energy source worth the negative

consequences?

• If the committee chooses to eliminate nuclear weapons, how may each country mainta in

its sovereignty in researching new technology, weapons, and science?

• How has the development of atomic energy impacted your country specifically? What are

the other sources of energy your country has mainly relied upon?

10 https://libcom.org/history/1945-us-responses-atomic-bombing-hiroshima-nagasaki 11https://www.revolvy.com/topic/United%20States%20Atomic%20Energy%20Act%20of%201946&item_type=topic 12 https://www.ctbto.org/nuclear-testing/the-effects-of-nuclear-testing/frances-nuclear-testing-programme/ 13 http://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/05/us/china-s-atomic-weapon-story-told.html?pagewanted=all

UNSC 1948

10

• What resources are needed to regulate the use of atomic energy effectively?

• What role did your country play during the development of atomic energy?

• What systems are in place in your country to regulate the usage of atomic energy? Could

these systems be applied to the international community?

• Does your country believe that prevention of atomic weapons or protection from atomic

weapons is more important?

• What international solutions does your country propose would solve the dilemma of usage

of atomic weapons?

• Does your country believe that possession and development of atomic weapons are an

attempt to assert hegemony (dominance)?

1.6 Key Terms

● Atomic energy = “energy released by reactions within atomic nuclei, as in nuclear fission

or fusion.”14

● Manhattan Project = secret plan by the United States government to create an atomic bomb

during the war

● Nuclear energy = Atomic energy

● Elimination of all nuclear weapons = overarching goal of the United Nations. The goal is

to eliminate the weapons, not necessarily use of atomic energy

1.7 Resources

● http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/attack-pearl-harbor-1941

● http://www.world-nuclear.org/information- library/current-and-future-generation/outline-

history-of-nuclear-energy.aspx

14 Dictionary.com

UNSC 1948

11

● http://www.icanw.org/the- facts/the-nuclear-age/

● http://www.aasc.ucla.edu/cab/200708230009.html

● http://www.ushistory.org/us/51f.asp

● https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/

● http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/atomic-energy/

● ** http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/1(I)

● http://www.euronews.com/2013/08/01/back- in-the-day-the- invention-of-atomic

● https://www.revolvy.com/topic/United%20States%20Atomic%20Energy%20Act%20of

%201946&item_type=topic

● SILLAH, Mohammed-Bassiru. “The African Response To Nuclear Proliferation : A Case-

Study of Nigeria.” Présence Africaine, no. 136, 1985, pp. 10–30. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/24351905.

● https://libcom.org/history/1945-us-responses-atomic-bombing-hiroshima-nagasaki

● http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/bombings-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-1945

● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation

● http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/atomic-energy-commission

● http://www.dictionary.com/

● http://www.un.org/press/en/2007/dc3064.doc.htm

● https://www.ctbto.org/nuclear-testing/the-effects-of-nuclear-testing/frances-nuclear-

testing-programme/

● http://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/05/us/china-s-atomic-weapon-story-

told.html?pagewanted=all

UNSC 1948

12

● http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir2/sovietexpansionineasterneuro

perev1.shtml

● https://www.flickr.com/photos/sakucae/3686680582

● https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/81/71381-004-534732C4.jpg

● https://s-media-cache-

ak0.pinimg.com/736x/fa/e8/49/fae849c9c89e6590467af8c8aefe7ced--cold-war-

propaganda-propaganda-art.jpg

● https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/thefutureofeuropes/images/6/6a/Iron-curtain-

map.png/revision/latest?cb=20150222150131

UNSC 1948

13

UNSC 1948

14

2 Topic 2 – Criteria for the Deployment of UN Personnel

2.1 Topic Overview

In the Post World-War II era of 1948, the United Nations finds itself frozen. Struggles for

power in the Security Council have left the United Nations Personnel stranded, waiting to be

deployed as permanent members exercise their veto power for their best interests while

simultaneously undercutting the UN by acting around it. Although the mission of the United

Nations is to maintain international peace and security15, members states are reluctant to follow its

recommendations as world powers seek to take advantage of the legitimacy that the internationa l

spotlight provides to further their own agenda. This political backdrop has complicated the

execution of the United Nations mission and threatens to weaken the autonomy and validity of the

already frail institution.

As the actor responsible for assigning personnel, it falls to the Security Council to clarify

the ill-defined and ambiguous criteria for the deployment of United Nations personnel. The

deployment of resources will be lens in which the world will judge the United Nations as either a

puppet of an aspiring hegemony, or as a hegemon of its own right imposing the will of the world’s

nations. On this metric, the United Nations will either emerge as a powerful institution, or as the

enabler of an aspiring hegemony. The United Nations is preparing to field its first Peacekeeping

mission on the Middle East, giving the Security Council the perfect opportunity to show what the

future of the United Nations will be.

2.2 Hegemonies and their Methods

15 UN – What we do: http://www.un.org/en/sections/what-we-do/

UNSC 1948

15

Before deciding upon the criteria to deploy United Nations personnel, it is important to

understand the context behind it. Powerful nations, with the clout to alter the decision-mak ing

process, seek the advancement of their ideals through the United Nations. As nations compete to

establish a new world order, their methods and objectives differ. For example, although on the

surface the Marshall plan and the Molotov plan seem similar in nature, mainly because they both

use material prowess to exert influence in war-torn Europe, the end goal differs. One nation seeks

to achieve a hegemony through coercion, while the other is more interest in collaboration. This

section explains what a hegemony is, the ideas behind its foundation and the way it moves power

to its benefit. After having a better understanding of hegemonies, it will be clearer how the would -

be hegemons might seek to influence the criteria for deploying UN personnel to the advancement

of their world-view. The members of this Council can then debate and decide upon deployment

criteria, having a better understanding of how their new guidelines will help establish the United

Nations as an International body, and how the member nations benefit from such foundation.

Hegemony can be defined as “a great capacity for coercion and/or great degree of influence or

control of the structures of international system and the international behavior of its units, but it

excludes situations where we have the establishment of relations of direct and official control of

foreign governments or territories.” 16 Based on this definition, four approaches to hegemony-

building efforts have been discerned, these are:

The Conventional approach comprises of what is usually known as a hegemony, where one

country exerts fundamental control over the structures of the international system and the behavior

of the actors that comprise it. The constitutive elements of a conventional hegemonic power

include military capabilities, control over raw materials, markets and capital, paired with

16 Antoniades – From “Theories of Hegemonies” to “Hegemony Analysis in IR:

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/2709786.pdf

UNSC 1948

16

competitive advantages in highly valued goods. The Untied State’s Marshall plan and the USSR’s

Molotov plan are examples of systems structured around the idea of controlling elements such as

capital and raw materials to exert influence over others and form a hegemonic block.

The Neoliberal approach is a counter to the neorealist hegemonic stability theory, which

advocates that an open and liberal world economy must have a hegemony to sustain it. The

neoliberal proposition is based on the International Organization approach to hegemony, in which

an international system established by a hegemon, through its institutions, can continue despite the

decline or collapse of the hegemon. This approach proposes that the international organizat ions

that are spawned from a hegemony’s world order are not bound to it, and shifts the focus from the

hegemon to the conditions and mechanisms of world structures. In this regard, the Neoliberal

approach is the most fitted to advocate from an independent and strong United Nations, where its

rules are shared by the whole members rather than enforced by few hegemonic powers.

The Gramscian approach is based on the idea that a hegemony is brought not by coercion, but

rather by consent. Antonio Gramsci described a hegemony as a social, economic and politica l

structure expressed through universal norms, institutions and mechanisms. Through these

methods, the rules of behavior are laid down and accepted through common values and believes.

Without diminishing the important over resources, those that follow Gramscian’s approach

understand that coercion can be applied on marginal cases, but a common understanding and

perception of the hegemon’s interests and values, which are accepted by the rest and helps promote

a consensual hegemony. Examples of this approach to hegemony is seen through the lens of ideas,

in the struggle between democracy and communism, both value-based systems that are accepted

by those who live within the institutions that promote them.

UNSC 1948

17

The Radical approach advocates that a project becomes a hegemony once it acquires universa l

signification. The hegemon and social forces that establish a hegemony do not define it, according

to the radical approach, as once it becomes universally significant it is defined and advanced by

the individuals that accept its norms. In other words, the hegemon does not lie in a powerful state

or idea, but rather with the individuals that see the international order brought by the hegemony as

an integral part of their place and view of the world.

While these approaches help understand a hegemony, they only consider the subject of a

hegemony (the hegemon) and the conditions of existence and reproduction of a hegemony, while

the nature of the movement of power tends to be lacking. To better understand the movement of

power, its useful to separate from where it comes from, either the inside or the outside, and where

its targeted, either in or out. Based on these two parameters, Antoniades defined hegemonies based

on how four methods of apply their worldview. These four categories are17 as follows:

2.2.1 Outside-out

A hegemony based on the possession of overwhelming material power, which is used as an

instrument to secure leadership or dominance in world politics. This form of applying power is the

traditional dependency structure seen in the Marshall and Molotov plans, in which the hegemon

targets and outside group, in this case a country, and exerts its influence through material wealth.

2.2.2 Outside-in

This strategy of power aims to generate a common set of believes between the hegemon and

its target to achieve dominance through consent rather than coercion. This method of power would

be favored by Gramscian-based hegemonies. While the previous approach relies uniquely in hard

17 Antoniades – From “Theories of Hegemonies” to “Hegemony Analysis in IR:

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/2709786.pdf

UNSC 1948

18

power, an outside-in hegemony favors soft power, convincing the targets to act in a way that

benefits the hegemon.

2.2.3 Inside-out

The conceptualization of a hegemony as a socio-cultural project in which the hegemon aims

to generate imitation within world politics. Unlike the Outside-in approach, the Inside-out way to

exert power does not seek to influence a target, but rather attract and co-opt them into the hegemon

project through a set of economic, political, social and/or military benefits.

2.2.4 Inside-in

A hegemony is a diffused and decentered apparatus aiming to govern internally. In this method

of power, the approach is not an imposition by the top that cascades down in society, but rather

exerts control bottoms-up. In this movement of power, the hegemony does not operate through

institutions but rather through its subjects and targets. By having no center and being the basis for

the subject’s way of life, the hegemony then becomes a condition of the existence of the subject’s

world-view. While this implies that the subject cannot live beyond the hegemony, it also implies

that due to the lack of centralization, the hegemony and the values it represents are not constant,

malleable to the will of the masses and the social conditions that alter the interpretation of the

hegemony.

Considering these four methods of applying power, a hegemon then seeks to build its

hegemony through four plausible approaches: Coercion, consent, attraction and life-integrat ion.

Basing a hegemony’s understanding not in its foundation, but rather in its modus operandi, it is

easier to analyze its methods and goals. Due to its military and representative nature, the way in

which United Nation Personnel is deployed will demonstrate the approach to power by the United

Nations, and more importantly, by the post-World War II hegemons that comprise it. As some

UNSC 1948

19

would-be hegemons have demonstrated a penchant for coercion, such as the USSR, others seek to

lead by consent, such as the US and the UK, while nascent projects indicate that attraction might

be the optimal way of employing power for France and Continental Europe18. The way in which

the United Nations deploys its resources will not only help determine what sort of world order it

seeks to establish, but it will also be indicative of the hegemon that wields the nascent United

Nations as a tool to impose its worldview and build a sprawling hegemony.

2.3 The United Nations Peacekeeping Personnel

The United Nations Personnel meant to be deployed is military in nature and are known as

Blue Helmets.19 The Blue Helmets are the troops and military observers that form the multinationa l

backbone of peacekeeping operations. Soldiers serving as blue helmets come from armies from

around the world and are members of their respective armies first and UN soldiers second.

The most common element of the blue helmets are infantry soldiers, however specialized

personnel referred to as enables also form their ranks. Enablers are soldiers skilled in other fields,

such as medicine or engineering, and can apply their knowledge to help in environments where

civilian personnel haven’t or can’t arrive due to field conditions.20

Although tentative ideas about what the Blue Helmets ought to do abound, such as protecting

civilians and providing security in conflict zones,21 the current use of Peacekeeping operations is

limited to maintaining ceasefires and stabilizing situations on the ground. This effort is meant to

contain tensions that would otherwise thwart the peacemaking process. Due to inaction from the

Security Council, there has only been one Peacekeeping mission as of today, staffed by unarmed

18 Europa – 1945 – 1959, A Peaceful Europe – the beginnings of cooperation: https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history_en#1945_-_1959 19 UN Peacekeeping – About us: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/about/ 20 United Nations Peacekeeping – Military: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/issues/military/index.shtml 21 UN Peacekeeping – Military http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/issues/military/

UNSC 1948

20

military observers and lightly armed troops with passive mandates such as monitoring and

reporting.22 The specifics of this mission are developed further in the paper.

2.4 Elements to Consider When Creating Criteria for the Deployment of UN Personnel

The United Nations Peacekeeping operations, and overall deployment of UN Personnel, will

establish United Nations objectives and methods, setting the tone to how the world will see the

UN. There are four elements to consider when crafting the criteria for deployment, and their

implications will determine the scope, depth and effectiveness of the Peacekeeping missions.

Successful Peacekeeping missions will further the mandate given to the UN, while failure to

achieve results will damage the faith given to the nascent international organ. The four elements

to consider are23:

2.4.1 Consent of the parties

An important element to consider is the acceptance of the parties involved in the mission.

Onboarding actors through a political process will boost the safety and freedom UN representatives

can take while operating on the ground, but requiring consent for executing a mission will

invariably limit the capabilities of the United Nations, as sometimes it would be in the best interest

of one actor not to have international intervention. Lacking such consent, however, can not only

increase the risks for UN Personnel, but also risk turning the mission into a political conflict and

distract from the original mandate. Lastly, it’s important to remember that even with the consent

of all parties, local or rogue elements might not agree. For example, if one of the accepting parties

is divided and struggling for internal control, there is no guarantee that the other part in the conflict

22 UN Peacekeeping – The Early Years: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/early.shtml 23 UN Peacekeeping – Principles of UN Peacekeeping:

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/principles.shtml

UNSC 1948

21

will agree to UN presence, and might interpret that military personnel that obtained the consent of

their foe is hostile.

2.4.2 Impartiality

The idea behind impartiality is not to neutral in the face of actions that go against the

mandate of the mission the UN Personnel has been deployed to execute, but rather avoid

judgements that will compromise the consent and cooperation of the parties involved. This element

is important if consent and credibility are relevant for the missions the Security Council envisions

will be assigned to the UN Personnel. For example, while Peacekeeping missions depend on

impartiality to ensure the collaboration of several parties, more active missions might depend on

the United Nations taking sides in a conflict. Ultimately, Impartiality allows the United Nations to

be an independent and just body that will be a fair arbiter in the resolution of conflicts, while at

the same time it undercuts the ability of member states to use UN Personnel to advance their

agendas.

2.4.3 Use of Force

The degree of force used will determine whether UN missions are a tool to enforce the will

of a country or group of countries, or if their objective is impartial. Even if the Security Council

deigns that all missions are to require consent and impartiality, force can still be used in a tactical

manner for self-defense. Likewise, the use of force can be broadened into a robust mandate, which

allows the UN operatives to use all means necessary to achieve the mandate if there is consent

from the host nation and the main parties of the conflict.24 the Security Council can also delimit

use of force for all missions, or adapt the use of force in a case by case basis, allowing some

24 UN – Peacekeeping Operation Principles, Non-use of force:

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/principles.shtml

UNSC 1948

22

missions to require consent and impartiality while others can operate without stringent

requirements to achieve specific objectives.

2.4.4 Legitimacy

The core of a legitimate claim is the acknowledgement of others. Although the Security

Council represents the body tasked with maintaining international peace and security, and member

states must comply to its resolutions25, that does not mean that some member states won’t disagree.

When crafting the criteria for deployment, considering the role of the General Assembly, if any,

would give greater legitimacy to the UN missions and raise the pressure for states to consent to

UN operations, while at the same time risks increasing time of deployment and losing a window

of opportunity or outright losing the right to deploy if the overall General Assembly disagrees with

the mission, despite the will of the Council. The veto power and the authority vested on the

Security Council would still allow it to send unilateral missions, but if the General Assembly

decries a mission, the pressure will instead be turned against the Security Council. Ultimate ly,

legitimacy through the General Assembly can grant leverage to the Security Council, or it can

backfire and undercut its ability to operate.

2.5 Ongoing Efforts: The Opportunity to Craft the Future

On November of 1947, the United Nations proposed the Partition Plan for Palestine as a

solution to end the British Mandate. The Plan proposes the creation of two states, one Jewish and

one Arab, by October of this year. The plan, however, was rejected by the Arab leaders, citing a

violation of the United Nations Charter right of self-determination. Meanwhile the Jewish Agency

25 UN – The Security Council: http://www.un.org/en/sc/

UNSC 1948

23

for Palestine has accepted the plan. The Partition Plan has caused controversy in an already tense

and unstable region.26

Seventeen days from now, the United Nations is planning to execute its first Peacekeeping

mission to help ease the transition from the British Mandate. In May 17, the United Nations Truce

Supervision Organization (UNTSO) will deploy military observers in the Middle East to monitor

ceasefires, supervise armistice agreements, prevent isolated incidents27 from complicating the

implementation of a solution between the Arabs and the Jews. The UN Office of Special Politica l

Affairs is currently organizing the operation, 28 but the details have yet to be ironed out. This gives

the Security Council the opportunity to see their criteria for deployment in action. The criteria for

deployment will not only map out the mandate of the mission, but show the world the sort of goals

the United Nations is pursuing, their effectiveness, and their inclusiveness.

2.6 Discussion Questions

The references attached at the bottom of each page are meant for you, an important member of

the Security Council, to be more informed about the subjects discussed. That being said, as all

important world figures, your schedule is packed with meetings, reason why you’ll find the

following questions useful, as they are meant to prompt you to think about the importance of this

subject and how you can better exploit your position in the Security Council.

• If your country is in a position to become a hegemon, what sort of hegemony works

better for your country?

• How could your country further its objectives through the criteria of the deployment of

the United Nations?

26 UN – The Plan of Partition and the End of the British Mandate: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/untso/ 27 UN – United Nations Truce Supervision Organization: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/untso/ 28 UN – Department of Peacekeeping Operations: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/about/dpko/

UNSC 1948

24

• Which countries might oppose your objectives? Do they hold Veto powers?

• Which countries might support your objectives?

• How could your country benefit from a strong and from a weak United Nations?

• What will be the objective of deploying UN Personnel? Will it be limited to

peacekeeping or will it take a more active role in maintaining international peace and

security?

• What will the role of the United Nations General Assembly be in the deployment of

United Nations Personnel?

2.7 Key Terms

• Hegemonic Stability Theory: The idea that the existence of a Hegemon creates “patterns

of stability within the international system.”29

29 Encyclopaedia Britannica – Hegemony: https://www.britannica.com/topic/hegemony#ref1181129

UNSC 1948

25

UNSC 1948

26

3 Topic 3 – Questions to be Considered by the UNSC under its

Mandate for the Maintenance of Peace and International Security

3.1 Topic Overview

In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, the global community continues to

adjust to a reshuffling of hegemony. The European colonial powers, deeply affected or crippled

by the effects of the war, find themselves in the twilight of their influence. In their stead the new

superpowers: the USA, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Soviet Union), and China are

ascendant. Additionally, the war and its aftermath have created a backlash against Eurocentric

imperialism as the principles of national identity, self-determination, and in some cases democracy

further accelerate the road to independence for several colonies.

However, rapid shifts in ruling power spark new, and bloody, regional conflicts. It is the

responsibility of the nascent UNSC to respond to, and pacify these conflicts. The council harbors

a variety of national interests, but its consensus effort should be to strive for the maintenance of

international peace and security. These difficult early conflicts will stress the UN’s ability to act,

and will present the balanced benefits and costs of interventionism and hegemony.

3.2 Historical Background

3.2.1 The British Colony of India

Through the East India Company, British influence as a trading power and conquest of the

Indian subcontinent largely began in the 1750’s. Participating in a complex array of regional

politics the company fought a series of intermittent wars that expanded its influence in the region.1 1

In response to the British usurpation of political influence and the accelerating Westernization of

the region, the Indian Mutiny erupted in 1857. This short but vicious confrontation saw massacres

and ferocity engaged by both sides.13 When the rebellion was crushed and peace restored in 1858,

UNSC 1948

27

the East India Company was abolished and the British Crown took over the subcontinent as a

British colony.10

During the British colonial period several legal and administrative changes were enacted,

including the Indian Councils Act and the High Courts Act. Infrastructure, particularly railways

began to grow and expand in this period. However, the British exercised a heavy tax rate upon the

colony and mandated the export of valuable cash crops.12 The Indian National Congress, a politica l

party urging for an independent Indian state, first convened in 1885.16 In 1906 the British divided

Bengal into Hindu and Muslim areas in a purported effort to help administration, though many

accused the government of pursuing a “divide and rule” policy. 12 This partition would begin the

early conflict between Hindus and Muslims in the area. Additionally, in 1906 the Indian Muslim

League was formed which, along with the Indian National Congress, would play a significant

political role in the later partition. The Indian independence movement first came to the forefront

in the 1920’s and 30’s under Mahatma Gandhi who promoted a system of nonvio lent

noncooperation and civil disobedience.16

3.2.2 The British Mandate in Palestine

During WWI with the weakening of the Ottoman Empire, the British high commissioner

of Egypt Sir Henry McMahon encouraged a revolt in the Ottoman region including Palestine,

promising British support for independence after the war. In 1917, the British Foreign Minister

Arthur Balfour declared British support for the creation of a “Jewish national home in Palestine. ”

Nevertheless, during the secret Sykes-Picot agreement France and Britain agreed to divide the

lands of the Ottoman Empire.25 The conflicting series of promises made by the British government

in this period strained its ability to fully complete any of them.

UNSC 1948

28

After the war, with significant support in the newly formed League of Nations the British

and French governments both established official mandates for the administration of states in the

Middle East: Britain in Palestine and France in Syria. The British mandate became official on

September 29, 1923 with the stated intent to “secure establishment of a National Jewish Home.”

Arabs were angered by the violation of their perceived right to self-determination.22 Particular ly

in Palestine there was significant discontent at the mentions of a Jewish state in the mandate, as

the territory had a majority Arab population.

Conflict between the Jewish and Arab populations within the territory grew from the

1920’s through the 1940’s as Jewish immigration to Palestine accelerated.19 This reached its apex

in the 1936 Arab Revolt, lasting until 1939 and costing over 5,000 lives.28 In response the British

issued a 1939 government White Paper limiting further Jewish immigration to the region. The

Jewish community in Palestine (the Yishuv29) saw this as a violation of the 1917 Balfour

Declaration. 19

3.2.3 The Dutch Colony of the East Indies

Dutch colonial power in Indonesia first coalesced in the 18th century under the Dutch United East

India Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie) or VOC. During the Napoleonic era,

relevant possessions of the archipelago exchanged

ownership repeatedly until the Dutch took control in 1815.

Driven by a financial and competitive imperia list

motivation, the Dutch aggressively expanded their

presence across the archipelago throughout the 19th

century.25 Despite an attempted “dualistic” ruling

hierarchy, Dutch colonial rule met resistance among the

Figure 1 - Rozenberg Quarterly

UNSC 1948

29

aristocracy; particularly in Java. In 1825 Prince Diponegro of Yogyakarta rebelled, sparking a civil

war that lasted five years and cost 215,000 Javanese their lives. With a Dutch victory in 1830,

colonial power was largely consolidated.41

In the ensuing period the Dutch ushered in “the Cultivation System” intended to aid the

Dutch kingdom financially by compelling the growth and trade of export crops for the financ ia l

benefit of the kingdom. This slowly began to change in 1901 when the Dutch Queen Willhelmina

announced a new “Ethical Policy” aimed at benefiting the native population. This policy had far-

reaching effects among which was the arousal of Indonesian nationalism as well as the cultiva t ion

of thinking surrounding democracy and self-rule.42 The Youth Pledge in 1928 became a highpo int

of Indonesian national consciousness proclaiming the ideals of “one motherland, one nation, and

one language.” 42

3.3 Current Situation

3.3.1 Kashmir

On August 8, 1942 Gandhi, Nehru and several other leaders of the Indian National Congress began

the “Quit India” movement. Immediately after its ratification by the party, the British arrested the

leaders of the movement, leading to mass demonstrations and rioting.17 After the war, the situation

began to shift with election of a new Labour government, led by Clement Attlee. Attlee’s foreign

policy showed determination to cut ties with and withdraw from financially exhaustive colonies in

the East.8 Conflict between elites on the subcontinent, as well as the influence of Mohammed Ali

Jinnah of the Muslim League, prompted the British to form a territorial divide of the ethnic and

religious Hindu and Muslim populations.6

UNSC 1948

30

British Parliament proposed a British withdrawal from the subcontinent in 1948. Attlee

appointed Lord Mountbatten as the last Viceroy responsible. Mountbatten promptly accelerated

this withdrawal to August

1947, widely believed to

be an ignorant and

shortsighted decision. In

just a few weeks “the

Radcliffe Partition” to

divide West and East

Pakistan from India was

drawn up.8

In the immediate aftermath of the hasty withdrawal; sectarian violence erupted causing

enormous human suffering, displacement, and loss of life. It is estimated that in less than six

months over 15 million peoples were displaced and 1-2 million killed (including Mahatma

Gandhi).9

Additionally, the Indian Independence Bill forming the division left a series of “princely

states” unallocated. The Bill only applied to the regions of India directly under British control

(approximately 54%) decreeing that the British departure would lapse its paramountcy over the

other 46% (about 564 states).15

Figure 2 - NY Times

UNSC 1948

31

Simply put, Mountbatten left them

independent, allowing them to determine their

ultimate accession to India or Pakistan. Despite

Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s numerous negotiat ion

attempts, urging that these states stay independent,

most (~554) acceded to the state of India quite

quickly.15 However, the Maharaja of Jammu and

Kashmir was reluctant in doing so. In October 1947

a tribal rebellion erupted in the western Kashmir region of Poonch. In a political effort to exert

control over the region, the Pakistani military quickly joined the Poonch insurgents. Soon after,

the combined forces threatened the capital of the state.5

Desperate, the Maharaja signed an Instrument of Accession with India. In return, the Indian

military stepped in to assist the Maharaja. This stalemated the conflict, as over several months of

fighting no side had made significant progress. India elevated the matter to the UN in a letter on

January 1, 1948.5 In response, on April 21, 1948 the UNSC Resolution 47 compelled both parties

to withdraw their troops progressively and for India to help oversee a plebiscite so that the people

of Kashmir might decide their accession democratically.3 Nevertheless, tensions remain and there

is no certainty that either state will comply with this agreement.5

3.3.2 Palestine

Britain in a weakened position during and after WWII, struggled significantly to manage

the escalating tension between Arabs and Jewish immigrants as part of their Mandate for the

administration of Palestine. This tension escalated as the Jewish Brigade Group organized the

“Brihah” after the war, an attempt to immigrate about 250,000 Jewish refugees to Palestine. 2 3

Figure 3 - Demystifying Kashmir

UNSC 1948

32

Concerned by the prospect of greater conflict, Britain stopped these efforts; many of the refugees

were interned indefinitely, which caused significant global outcry in 1946. 23 Based on the report

of the “Anglo-American Commission of Inquiry” US President Harry Truman pressured the

British government into admitting many of these

refugees into Palestine.24 During this period two

militant Zionist groups had arisen, the Irgun and the

Lehi. They believed that British policies in Palestine

were a betrayal of previous agreements, and that the

situation in the Middle East had to be deemed

untenable for the British, in order to guarantee an

independent Jewish state. To this end they coordinated

a series of militant and terrorist attacks on British

government and military targets. These included the

assassination of Lord Baron Moyne in 1944, and the tragic bombing of the King David Hotel in

1946, causing the loss of 91 lives.22 With the election of the Labour majority Britain, exhausted

after the war, simply lacked the financial, military, or political resolve to continue the mandate.

By 1947, with conflict between Jewish and Arab groups escalating, the British government

requested a U.N. solution. On November 29, 1947 the UNGA adopted Resolution 181, which

would divide the Palestinian Mandate into Jewish and Arab states.18

This plan was formally supported by Zionist leaders of the Yishuv (though privately

dissatisfied at the loss of Jerusalem) but wholly opposed by the Arab League and the Arab majority

of Palestine. Shortly after the vote, violence erupted between Jewish and Arab forces with terror

attacks slowly growing more militarized. With British troops not intervening to quell the violence,

Figure 4 - NY Times

UNSC 1948

33

thousands died in the ensuing months.19 Jewish forces, though outnumbered, were better organized

and consolidated leading to several early victories. With the slated departure of British troops on

May 15, 1948 the threat of an all-out war has tension in the Middle East at a fever pitch.19

3.3.3 Indonesia

In 1942, the Japanese captured the archipelago. During their three year rule, Indonesian

nationalism movements rapidly grew and accelerated.42 Shortly after the announcement of a

Japanese surrender, a nationalist leader; declared independence on August 15, 1945. The Dutch

and the Allies immediately denounced this declaration as that of a fascist regime.32 Nevertheless,

it would be months (late 1945, or even early 1946) before significant Allied forces arrived to

reestablish control. From late 1945 through 1946 a bloody revolution was fought between the

pemuda rebels and their Japanese and British opponents. Thousands of Republican Indonesian

militia fighters died fighting British and Dutch troops by late 1946.31 The “Linggarjati Agreement”

in 1947, was an accord brokered by the British; establishing a ceasefire and compromise by laying

out a path for the creation a semi-autonomous “United States of Indonesia” by 1949. 40

This agreement quickly fell apart, and by June 20, 1947 the Dutch began a program of

“police actions.” Ostensibly intended to restore law and order, these were accused of really being

a terror campaign against Republic factions. With global opinion rapidly turning against them, the

Dutch were pressured into signing the Renville Agreement in January 1948. This recognized a

ceasefire along the “Van Mook” line and recognized some political status to the Republic.31

Despite the agreement, Indonesian nationalists remain splintered politically and deeply unsatisfied.

Various factions threaten to mobilize, and some clashes of Republic troops in West Java have

occurred.31 The situation continues to deteriorate, demanding a more sustainable solution brokered

by the UNSC and endorsed by the global community.

UNSC 1948

34

3.4 Post-Colonial World, Right to Self-Rule, and International Security

Each of these conflicts reflects the effects of a new global order in the wake of the Second

World War. As the power and prosperity of colonial European powers has been grossly weakened,

the opportunity and interest for independence and self-determination will continue to grow across

the globe. Nevertheless, the ensuing power vacuum in many of these previously dominated regions

presents its own dangers. Ethnic, religious, and political violence can erupt as groups try to assert

their own dominance or in fear of domination by another.

The UNSC and the global community as a whole must be prepared for the emergence of such

conflict and respond steadfastly to preserve the peoples’ right to self-determination, while helping

to ensure peace. These conflicts will divide nations across boundaries of self-interest, politica l,

and ideological affiliation. Thus, sustainable peace and international security can only be achieved

by accounting for and bridging such divides to resolve regional and global conflicts alike.

3.5 Bloc Positions

3.5.1 The United States

The United States has largely acted in support of the right of self-determination. Explicit ly,

the Truman regime has expressed support for the establishment of a Jewish state in the past,

particularly as a result of the “Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry.”24 However, in the wake of

the eruption of hostilities after the vote for partition, US sentiment has slowly turned against the

partition due to concerns of an all-out civil war.22 Despite early support for its wartime ally, in

Indonesia, the Dutch police action saw a strong reaction from the United States; condemning the

Dutch Policy and beginning to promote Indonesian independence.39

UNSC 1948

35

3.5.2 Soviet Union

The Soviet Union has expressed support for decolonization efforts, despite its own policy

in Eastern Europe. Additionally, its national interests coincide directly with the weakening of

European presence in colonial areas, potentially allowing for government control by Communist

factions. 45

3.5.3 China

China is in a particularly turbulent period of history politically in the mid to late 1940’s.

Despite the efforts of the U.S. and the Marshall Agreement, the civil war between the Communists

and Nationalist armies continues to rage. With the nation in turmoil and inflation skyrocketing, the

Communists have slowly begun to succeed militarily against the Nationalists. Hostile against the

U.S. for its financial support of the Nationalists during Marshall’s mediation, a Communist victory

could see a realignment of global power and blocs within the UNSC. 47

3.5.4 Colonial Nations (Britain, France, Belgium)

While the traditionally colonial factions engender an attempt to retain much of their

colonial territorial control, their power and influence are waning. The combination of their

weakened financial and military state, coupled with the ascendance of US and Soviet superpowers

means they have the capacity to perhaps slow, but not stop global decolonization efforts.45

3.6 Discussion Questions

• What capacity should individual peoples have for self-determination, particularly after an

extended period of foreign control?

• How can efforts to ensure self-determination be balanced with the security and order that

hegemonic or colonial control provide?

UNSC 1948

36

• What can be done to pacify conflicts in regions that are characterized by sectarian, politica l,

ethnic, or religious strife?

• What role should the UNSC and the UNGA play in managing these transitions of power,

and how can the international community act to ensure peace in such situations?

• How much influence should large, advanced nations have in the determination and politica l

influence of developing regions?

3.7 Keywords

• Hegemony

• Mandate

• Plebiscite

• Accession

• Self-determination

• Trusteeship

3.8 Resources

3.8.1 Kashmir

1.http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1947.htm

2.http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/south_asia/2002/india_pakistan/timeli

ne/1947_48.stm

3.http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/47(1948)

4.http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/stable/pdf/2645304.pdf?refreqid=excelsio

r:4d0a9381adf218b5a806e04c49d37aff (India, Pakistan, and Kashmir: Antinomies of

Nationalism)

UNSC 1948

37

5.http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/lib/utxa/reader.action?docID

=183192 (The Kashmir Question by Sumit Ganguly)

6.http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/partition1947_01.shtml

7.https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/08/the-birth-and-partition-of-

a-nation-indias- independence-told-in-photos/261188/

8.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/mar/14/past.education

9.http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/06/29/the-great-divide-books-dalrymple

10. https://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/British/BrIndia.html

11. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/east_india_01.shtml

12. http://www.gatewayforindia.com/history/british_history3.htm#British colonial

period - Colonial Rule (1858 – August 1918)

13. https://www.britannica.com/event/Indian-Mutiny

14. https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/peacocks-at-sunset/

15. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=h48nhaNzHxEC&oi=fnd&pg=P

P1&dq=kashmir+1940s&ots=E59VFTSU9c&sig=D4ykcFRiok7tu2xqugP_h35q

Klc#v=onepage&q=kashmir%201940s&f=false

(Demystifying Kashmir)

16. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Indian-National-Congress

17. http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/makingbritain/content/1942-quit- india-

movement

3.8.2 Palestine

18. https://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/nov-29-1947-united-nations-

partitions-palestine-allowing-for-creation-of-israel/

UNSC 1948

38

19. http://www.merip.org/primer-palestine- israel-arab- israeli-conflict-new

20. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/books/review/Margolick-t.html

21. https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/FDF734EB76C39D6385256C4C0

04CDBA7

22. https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine#toc45073

23. https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005459

24. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/creation- israel

25. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/palestine-during-world-war- i

26. http://time.com/3445003/mandatory-palestine/

27. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

28. http://www.historytoday.com/charles-townshed/first- intifada-rebellion-palestine-

1936-39

29. http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-

and-maps/yishuv

3.8.3 Indonesia

30. http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/fact-sheets/fs62.aspx

31. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Indonesian_War_of_Independence

32. http://www.usindo.org/resources/the-origins-of-the- indonesian-nation-the-

indonesian-revolution-of-1945-49-2/

33. http://www.entoen.nu/indonesie/en

34. https://www.rnw.org/archive/black-page-dutch-history

35. https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/rijksstudio/timeline-dutch-history/1820-1950-

indonesia-and-decolonisation

UNSC 1948

39

36. http://www.san.beck.org/20-11-Indonesia1800-1950.html

37. https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000258825.pdf

38. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-15114517

39. http://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1818&context=maste

rs-theses

40. https://www.indonesianhistory.info/pages/chapter-5.html

41. https://www.indonesianhistory.info/pages/chapter-4.html

42. https://www.indonesia-investments.com/culture/politics/colonial-history/item178?

43. http://rozenbergquarterly.com/wikipedia-dutch-east- indies/

3.8.4 Miscellaneous

44. http://www.un.org/en/sc/inc/searchres_sc_year_english.asp?year=1948

(UNSC Membership)

45. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/asia-and-africa

46. http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/1948.shtml

(UNSC Resolutions of 1948)

47. https://www.britannica.com/place/China/War-between-Nationalists-and-

communists#ref590723