Ishaan Sharma

Dear delegates
Welcome to SPIT MUN 2015!
Its a great opportunity for us to be part of this MUN and be associated
with Sardar Patel Institute of Techbology. I am looking forward to an
interesting and an enjoyable session with such talented bunch of
delegates.
Model United Nations is a great opportunity for students coming from
all parts of the world to discuss world problems at a common platform
and look for solutions for the same.
Here is a study guide for all the delegates giving a brief of what the
agenda is all about. It is a sincere advice that this guide be treated as
one of resources and delegates go beyond the study guide for a better
debate. The scope of Study guide is very limited so it is a
matter of great concern that delegates refer to other sources
as well.
The agenda of this committee has been chosen keeping in mind the
dramatics of the geopolitical arena. The agenda has a wide scope of
discussion and we expect a healthy and engrossing debate with a lot of
accusations and unorthodox solutions from your dynamic minds.
Along with knowledge on the agenda it is also important for the
delegates to know certain other essential of a MUN. These essentials
are mandate of the committee, foreign policy of the nation and rules of
procedure which will be taken care in step by step fashion during the
course of committee as well.
In case of any query please feel free to contact the executive board.
Thank you and wishing you guys ALL THE BEST

Rishabh Srivastava
Sharma
Chairperson
Chairperson

Ishaan
Vice-

COMMITTEE DESCRIPTION - DISEC

The First Committee (DISEC) seeks to deal primarily with disarmament, global
challenges and threats to peace that affect the international community and to
deliberate upon solutions to the challenges in the international security regime. All
disarmament and international security matters are dealt with within the scope of
the United Nations Charter or relating to the powers and functions of any other
organ of the United Nations.
The committee works in cooperation with the United Nations Disarmament
Commission and the Conference on Disarmament, based in Geneva. It is the only
Main Committee of the General Assembly entitled to verbatim records coverage as
according to Rule 58 (a) of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. {58(a)
Verbatim records of the meetings of the General Assembly and of the Disarmament
and International Security (First Committee) shall be drawn up by the Secretariat
and submitted to those organs after approval by the presiding officer.
The General Assembly shall decide upon the form of the records of the meetings of
the other Main Committees and, if any, of the subsidiary organs and of special
meetings and conferences. No organ of the General Assembly shall have both
verbatim and summary records.

Agenda 1 Containing the

threat of ISIS in Iraq and Syria

Time and again, the international community has witnessed the splintering of established
nations and the creation of new states as a result of a quest for self-determination of ethnic
minority groups or the confrontation of different political factions. There have been
innumerable occasions throughout history during which these minority groups have either
attempted to assert their independence and their right to self-government, or alternatively
have been oppressed by the majority or governing group. Often times, these cases involve
rebellion and violence from either or both sides of the conflict, escalating the initial political
disagreement into a civil war, yielding economic and humanitarian crises. Furthermore, if the
separatist minority group is in fact successful in forming a nation state, stabilizing a
sustainable government and economy can become an even greater challenge in todays
modern society with focus on Middle East.

Islamic militant group ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), which has been increasing
its influence and power in the Syrian civil war, has took Iraq to the brink of a sectarian civil
war. This extremist organization has proven to hold an unprecedented amount of resources
and military capability. Furthermore, it now controls 35% of the Syrian territory and most of
the Syrian oil and gas fields as well as a great part of the Iraqi territory. The organization
may be added to the UN war crimes list for committing of public executions, tortures, mass
killings and other harsh and inhuman punishments for those disobeying the law. ISIS
sharpens the sectarian conflict between Sunni and Shia and represents an existential threat
for the Christian community in the Middle East. As the power of ISIS is continuously on the
rise, the atrocities are likely to get even worse.

Brief History of Iraq

In the aftermath of WWI the Ottoman Empire was divided by way of the treaty of Sevres. The
League of Nations placed Iraq under British mandate. A Hashimite monarchy was
established a Sunni Arab elite was appointed for government, disregarding Shiite and
Kurdish claims of independence. In 1932, marking the end of the mandate, Iraq became
independent, only to be occupied once again by Britain during WWII.
The Hashimite monarchy was overthrown in 1958 in a military coup led by Brig Abd-al-Karim
Qasim and ColAbd-al-Salam Muhammad Arif. Thus, Iraq was declared a republic. In July 1979
the president, Ahmed Hasan Al-Bakr, was replaced by Saddam Hussein, his vice president.
Saddam proceeded to purge his political rivals in order to secure his position and power.
In 1980, the Iran-Iraq war broke out. Saddam had no intention of deteriorating his relations
to Iran and even welcomed the ascent of Ayatollah Khomeini. Nevertheless, as the Iranian
Revolution threatened to spread across the border and territorial disputes arose, Saddam
declared war on Iran. The war lasted until 1988 and brought about no territorial gains on
either side, however an estimated one million lives were lost. 1988 marks not only the end
of the war with Iran, but also the genocidal campaign conducted against Iraqi Kurds. The
chemical weapons, such as mustard gas and sarin used in the process killed thousands.

Understanding the Invasion of US in Iraq

During World War I, Iraq sided with Germany and eventually fell under British control after
the war. After that, Iraq experienced several changes in government until in 1979, when
Sadam Hussein came to power as President. At the time, the US supported Hussein. Due to
the Iran hostage situation, the US was out of sorts with Iran, and therefore gladly sold Iraq
millions of dollars worth of US weapons, to back it in the Iraq- Iran war (1980).
In 1982, the US State Department, headed by President Ronald Reagan, removed Iraq from
its list of states supporting international terrorism despite opposition by certain congress
members. In 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait. Iraqs economy was hurting at the time due to the
recent war with Iran. It accused Kuwait of cheating it of its share of the Rumaila oil field and
claimed to be aggravated by Kuwaits uncompromising attitude in negotiations regarding the
islands of Bubiyan and Warbah, strategically situated near the Iraqi naval base of Umm Qasr.
Husseins invasion was successful, and he declared Kuwait to be a part of Iraq.

The UN strongly objected to this, and responded by creating a coalition of countries, and
building up forces in Saudi Arabia. The First Gulf War began. Operation Desert Storm was
primarily full of air attacks against Iraq, which lasted for 100 days, as Iraqi armed forces
were destroyed very quickly, and they hastily retreated from Kuwait. Following Kuwaits
liberation, the UN appointed a five-member boundary commission to demarcate the KuwaitIraq boundary.
In 1993, the CIA intelligence agency apparently discovered Husseins covert plan to
assassinate former President George H.W. Bush. As a result of this, US Iraq relations turned
cold, and the US launched an operation called Desert Fox. The US started making several
allegations against Iraq throughout the years, with special reference to Iraqs secret weapon
laboratories and uranium acquisition, insinuating Iraqs stockpiling motives. In 2002, the
UNSC passed resolution 1441, offering Iraq a final opportunity to comply with its
disarmament obligations.
Another factor that played a pivotal role in the invasion was oil. Oil was an issue because
Iraqs oil revenues meant that Hussein would always have the resources to foment trouble in
the region, would always be difficult to remove through internal opposition, and would
always use petrodollar influence to undermine U.N. resolutions, spike world oil prices, or
distort Western solidarity. However, many are certain that the invasion was planned with the
ulterior motive of seizing Iraqs wealth of oil resources.

Relationship between USA and Iraq

The period during the US invasion of Iraq was not uneventful, to say the least. Rather than
initially boosting the US public image, due to news such as grotesque abuses of Iraqi
detainees by U.S. soldiers, the invasion undermined it, spiking domestic and foreign criticism
of the USs decision to invade Iraq. The occupation forces were unable to thwart a wave of
lawlessness and violence that destabilized Iraq in just weeks subsequent to Husseins
downfall.
The USs attempt to organize popular elections for a new government within 90 days failed
miserably. Within months, the US faced a debilitating insurgency across Iraq. This seemed to
come from three sources: the Sunnis, Shiite militias, and non Iraqi Islamists who infiltrated
Iraq due to their deep-seated hatred for the US. Suicide attacks, sniper fires, car bombs and
roadside bombs were commonplace, and killed several US soldiers, more than those who
had died during the invasion itself. The annual costs to the US treasury rose dramatically,
and the security situation in the US itself worsened because of anti-US attacks.
The US established the CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) to govern Iraq. The CPA
transferred full governmental authority to the Iraqi Interim Government in 2004. In 2005,
millions of Iraqis participated in a democratic election. There was a clash between the
growing insurgency and the quest to democratize Iraq, which came to a head in 2006.
President Bush, in a strategic initiative known as the surge, increased the number of GIs in
Iraq and ordered them to reform their modes of operation and engage in political initiatives
designed to gain goodwill. US forces used diplomacy, persuasion and aid to mobilize various
factions to fight against insurgent groups.

By 2008, the surge seemed to succeed. The presence of US troops partially suppressed
Iraqs internal political, military and economic challenges. Obama took office in 2009 and
gradually concluded US military presence in Iraq. He ended combat operations in 2010, and
according to a formerly signed SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement), withdrew them all in
2011.

Situation in Iraq and Syria

Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), a predominantly Sunni jihadist group, seeks to sow civil
unrest in Iraq and the Levant with the aim of establishing a caliphatea single, transnational
Islamic state based on sharia. The group emerged in the ashes of the U.S.-led invasion to
oust Saddam Hussein as al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), and the insurgency that followed provided it
with fertile ground to wage a guerrilla war against coalition forces and their domestic allies.
Since the withdrawal of U.S. forces in late 2011, the group has increased attacks on mainly
Shiite targets in what is seen as an attempt to reignite conflict between Iraq's Sunni minority
and the Shiite-dominated government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Burgeoning violence
in 2013 left nearly eight thousand civilians dead, making it Iraq's bloodiest year since 2008,
according to the United Nations.
Meanwhile, in 2012 the group adopted its new moniker, ISIS (sometimes translated as
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL) as an expression of its broadened ambitions as
its fighters have crossed into neighboring Syria to challenge both the Assad regime and
secular and Islamist opposition groups there.

Origins of ISIS
The insurgent group was launched by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an Arab of Jordanian descent,
and flourished in the sectarian tensions that followed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Zarqawi had commanded volunteers in Herat, Afghanistan, before fleeing to northern Iraq in
2001. There he joined with Ansar al-Islam (Partisans of Islam), a militant Kurdish separatist
movement, for whom he led the group's Arab contingent. Analysts say this group, not alQaeda, was the precursor to AQI.
Ahead of the 2003 invasion, U.S. officials made a case before the UN Security Council linking
Zarqawi's group with Osama bin Laden, though some experts say it wasn't until October
2004 that Zarqawi vowed obedience to the al-Qaeda leader. The U.S. State Department
designated AQI a foreign terrorist organization that same month. "For al-Qaeda, attaching its
name to Zarqawi's activities enabled it to maintain relevance even as its core forces were
destroyed [in Afghanistan] or on the run," wrote Brian Fishman, a counterterrorism fellow at
the New America Foundation.
According to a 2011 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Zarqawi
developed a four-pronged strategy to defeat the coalition: isolate U.S. forces by targeting its
allies; discourage Iraqi collaboration by targeting government infrastructure and personnel;
target reconstruction efforts through high-profile attacks on civilian contractors and aid
workers; and draw the U.S. military into a Sunni-Shiite civil war by targeting Shiites.

The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), the transitional government established by the
United States and its coalition partners, made two decisions early in the U.S.-led occupation
that are often cited as having fed the insurgency. The CPA's first order banned members of
Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party from government positions (so-called "de-Baathification"); its
second order disbanded the Iraqi army and security services, creating hundreds of
thousands of new coalition enemies, many of them armed Sunnis.

Recent Developments
The Jamaat al-Tahwid wal-Jihad, the formation that would later evolve into IS, was created in
1999 and spread unrest in Iraq but Sunni Iraqis and competing militant groups forced it to
retreat in 2008. Later, under the aegis of self-proclaimed Caliph Ib-rahim (Abu Bakr alBaghdadi), IS was able to exploit the economic downfall and social tensions within Iraq as
well as the turmoil of the Syrian Civil War.
Past military offensives have led to the seizure of relatively modern military equipment from
the US-backed Iraqi Army, the capture of strategically important locations such as the Tabqa
Dam in Syria and the Mosul Dam in Iraq. Furthermore, the Syrian Civil War enabled IS to
expand further into territory previously held by moderate Syrian rebels of the Free Syrian
Army, spreading as far as Al-Bab and Al-Bukamal. These conquests went hand in hand with
grave breaches of human rights that were widely publicized in media outlets around the
world.

Inevitably, one might say in light of the prevalent doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P),
the United States of America fostered support and eventually forged a coalition determined
to destroy the threat of ISIS. The list of supporters ranges from big contributors such as the
USA and the UK to nations like Bahrain and Lithuania the measures taken against IS are
equally diverse, including air strikes and weapon shipments as well as intelligence sharing
and internal bans of groups financially or or-ganisationally supporting IS. Some successes
have already been achieved by this multi-faceted approach, the Kurdish Peshmerga forces
were able to secure the Mosul Dam and other parts of critical infrastructure, and religious
minorities like the Yazidis have been defended more or less successfully.

Only very recently, on 2nd October 2014, the Turkish parliament has agreed to join the USled coalition. This is ground-breaking development because Turkey is now the first coalitionmember to border the battle zone and could soon deploy troops to cross the border and
relieve the flanks of both Kurdish Peshmerga and Syrian rebels. At the same time, Turkey has
its very own interests in keeping the possibility of a stronger Kurdish spirit as low as

possible. Regardless whether one regards Turkeys behaviour as ethically wrong or politically
smart, it is a brinkmanship that all nations present in this Council need to take into account.
Furthermore, Iraq, one of the two states concerned by IS operations, is highly unstable and
saw its armed forces disperse in the face of IS attacks. In doing so Iraq has abandoned a
great deal of US military equipment, ranging from tanks over mortars to modern assault
rifles. This weaponry, now in the possession of IS, has drastically increased the fighting
power of the group. Crucial mistakes such as the inadvertent airdrop of supplies by the Iraqi
Air Force to IS troops reveal that Iraqs military is unreliable and consistently unorganized.

UN Involvement
In a recent speech US President Barack Obama stated that if you threaten America, you will
find no safe haven. Traditionally speaking, however, there has been little meaningful
discourse within the United Nations with regards to terrorist acts, mainly because of the
definitional question of what defines a terrorist and a terrorist act. As such, proposals for a
Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism that would also tackle issues such as
the illicit financing and support of terrorist groups have definitely been discussed since
1996, but to this day no agreement has been reached. Indeed, the very question whether IS
is a terrorist army or a competing player in the geopolitical game depends on the definition
of these terms.
Against this background, the UNSC has remarkably passed resolutions that also concern IS.
The two most recent resolutions are Resolution 2170 (2014) and Resolution 2178 (2014).
The former includes the decision to freeze assets of six individuals within groups such as alQaida, IS, and the Al-Nusrah Front, and more generally interrupt the flow of financial support
it also paved the way to taking national measures to suppress the flow of foreign terrorist
fighters.
The latter more strongly focuses on the issue of foreign fighters in the ranks of terrorist
groups, specifically advocating that particularly the states in the region should intensify cooperation to control borders. Furthermore, it includes sections for preventive behaviour,
advising that member states should engage relevant communities and non-governmental
ac-tors in developing strategies to counter the violent extremist narrative.
Overall, UN involvement has not thus far resulted in tangible results many decisions have
been made outside the UN in multilateral agreements and international cooperation (See
Past and Recent Developments) and as such the UN has been left to engage with topics that
would only have less immediate effects, such as financing and border security.
The lack of visible results has not kept the political watch-dogs from scrutinising the current
political agenda of the Security Council; the most recent anti-terror resolution does, legally
speaking, not only refer to ISIS and other groups like Khorasan, but has a broader scope that
could be abused by different nations for different reasons. The notion that Russia, China, and
various Western states could agree on an anti-terror resolution indicates that the framework

is extremely broad, which in turn worried many political commentators that it could be
abused for other state operations against undesired groups.

Foreign Fighters in Iraq and Syria

Islamic State fighters - among them many foreign jihadists - have a reputation for brutality.
Atrocities allegedly committed by those in the group's ranks include kidnappings,
beheadings, crucifixions, and torture and summary executions. International investigators
gathering evidence against Islamic State fighters have built up a detailed picture of how IS
operates, with self-appointed leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi at the helm.
Directly beneath him are four advisory councils: Sharia (Islamic law); Shura (consultation);
military and security. The latter two are the most powerful. This one-plus-four structure is
then duplicated down the chain of command to local level.
The US Central Intelligence Agency believes IS may have up to 31,000 fighters in Iraq and
Syria - three times as many as previously thought. Among them are foreign recruits - the
number of whom has surged since IS declared itself a caliphate in the summer, international
investigators say. Figures from the London-based International Centre for the Study of
Radicalization and Political Violence (ICSR) and the New York-based Soufan Group show an
estimated 12,000 fighters from almost 80 countries have travelled to Syria and Iraq to fight
with extremist groups.

Some have travelled from as far away as China, Canada and Australia. Australian officials
believe at least 60 of the country's citizens are fighting with jihadist groups in Syria and
northern Iraq. Others suggest the figure could be as high as 250.

On 18 September, police in Sydney arrested 15 people and charged one with conspiracy to
prepare a terrorist attack following armed raids across the city. It followed reports of a plot to
carry out "demonstration killings" by Islamic extremists, including a public beheading.

Violations by ISIS
ISIL, commonly referred to as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), has been causing
increasing international alarm over its escalating human rights abuses since its insurgence
into Syria and Iraq that began in early 2013, prompting strong denouncements and military
action against the group. Recent airstrikes against ISIS by the US and several Arab countries
were defended to the UN as necessary and consistent with the UN Charter to defend Iraq
and protect the US from terrorism.
Last week, the newly-appointed UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid bin
Ra'ad, decried ISIL for its recent killings and human rights violations of women in ISILcontrolled areas in Iraq. Earlier in September, Saudi Arabia's conservative top clerical council
made its most comprehensive verbal attack against Islamic radicalism when it issued a
statement calling terrorism a "heinous crime" and calling for its perpetrators to be tried in
court.
Also this month Germany, following an ISIS-led attack on a group of Yazidis in western
Germany, banned all images and activities in support of ISIS effectively outlawing support
for the group. Islamic State militants in Iraq have committed gross human rights abuses
that may amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity, including the forced recruitment
of children and the abduction of girls to be sold as sex slaves, according to a U.N. report

As of August 2014, an estimated 1.8 million Iraqis have been displaced due to ongoing
violence involving ISIS, the reports says, and at least 4,692 civilians were killed between
June and August alone. UNAMI/OHCHR has received reports of serious violations of
international humanitarian law and gross abuses of human rights that have been
perpetrated by ISIL and associated armed groups, with an apparent systematic and
widespread character, the report states.
"These include attacks directly targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure, executions and
other targeted killings of civilians, abductions, rape and other forms of sexual and physical
violence perpetrated against women and children, forced recruitment of children,
destruction or desecration of places of religious or cultural significance, wanton destruction
and looting of property, and denial of fundamental freedoms." Witnesses in Mosul said ISIS
militants made orphaned children pose with flags, while others were seen wearing similar
attire as fighters and carrying weapons too big for them to handle.
The report also says that ISIS has been particularly harsh in regards to the treatment of
women, as the group has attacked and killed female doctors and lawyers.

Summary of the Problem

It is difficult to overstate the size of the challenge at hand; if IS is treated with inertia and a
distinct lack of assertiveness, it could not only consolidate its stand in the region, it could
also become a threat to the Kurdish people as much as to moderate Syrian rebels.
Conversely, if the UN decides to indulge in the dreams of R2P, this could further increase the
Middle Easts level of alienation towards the West and, again, destroy all previous efforts of
sustainable state-building.
The issue per se is best described by the formation and development of IS; Ra-cial tensions,
competing religious interpretations, economic depression, lack of central governance, and
clashing interests of the global players have fuelled a fire that, thus far, proves to be difficult
to extinguish. The attractiveness of IS to foreign fight-ers questions the very constitution of
Western societies, touching upon notions of alienation, integration, and censorship.
Similarly, IS has shown its determination to engage in state-building by setting up a
functioning government as well as active public institutions, offering a very strict, but
ordered home to people who have previously had to fear sectarian clashes. IS has also been
reported on having daily oil revenues of up to $3 Million in combination with external
financiers a multi-prong approach has to be found to stop IS from gradually increasing its
wealth and influence.
Despite the worldwide acknowledgement that IS is a threat to global security, basic
questions about the strength of the groups military both in terms of quality and quantity are
still disputed and strongly change from source to source. IS is very much an unknown
variable, then, because no one knows what exactly it possesses and, more importantly, what
it could further mobilise if it was brought in a position to do so.

Questions a Resolution must answer

1. Is it possible to isolate the Iraqi Situation from the Syrian Civil War?
2. How can DISEC prevent the free flow of weapons and money coming from individuals
in other countries?
3. Acknowledging these transfers already exist in case of Syria and Iraq, how can the
accountability be strengthened in order to avoid arming ISIS?
4. Are personal sanctions on these donors the best method to punish and avoid ISIS
support?
5. Would any kind of foreign intervention be considered legitimate by: The UN / the
public / the people who are ultimately affected in the region?
6. Can ISIS be defeated from inside? What can be done to rescue hostages from ISIS?

Agenda 2 - The situation in

Crimea

Ukraine has long been a crossroads between Europe and Russia. Theterm Ukraine itself may
be translated as at the border or borderland. Throughouthistory, it has been heavily
contested, ruled and divided by various powerful rulers,mostly between Polish rulers and the
Russian ones. In fact, the Ukraine remaineddivided until its consolidation into a Soviet
republic. Following the RussianRevolution, a Ukrainian movement for self-determination reemerged, which led to acreation of several separate Ukrainian states for a short period of
time.

Background
Ukraine, the largest state situated wholly within the European continent, comparable in size
and population to those of France, is situated in the sensitive region between Russia and
Poland, Romania, Hungary and Slovakia, all member states of North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation (NATO), therefore possessing a geographically significant position.
Throughout history, the area has been heavily ruled and divided by various powerful rulers
of Russian and Polish ethnicity. In fact, the Ukraine remained divided until its consolidation
into a Russian republic. Following the Russian Revolution, a Ukrainian movement for selfdetermination emerged, which led to the creation of several separate Ukrainian states for a
short period of time. By 1921, however, most of the Ukraine had been taken over by the
Soviet Union and eventually the Ukraine became one of the original constituent republics of
the Soviet Union in December 1922, playing a key role in the formation of the whole Soviet
Union, being central to the Union geographically and also in terms of economic progress.
Stalins agricultural collectivization, imposed in the 1930s, ushered in a severe famine and
the death of millions in the Ukraine, with any opposition being purged, the situation being
similar to the rest of the states in the Soviet sphere of influence.
Near the end of the Second World War, the Germans that were first welcomed as liberators
were later met with opposition from the Ukrainian guerrillas who also displayed such
aggression to the Soviet forces with anti-Soviet resistance continuing until 1953. After the
war Stalin forcibly deported the entire community of Muslim Tatars, a group of 200,000 300,000 who had lived on the Crimean peninsula for centuries, due to their alleged
collaboration with Nazi Germany. Only after the collapse of the Soviet Union could many of
them return to the Crimea. Several territorial changes occurred in the Ukraine during and
after the Second World War. For instance, East-Galicia, including Lviv, was added to the
Ukrainian territory in 1945. In 1954 Nikita Khrushchev had the Crimean region annexed to
the Ukraine.
In 1986, one Ukrainian city, namely Chernobyl, gained an ambiguous reputation as one
reactor in its nuclear power station exploded, sending a radioactive cloud across Europe,
contaminating approximately 8% pf Ukraines territory.

In July 1990, the Ukrainian parliament passed a declaration of sovereignty and after a failed
coup in Moscow against Mikhail Gorbachev, the Ukraine passed the act of independence and
held a nationwide referendum in which 90% of the Ukrainians voted in favour of
independence. Being ranked as number three nuclear country in the world, the Ukraine
ratified the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and
turned its nuclear arsenal over to Russia for destruction (completed 1996). After
independence tensions emerged over the Crimean peninsula, former Russian territory with
its majority Russian population. In 1995, after the Crimea challenged the Ukrainian
government's sovereignty and threatened to secede, the Ukraine placed Crimeas
government under national control.

Another important and rather contentious issue was the division between Russia and the
Ukraine of the former Soviet Black Sea fleet, based in the Crimean port of Sevastopol. A
basic agreement, under which four fifths of the fleet would fall under Russian control, was
reached in 1995, and in 1997 it was agreed that Russia would be allowed to base its fleet at
Sevastopol for 20 years. In 2010 the agreement was extended by another 25 years to 2042
in exchange for Russias supply of discounted natural gas.
The first president after independence, Leonid Kravchuk, presided over a period of economic
decline and excessive inflation. His successor, Leonid Kuchma, oversaw steady economic
recovery, yet only a few state-run companies dominated the market. More importantly, he
was accused of conceding too much to Russian economic interests, corruption and limiting
media freedom. Public opinion turned against him especially after manipulations of
presidential elections in 2004, which led to the peaceful Orange Revolution. A diverse

alliance of pro-Western party members, socialists, nationalists and business leaders united
behind the main opposition leader and former Prime Minister Viktor Yushchenko, who won
the re-held presidential election against Viktor Yanukovych. Yuliya Tymoshenko.
The new president starts course that should bring Ukraine closer to the EU and NATO. Due to
an open rivalry and the president dismissed the government of Tymoshenko in 2005. In 2006
Yanukovych became Prime Minister again until parliamentary elections in 2007. After those
elections Yulia Tymoshenko was appointed prime minister again, in coalition with President
Yushchenkos party.
Even though the EU has become the most important trading partner over the past few
years, Russia remains the largest individual trading partner and the Ukraine still greatly
depends on Russia for its gas supply.
Ukraine is a major transit route for Russian gas export to Europe. In January 2006 and 2009
Russia has cut supply for gas in a dispute over unpaid bills and prices. The effects of these
cuts were also felt in other European countries, where people had to deal with gas
shortages.
In 2010 Viktor Yanukovych, won the presidential election and Tymoshenko resigned as a
Prime Minister. Yanukovych swiftly opted for implementing a foreign and trade policy towards
Russia and clamped down on media freedom. He also had various opponents, most
prominently Ms Tymoshenko, charged with abuse of state funds with regards to gas deals
and imprisoned in trials widely regarded as politically- motivated. The parliamentary
elections of 2012 led to a major victory of Yanukovychs party. However, OSCE observers
expressed grave concerns over irregularities.
In August 2013 trade tensions with Russia flared again, with Ukraines trade negotiations
with the European Union being the trigger. In November 2013 the Ukrainian government
decided to abandon plans to sign an association agreement with the EU, which led massive
anti-government protesters to take streets of Kiev, as well as an on-going political crisis.

Russia-Ukraine Relation
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991, world attention has focused on the
future of the new independent states (MS) in Central and Eastern Europe. Their survival has
depended on Russia's recognition of existing and inviolable borders between itself and the
republics of the former Soviet Union (FSU). Ukraine has been of particular importance to
Russia because, in becoming an independent state, it has completely changed the
geopolitics of Eastern Europe. Ukraine's struggle for independence pushed Russian borders
500 miles to the east. Ukraine has limited Russias access to the Black Sea.

Sherman Garnett best describes why this country is important: Ukraine is the keystone in
the arch of the emerging security environment in Central and Eastern Europe.
Russian national security interests in Ukraine include culture; language; the strong Russian
diaspora on the Crimean peninsula, as well as in eastern Ukraine; extensive economic links:
defence industry, agriculture, energy, and military early warning radar systems; basing
rights at Sevastopol; the Black Sea Fleet; and Ukraine's strategic and crucial geographic
location. The region is full of precious resources: Donetsk and Kherson coal, Katerynoslav
steel, Kharkiv industry, agriculture products (e.g., wheat, salt, tobacco, wine and fruits), and
the Crimean peninsula's vacationing resorts.: The Russian-Ukraine Friendship Treaty In
general, the Russian policy makers find it very difficult to fundamentally differentiate
themselves from the Ukrainians, as they both share very similar cultures, languages, and
lifestyles. Thought the similarity persists, Russian policymakers see Ukraine is tilting towards
the West, towards NATO whilst the Russian Federation remained east. Also during the Final
Act of the Conference on Security and Co-Operation in Europe, (also known as the Helsinki
Accords, or the Helsinki Declaration) in Helsinki, 1975, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic
was also one of the signatories.

Crimea
The region of Crimea is as complicated, if not more when comparing with otherparts of
Ukraine. Crimea was a part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire since 17 thCentury, later taken by
the Russians and has remained a part of Russia until 1954.The Crimean Peninsula changed
hands on 1954 from Russia to Ukraine by the SovietLeader Nikita Khrushchev. However this
is not a significant piece of history seeingthat Ukraine and Russia were united within one
Soviet Union back in the days. Ashistory suggested, the Soviet Union has broken down into
sovereign countries in 1991,and yet Crimea was left behind with the Ukrainians. However, it
is very crucial tobear in mind that the Russians have not only left the Crimean Peninsula
behind,which the Russian government has devoted a lot of resources upon.

As the closely connected relationship brakes within a sudden, different viewsemerged within
the country of Ukraine: west as pro-Europe and the east aspro-Russians. This however, has
affected severely upon the peninsula of Crimea as ithas remained a part of Russian for a
long time, though was unintentionally left tothe Ukrainians upon the partition of the Soviet
Union, many Crimean citizens remainwhole-heartedly Russian. More importantly, Crimea is
the only eastern provincewithin the country of Ukraine with an ethnic Russian majority.
But this is not yet the end of the Crimean problem, as the time continues since1991, people
have moved into and out of Crimea due to its geographicallocation-close to Turkey, Ukraine
and Russia. With its population blended with threemajor region and more, Crimea was, and it
is still facing an unprecedented state ofdelicacy. Moreover under the influenced of the newly
emerged Crimean Separatism,the position of Crimea and the direction of development
shifted from only within thecountry of Ukraine, (though its tough, given the complicated
Russian-Ukrainerelation) to in between Russia and Crimea.
Though arguably, the relationship between Russia and Crimea, or the country of
Ukraine should not and cannot be escalated to the level involving militaryinterventions, as
stated within the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, butthe Crisis within

Crimea in early 2014 might not be included within the Memorandumas the origin of the crisis
is considered to be internal, rather than external, which isprohibited.
The Crimean crisis is sometimes viewed to begin starting on 21 February 2014,when
President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev, the capital city of Ukraine. Since then,Russians have
accused the European Union and the United States of America ofmanipulating the politics of
Ukraine, which is the infringement upon Ukrainesnational sovereignty. On February 26, proRussian forces began to gradually takecontrol of the Crimean peninsula, and a referendum
on whether to join Russia hasstarted thereafter. The result is outstanding: with 83% of
turnout and 96.77% and95.6% affirmative vote, the people in Crimea have chosen to return
their land back toRussia. However, the vote is strongly condemned by the western world
that is theEuropean Union, the United States of America and so on. Furthermore, the
UnitedNations General Assembly (UNGA) has passed a resolution titled TerritorialIntegrity of
Ukraine and deemed the independent referendum aftermath of theCrimean peninsula
invalid. More importantly, this resolution is proposed by Canada,Costa Rica, Germany,
Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine, as a mean to counter-act withthe previously Security Council
resolution which was vetoed by the RussianFederation.
In addition, Barrack Obama on March 6th 2014 warned the Republic of Crimeathat their
attempt to reclaim autonomy of joining the Russia Federation is a violationof the sovereign
integrity of Ukraine and the International Law. Furthermore, Obamastressed that the United
States will be intervening if the process continues.Later andafter the referendum, Russia has
incorporated the region of Crimea and Sevastopolinto the Southern Military District.

The response to Russias attempts to intervene with Crimea is overwhelmingaround the

globe. On March 1st, Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary-General of the UnitedNations had
expressed his grave concern upon the development and has called for animmediate
restoration of Ukraine. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATOs SecretaryGeneral, on March 2nd
also emphasise the urge of removal of Russian force within theregion of Crimea so that the
peace of its adjacent region will not be compromised.Alongside the UN and NATO, many
other countries have also joined the side of theclearance of Russian interference over the
territory of Ukraine. However, countriessuch as Venezuela, Syria and Cuba on the contrary
have claimed to supportRussias action of recovering the autonomy of the Crimean
region.Until now, this issue is still on-going, and has affected not only Russia, but themajority
of the world in different ways.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONFLICT

On 21 November 2013 President Yanukovych's cabinet announces that it isabandoning an
agreement that would strengthen trade ties with the EU, and willinstead seek closer cooperation with Russia. The trade agreement, as well as apolitical association deal, is part of
the European Unions Eastern NeighbourhoodPolicy, which was launched in 2005. The
incentive was to offer trade and politicalbenefits to the post-Soviet states traditionally falling
within Moscow's orbit. Theneighbourhood policy, however, does not offer eventual
membership of the EU ornegotiations to join. Ukrainian MPs also reject a bill that would have
allowed jailedopposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko to leave the country. Protests begin that
samenight,

with

only

several

hundred

present

at

first.

Media

starts

making

its

firstcomparisons with the Orange Revolution.

On 24 November the protests gather pace, with 100,000 people attending ademonstration in
Kiev. It is the largest protest in the Ukraine since the OrangeRevolution in 2004. On 30
November the police launch their first raid on protesters,arresting 35 persons. Images of
injured demonstrators spread quickly in the media,raising the international profile of the
protests. Protesters occupy Kiev City Hall and Independence Square in dramatic style on 1
December. Subsequently they turn thesquare into a tent city. On 8 December the largest
demonstration so far comprises of800,000 people attending a protest in Kiev. After talks with
President Viktor
Yanukovych, Russian President Vladimir Putin agrees on 17 December to buy $15bnof
Ukrainian debt and to reduce the price of Russian gas supplies to Ukraine byabout a third.
On

16

January

2014

Ukraines

parliament

passes

restrictive

anti-protest

law,

whichopponents call draconian. 22 January marks the day that the unrest turns deadly
forthe first time as two people die from gunshot wounds after clashing with the police.The
body of a high-profile activist, Yuriy Verbytsky, is found the next day in a forestafter he was
reportedly abducted earlier in the week. The 24 January sees thestorming of regional
government offices in Western Ukraine by the protestors. Aspressure mounts, Ukraine's
Prime Minister Mykola Azarov resigns and parliamentannuls the anti-protest law on 28
January. One day later, the Parliament passes anamnesty bill promising to drop charges
against all those arrested during the unrest, ifprotesters leave government buildings. The
opposition rejects its conditions.On 14 February all 234 protesters, who have been arrested
since December, arereleased but charges against them remain. On 16 February, protesters
evacuateKiev city hall after occupying the building since 1 December, along with other
publicbuildings

in

the

regions.

day

later,

the

arrested

protesters

are

granted

amnesty.18February sees the killing of at least 18 people, including seven policemen.

Protesterstake back the control of Kievs city hall while Ukrainian riot police encircles

theIndependence Square, where some 25,000 protesters remain.A truce agreed on 19

February is short-lived. 20 February marks the day that CentralKiev sees the worst violence
yet: the death toll in 48
hours of clashes rises to at
least77. Hundreds more are
wounded.

Videos

Internet

show

snipersfiring
holding

on

the

uniformed

at

protesters

makeshift

shields.

Witnesses

report

demonstrators aredying from

single

gunshot

wounds.

Three

European

Union

foreign ministers fly in totry to broker a deal and Russia announces it is also sending an
envoy.On

21

February

President

Yanukovych

signs

compromise

deal

with

oppositionleaders, envisaging a new national unity government, constitutional changes to

handpowers back to parliament and early elections, to be held by December. The
foreignministers

of

France,

Germany

and

Poland

brokered

the

deal.

Sporadic

violencecontinues and in Western Ukraine protesters occupying government buildings

remaindefiant, refusing to recognise the Kiev authorities.
One day later on 22 February, protesters take control of the presidentialadministration
buildings without resistance and opposition leaders call for elections tobe held on 25 May.
President Yanukovych is nowhere to be seen and reportsemerge that he has left for Kharkiv
in the northeast of Ukraine. Parliament votes toremove him from power with elections set for
25 May. Mr Yanukovych appears on TVto insist that he was the lawfully elected president,
and denounces a coup dtat.His arch-rival, opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, who was
jailed for seven years in2011, is freed and travels from Kharkiv to Kiev. On 23 February the
UkrainianParliament

names

speaker

Oleander

Turchynov

as

interim

president.

Mr

Turchynov,a close associate of freed former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, tells the
MPsthey have until Tuesday to form a new unity government. An arrest warrant is issuedfor
Mr Yanukovych on 24 February and Mr Turchynov warns of dangers ofseparatism. On Feb 25
Pro-Russian Aleksey Chaly is appointed as Sevastopols defacto mayor as rallies in Crimea
continue.On 26 February the members of the proposed new government appear before
thedemonstrators

in

Independence

Square,

with

Arseniy

Yatsenyuk

nominated

as

primeminister. Acting as interior minister, Yatsenyuk announces disbanding the elite

Berkutpolice unit, which has been blamed for the deaths of protesters. In the Crimea

rivalprotests continue as the Crimean Tartars supporting the new Kiev administrationclash
with the pro-Russia protesters in the region. Russian troops near border withthe Ukraine are
put on alert and drilled for combat readiness.On 27 February a new coalition is formed
inthe Parliament to unite opposition partiesand vows to prevent a country break-up asthe
Crimean Parliament set May 25 as thedate for referendum on regions status. In theCrimean
capital Simferopol, pro-Russiangunmen seize government buildings. MrYanukovych is
granted refuge in Russia andissues a statement through Russian media,saying that he is still
the legitimate presidentof the Ukraine.On 28 February unidentified gunmen in combat
uniforms appear outside SimferopolInternational Airport and a military airfield in Sevastopol,
sparking fears of Russianmilitary intervention. The Ukrainian government accuses Russia of
aggression. TheUnited Nations Security Council holds an emergency closed-door session to
discussthe

situation

in

the

Crimea.

The

United

States

also

warns

Russia

of

militarilyintervening in the Ukraine. Moscow states that the military movements in the
Crimeaare in line with previous agreements to protect its fleet position in the Black Sea.
Thesame day, Mr Yanukovych, now in Russia, appears at his first news conference andinsists
that he remains President. He also says that he opposes any militaryintervention or division
of the Ukraine.Prospects for a single pro-EU candidate at the proposed 25 May presidential
electionvanish, when contender Vitali Klitschko says Yulia Tymoshenko has told him that
shewants to run too. Ukraines central bank limits daily foreign currency cashwithdrawals to
the equivalent of 15,000 hryvnia (approx. 1,000).
On 1 March, as the situation worsens in the Crimea, local leaders ask for RussianPresident
Vladimir Putins help. The Russian upper house of the parliament approvesa request by Putin
to use military power in Ukraine. The following day, 2 March, aconvoy of hundreds of Russian
troops heads towards the regional capital of the
Ukraine's Crimea region, a day after Russias forces took over the strategic BlackSea
peninsula without firing a shot.

1991 - Ukraine declares independence followingattempted coup in Moscow: 90% vote

forindependence in nationwide referendum inDecember.
1997 - Friendship treaty signed with Russia.Ukraine and Russia also reach agreement on
theBlack Sea fleet.
2000 - Chernobyl nuclear power plant is shutdown, 14 years after the accident. Well over
tenthousand people have died as a direct result ofthe explosion, the health of millions more
hasbeen affected.
2001 October - Ukrainian military accidentallyshoot down Russian airliner over the Black
Sea,killing all 78 on board. Defence MinisterOlexander Kuzmuk resigns.

2006 June-July - After months of bargaining, thebackers of the Orange Revolution the
Yushchenko and Tymoshenko blocs and theSocialists - agree on a coalition, but the
dealcollapses.
2008 October - Global financial crisis leads todecline in demand for steel, causing price of
oneof the country's main exports to collapse. Valueof Ukrainian currency falls sharply and
investorspull out.
2009 January - Russia stops all gas supplies toUkraine after collapse of talks to end row
overunpaid bills and prices, leading to shortages insoutheast Europe. Supplies are restored a
weeklater when Ukraine and Russia sign a 10-yeardeal on gas transit.
2009 December - Ukraine and Russia sign dealon oil transit for 2010, allaying fears of
supplycuts to Europe.
2010

April

Ukraine

agrees

to

eliminate

itsstockpile

of

weapons-grade

nuclear

materialahead of the Washington nuclear securitysummit.

2010 June - Parliament votes to abandon NATOmembership aspirations.
2010 August - IMF approves fresh $15bn (9bn)loan for Ukraine, subject to the
governmentcurbing the subsidising of utilities bills.
2013 November - Tens of thousands ofprotesters take to the streets of central Kiev andother
cities to protest at the government'ssudden decision to abandon plans to sign anassociation
agreement with the EU. They accusethe government of bowing to Russian pressure,as well
as being corrupt and unaccountable.
2013 December - Russia agrees to slash price ofgas supplied to Ukraine and lend $15bn
tomollify protesters.
2014 March - Russian forces help separatistsseize power in Crimea, which Russia
thenannexes, prompting the biggest East-Westshowdown since the Cold War. US and
itsEuropean allies impose sanctions on Russia.
2014 May - Voters call for independence inDonetsk and Luhansk in a poll rejected
asillegitimate by Kiev.
2014 June - Poroshenko signs a delayedassociation accord with the EU - pulling thecountry
decisively out of Moscow's sphere.
2014 July - US and EU tighten sanctions onMoscow over its alleged involvement in
theuprising in Ukraine.

International Involvement
China
The Chinese leadership, while up until now very sparse in words, now is publiclydenouncing
the western criticism of Russia and is of the opinion that the westerncountries are still

lingering in a Cold War-like mentality and that this wouldcontinuously lead to unnecessary
and avoidable confrontations with the Russian
Federation. The Peoples Republic calls upon the Western countries to let go of suchan outdated way of thinking and instead further close cooperation with Moscow.
France
Aside from Frances involvement in the Crimean war (October 1853 February1856), France
assumed a rather passive political stance on all things Ukrainian.On the commercial sector
the French-Ukrainian relations were (and to some extendstill are) good. In 2011 France was
the 7th largest foreign investor in the Ukraine withmore than 300 French enterprises setting
up businesses there.In 2012, French exports to the Ukraine were valued just above 1 billion
Euros. In thesame year Ukrainian exports to France were reported to be equivalent to 539
millionEuros.
France involvement in the current crisis on the Crimean peninsula can also becharacterized
as cautious. While the French alongside the USA, Canada, UnitedKingdom, Germany, Italy,
and Japan vouched to suspend their attendance at theG8 summit in Sochi in June of this
year because of actions taken by the RussianFederation, they still see their role as one of a
mediator.On February 20th the French foreign minister, together with his colleagues
fromPoland and Germany, brokered an agreement with the now ousted UkrainianPresident
Yanukovych that would allow for unified government that would leave Mr.Yanukovych in
place as president until new elections would be held in December.
Russia
Russia and the Ukraine share a common history, which dates back to the 9th -12 thcenturies,
when the Kievan Rus, a loose federation of East Slavic tribes in Europe,was formed. Today a
significant minority of the population of Ukraine are Russians oruse Russian as their first
language. Russian influence is particularly strong in theindustrialised East, as well as in the
Crimea, the autonomous republic on the Black
Sea, which was part of Russia until 1954. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is based inthe Crimean
city of Sevastopol. Under the terms of the lease, the Russian fleet canbe stationed there
until 2042. However, any movement of Russian troops outside thebase must be authorised
by the Ukrainian government. The treaty allows for themaintenance of 25,000 officers and
sailors, 161 aircraft and 388 warships and othervessels.
The Crimea is also the homeland of the Crimean Tatars whom Stalin accused ofcollaborating
with the Nazis and deported to Central Asia in 1944. More than 250,000have returned since
the late 1980s.
Under the current situation, Russia sees its taken measures as completelyappropriate.
Arguing that theres a threat of violence coming from ultra-nationalists,Russia sees a threat
to the lives and health of the Russian citizens and the manycompatriots who are currently on

Ukrainian territory. In the case of any further spreadof violence to Eastern Ukraine and the
Crimea, Russia therefore retains the right toprotect its interests and the Russian-speaking
population of those areas as it claimsto be responsible for the safety of ethnic Russians in
the region.
UK
The United Kingdom has been a strong proponent for closer ties between theUkraine and the
EU in the past. Consequently it welcomed the new pro-Europeangovernment and pledged
economic support. The UK considers Russias involvementin the Crimea the biggest crisis in
Europe in the 21st century, calling it an act ofaggression and contrary to the UN Charter
thus a violation of international law. Iturged the Russian government to respect the territorial
integrity of the Ukraine bywithdrawing their troops and to take up direct consultations with
the new Ukrainiangovernment. The United Kingdom, following the United States, threatened
that afurther military involvement of Russia will have costs on their part.
US
The United States has made it clear that it supports the newly formed Ukrainiangovernment
and called upon the international community to support the people ofUkraine on their path.
Nevertheless, the United States urged that the newgovernment has to be inclusive and
representative and that minorities rights in the
Ukraine, in particular of the Russian minority, have to be respected.
The United States also reaffirmed its past commitment for the unity, territorialintegrity and
sovereignty of Ukraine. Thus Russias troop deployment in the Crimeahas been strongly
criticized, declaring that it will have costs. In particular, the UnitedStates threatened that in
case should Russia fail to withdraw their troops, economicsanctions will ensue, such as the
exclusion from the G8, claiming that eventuallyRussias actions could lead to its political
and economic isolation. In order to solvethe crisis, the United States have proposed the
deployment of international observersand an independent, international mediation mission.

MH17
The Malaysian Airline flight 17 was a flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.According to
the Dutch Safety Board, Flight MH17 with a Boeing 777-200operated by Malaysia Airlines
broke up in the air probably as the result of structuraldamage caused by a large number of
high-energy objects that penetrated the aircraftfrom outside. This is mentioned in the
preliminary report on the investigation intothe crash of MH17 that has been published today
by the Dutch Safety Board. Thereare no indications that the MH17 crash was caused by a
technical fault or by actionsof the crew. The plane was believed to be shot down due to the
friction betweenRussia and Ukraine. The United States Intelligence officials released some
satellitepicture of July 21st, which indicates an increase in vehicular activity within the
region.This plane crash has brought the world back into reconsidering the relationship
andthe solution between Ukraine and Russia, and that as the situation persists, morecivilians
are to be hurt regardless.

Involvement of the United Nations

26 February 13th March, 2014
Ukraine sent a letter to the President of the UN Security Council on 26 February, 2014,
replying to the statement made by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia (24 Feb). The
letter was regarding non-interference in Internal Affairs of Ukraine.
On 28 February, Ukraine requested an urgent meeting of the UNSC citing the situation in
Crimea as a threat to the territorial integrity of Ukraine, in accordance with Articles 34 and
35 of the UN Charter.
Article 34
The Security Council may investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to
international friction or give rise to a dispute, in order to determine whether the continuance
of the dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and
security.
Article 35 Para 1
Any Member of the United Nations may bring any dispute, or any situation of the nature
referred to in Article 34, to the attention of the Security Council or of the General Assembly.
Ukraine further requested that their representative should be allowed to participate in the
proceedings, in accordance with Rule 37 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security
Council.
Rule 37
Any Member of the United Nations which is not a member of the Security Council may be
invited, as the result of a decision of the Security Council, to participate, without vote, in the
discussion of any question brought before the Security Council when the Security Council
considers that the interests of that Member are specially affected, or when a Member brings
a matter to the attention of the Security Council in accordance with Article 35 (1) of the
Charter.
On

28

February,

Assistant

Secretary-General

Oscar

Fernandez-Tarranco

from

the

Department of Political Affairs briefed the Council on the developments in Ukraine in a

Private Meeting. On 1 March, the United Kingdom called for a meeting of the Security
Council where the Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson briefed the council members in an
Open Meeting (Russia wanted the meeting to be closed, but a number of countries pressed
for it to be open). Russia requested a briefing by Oscar Fernandez-Tarranco on 3 March,
where he briefed the Council on the latest developments. The Security Council held
consultations on 6 March at the request of the United Kingdom, where Jan-Eliasson briefed
the Council from Kiev, Ukraine. During its meeting on Ukraine held on 10 March, the
majority of the Council members expressed concern about the possible consequences of the
Crimean referendum and inability of international observers to enter Crimea and make an

assessment of the situation on the ground. On the afternoon of 13 March, the Council held
a public meeting on Ukraine chaired by Jean Asselborn, Minister for Foreign and European
Affairs of Luxembourg. Jeffrey Feltman, Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs briefed
the Council after which the Prime Minister of Ukraine, Arseniy Yatsenyuk addressed the
Council. Feltman gave an update on the situation Ukraine noting that a comprehensive
assessment was difficult as most international observers including Ivan Simonovic,
Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights had not been allowed to enter Crimea.
Feltman stated that there is still a chance for a peaceful resolution of the conflict and called
on Council members to seize this opportunity. On 13 March, Ukraine sent a letter to the
president of the Council from the Ukrainian parliament which stated that Ukraine, in
accordance with its right to self-defence as enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter,
reserved the right to request assistance in restoring its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Questions a resolution must answer

Is the current situation suitable to be proceeding into a long-term relationship

between two countries?

How can sovereignty and integrity of the Ukraine be preserved and at the same time

the interests of ethnic Russians be protected?

How can the new Ukrainian government and the International Community protect

minority rights?
How can the International Community support the Institution Building process of the

new Ukrainian government?

Is it permissible for countries to deploy military forces into the region even though
they do not cause any damage (i.e. trespassing Ukrainian territorial air space)?

Factors to be considered

Legality of Crimea referendum and any other possible referendums conducted in

Eastern Ukraine;
Question on how Russian Federation should compensate Ukraine for the loss of

Crimea if that move of borders is to be internationally recognized;

If referendum in Crimea was not legitimate question on how to bring a status quo

ante considering that Russian Federation is now fully controlling Crimea;

Deteriorating security situation in eastern Ukraine due to continued clashes between

pro-Russian separatists and government forces;

Question on how to ensure long-term peace and security in the region.