Background Guide

United Nations Security Council

2Hello Delegates,

I am so excited to be the director of this year’s United Nations Security Council (UNSC). I am Lindsey Mosley, a junior political science and history major at the University of Florida. This is my third year staffing GatorMUN and my second time serving as a director. I was the director of the American Civil Rights Movement crisis committee at GatorMUN XIV last year. Additionally, I am the Director of Conference Logistics for UF’s Model UN team as well as a director at FLCS VII, our collegiate conference.

I am so excited to be trying something new this year with the UNSC. We will be focusing on the issues of the Bosnian War and Genocide, and thus will be going back into the early 1990s. The committee will receive continual updates regarding the conflict as time progresses and action (or inaction) is taken by the committee. I believe this is an interesting addition to the UNSC that I am excited to see it develop.

I chose this specific topic because of a class I took on American Foreign Policy. As we were discussing the UN, the professor mentioned that the UN chose not to heavily intervene in the Bosnian conflict. Historians have identified this inaction as one possible cause of the escalation of the conflict and an increased number in casualties that occurred as the complicated war progressed. I began to wonder what would have happened if the UN took time to focus on this conflict early on and more deeply. This is where I had the idea to make it the topic of this year’s UNSC.

For this committee you will need to write a 2-page position paper on the topics. They will be due at the start of the committee as a hard copy. For assistance in writing the position paper, please look at the position paper writing guide in the Delegate Tools section of the GatorMUN website.

I am looking forward to working with all of you and hope that everyone comes to committee ready for stimulating, informed, and enthusing debate. If you have any questions as to how the committee will run or anything else please do not hesitate to reach out to me at GatorMUN@gmail.com. Good luck with all of your research! I simply cannot wait to work with you all very soon.

Best regards,

Lindsey Mosley

Director

3Rules of Procedure

QuorumA majority of voting members answering to the roll at each session shall constitute a quorum for that session. This means that half plus one of all voting members are present. Quorum will be assumed consistent unless questioned through a Point of Order. Delegates may request to be noted as “Present” or “Present and Voting.”

Motion to Open DebateThis opens the floor for debate, allowing other points or motions.

Motion to Set the AgendaThis motion determines the order in which the topics of a committee will be debated. Permission to speak will be accorded to one speaker for and one speaker against, and a two-thirds majority is required for the motion to pass.

Motion to Open the Speaker’s ListOpening the Speaker’s List requires a simple majority to pass. A delegate may only be present on the Speaker’s List once, but may re-enter after he/she has spoken. If the Speaker’s List expires, debate then closes.

Motion to Set Speaking TimeSpeaking Time must be indicated by this motion from the floor before any members of the body may speak on the Speaker’s List. This motion must also accompany any motion for a Moderated Caucus. In a Motion to Set Speaking Time for the formal Speaker’s List, a delegate may also specify a number of questions or comments to automatically affix to the Speaking Time. These designated questions or comments may also have Speaking Time or Response Time (in the case of a question) limits, but these are not required. The Director may rule any Motion to Set Speaking Time dilatory. This motion requires a simple majority. Any delegate may make this motion between formal speakers in an effort to change the Speaking Time.

Motion to Close the Speaker’s ListThe Speaker’s List may be closed upon a motion from the floor. Permission to speak will be accorded to one speaker for and one speaker against, and a two-thirds majority is required for the motion to pass.

Motion to Suspend the Rules for the Purpose of a Moderated CaucusThis motion must include three specifications: a. Length of the Caucus b. Speaking time, and c. Reason for the Caucus.During a moderated caucus, delegates will be called on to speak by the Committee Director. Delegates will raise their placards to be recognized. Delegates must maintain the same degree of decorum throughout a Moderated Caucus as in formal debate. This motion requires a simple majority to pass.

4Motion to Suspend the Rules for the Purpose of an Unmoderated CaucusThis motion must include the length of the Caucus. During an unmoderated caucus, delegates may get up from their seats and talk amongst themselves. This motion requires a simple majority to pass. The length of an unmoderated caucus should never exceed twenty minutes.

Motion to Suspend the MeetingThis motion is in order if there is a scheduled break in debate to be observed. (ie. Lunch!) This motion requires a simple majority vote. The Committee Director may refuse to entertain this motion at their discretion.

Motion to Adjourn the MeetingThis motion is in order at the end of the last committee session. It signifies the closing of the committee until next year’s conference.

Motion to Table the TopicIf a delegate believes that the flow of debate has become stagnant, he/she may make this motion. To Table the Topic is to halt debate on the present Topic, save the speakers’ list and all draft resolutions, and move on to the next Topic on the Agenda. The delegate making this motion may also choose to specify a previously tabled Topic. This motion requires a two-thirds vote to pass. The Topic may be returned to at any time by tabling the present Topic and adding the phrase “for the purpose of returning to Tabled Topic ____,” to this motion. If no Topics have been previously tabled, debate must follow the established Agenda. This motion is to be used sparingly.

Points of OrderPoints of Order will only be recognized for the following items: a) To recognize errors in voting, tabulation, or procedure, b) To question relevance of debate to the current Topic or c) To question a quorum.A Point of Order may interrupt a speaker if necessary and it is to be used sparingly.

Points of InquiryWhen there is no discussion on the floor, a delegate may direct a question to the Committee Director. Any question directed to another delegate may only be asked immediately after the delegate has finished speaking on a substantive matter. A delegate that declines to respond to a question after a formal speech forfeits any further questioning time. The question must conform to the following format: Delegate from Country A raises placard to be recognized by the Committee Director. Committee Director: “To what point do you rise?” Country A: “Point of Inquiry.” Committee Director: “State your Point.” Country A: “Will the delegate from Country B (who must have just concluded a substantive speech) yield to a question?” Committee Director: “Will the Delegate Yield?” Country B: “I will” or “I will not” (if not, return to the next business item) Country A asks their question (it must not be a rhetorical question.) Country B may choose to respond or to decline.

5If the Delegate from Country B does not yield to or chooses not to answer a question from Country A, then he/she yields all remaining questioning time to the Committee Director.

Points of Personal PrivilegePoints of personal privilege are used to request information or clarification and conduct all other business of the body except Motions or Points specifically mentioned in the Rules of Procedure.

Please note: The Director may refuse to recognize Points of Order, Points of Inquiry or Points of Personal Privilege if the Committee Director believes the decorum and restraint inherent in the exercise has been violated, or if the point is deemed dilatory in nature.

Rights of ReplyAt the Committee Director’s discretion, any member nation or observer may be granted a Right of Reply to answer serious insults directed at the dignity of the delegate present. The Director has the ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY to accept or reject Rights of Reply, and the decision IS NOT SUBJECT TO APPEAL. Delegates who feel they are being treated unfairly may take their complaint to any member of the Secretariat.

Working Papers and Draft ResolutionsOnce a Working Paper has been submitted, approved, distributed, and formally introduced to the body, it can and will be referred to as a “Draft Resolution.” In order for a Working Paper to be submitted to the Committee Director, it must be in correct format and bear the names of a combination of a number of Sponsors and Signatories necessary to introduce, as determined by the Committee Director.

Sponsors are the writers of the Working Paper, and agree with it in its entirety. They should be able to vote ‘yes’ for the paper during voting procedure. Signatories are those delegates interested in bringing the Working Paper to the floor for debate, but do not necessarily agree with its contents.

A delegate can motion to discuss the working paper during a moderated caucus or unmoderated caucus. A delegate can also motion for an author’s panel, which is essentially a moderated caucus moderated by the authors. It is the chair’s discretion on the maximum amount of authors allowed on the author’s panel.

Friendly AmendmentsFriendly Amendments are any changes to a formally introduced Directive that all Sponsors agree to in writing. The Committee Director must approve the Friendly Amendment and confirm each Sponsor’s agreement both verbally and in writing.

Unfriendly AmendmentsUnfriendly Amendments are any substantive changes to a formally introduced Directive that are not agreed to by all of the Sponsors of the Directive. In order to introduce an Unfriendly Amendment, the Unfriendly Amendment must the number equivalent to 1/3 of Quorum confirmed signatories. The Committee Director has the authority to discern between substantive and nonsubstantive Unfriendly amendment proposals.

PlagiarismGatorMUN maintains a zero-tolerance policy in regards to plagiarism. Delegates found to have used the ideas of others without properly citing those individuals, organizations, or documents will have their credentials revoked for the duration of the GatorMUN conference. This is a very serious offense.

6 Motion to Close Debate and Voting Procedures A motion to close debate may only pass with a two-thirds majority. Once this motion passes, and the committee enters Voting Procedure, no occupants of the committee room may exit the Committee Room, and no individual may enter the Committee Room from the outside. A member of the Dias will secure all doors.

Once moving into voting procedures chair can only accept these motions:• A point of order to correct an error in procedure• An appeal of the decision of the chair• A motion for division• A motion for roll call vote• A motion for adoption by acclamation• No talking, passing notes, or communicating of any kind will be tolerated during voting procedures.

Each Draft Resolution will be read to the body and voted upon in the order which they were introduced. Any Proposed Unfriendly Amendments to each Draft Resolution will be read to the body and voted upon before the main body of the Draft Resolution as a whole is put to a vote. The Committee will adopt Directives and Unfriendly Amendments to Directives if these documents pass with a simple majority. Specialized committees should refer to their background guides or Committee Directors for information concerning specific voting procedures. Unless otherwise specified by the Secretariat, each Committee may pass as many resolutions as it agrees are necessary to efficiently address the Topic

Delegates who requested to be noted as “Present and Voting” are unable to abstain during voting procedure. Abstentions will not be counted in the tallying of a majority. For example, 5 yes votes, 4 no votes, and 7 abstentions means that the Directive passes.

Roll Call VotingA counted placard vote will be considered sufficient unless any delegate to the committee motions for a Roll Call Vote. If a Roll Call Vote is requested, the committee must comply. All delegates must vote: “For,” “Against,” “Abstain,” or “Pass.”

During a Roll Call vote, any delegate who answers, “Pass,” reserves his/her vote until the Committee Director has exhausted the Roll. However, once the Committee Director returns to “Passing” Delegates, they must vote: “For” or “Against.”

Voting with RightsDuring a Roll Call vote delegates may vote “For with Rights” or “Against with Rights.” Delegates will be granted 30 seconds to explain their reasons for voting for or against a draft resolution. This time will come after the tabulation of votes.Delegates should use this option sparingly. It is meant for delegates who feel that their vote may seem off policy, despite it being correct. The acceptance of rights is up to the director’s discretion. If a speaker goes off topic during their allotted time the director will rule their speech dilatory and move to the next motion in order.

7Accepting by AcclamationThis motion may be stated when the Committee Director asks for points or motions. If a Roll Call Vote is requested, the motion to Accept by Acclamation is voided. If a delegate believes a Directive will pass without opposition, he or she may move to accept the Directive by acclamation. The motion passes unless a single delegate shows opposition. An abstention is not considered opposition. Should the motion fail, the committee will move directly into a Roll Call Vote.

8 Committee Description and Backgound

DescriptionThe United Nations Security Council is the principal body of the UN tasked with preserving peace and security on an international scale. There are a total of 15 members that make up the Security Council, all with one vote. There are five permanent members (China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America), and ten other members that remain on the council for two years at a time, elected by the General Assembly. The five permanent members enjoy veto powers, which allow them to prevent a resolution from passing. The UNSC’s members must identify threats to world peace and attempt to help involved parties find peaceful solutions, while also suggesting ways to end the conflict. In cases where this is not possible, the UNSC is also able to take further action, such as applying sanctions or even authorizing force in the hope of restoring peace. Just as the actual UNSC, all permanent members will have the ability to veto any resolution that they wish which will result in the failure of that resolution.1

BackgroundThe United Nations Security Council was formed with the creation of the UN itself in 1945. The permanent members were selected from the victors of World War II. Initially, there were only six non-permanent members that still served for two-year terms, with members equally spread based on geographic region. In 1965, the amount of non-permanent members was increased to ten.2 Since its founding, the actions of the body have been met with both success and failure. In 1993, thousands of people were sent to Somalia in order to try and restore peace, but this ended in the deaths of dozens of soldiers, the withdrawal by some nations from the operation, and the failure to restore peace to the region. In 1994, the UNSC was involved with attempting to help restore peace in Rwanda, but failed to stop the genocide of hundreds of thousands of people.3 However, in Sierra Leone, the Security Council created UNAMSIL that “disarmed tens of thousands of ex-fighters, assisted in holding national elections, helped to rebuild the country’s police force, and contributed towards rehabilitating the infrastructure and bringing government services to local communities.”4 The history of the UNSC is filled with stories of both massive success and horrific failures.

This committee will not be a normal UNSC. First of all, it is set in early 1993. This means that the conflict is at a critical point and that the nations in committee will reflect those present in 1993: the five permanent members, and ten non-permanent members (Brazil, Cabo Verde, Djibouti, Hungary, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan, Spain, and Venezuela). For the purpose of this committee, no matter how long the conflict and committee progress, the ten non-permanent members will remain present and will not rotate out.

While the UN has already stepped in at the start of committee, there are still a lot of problems that it must tackle, and key decisions that will shape the conflict must be made. Also, while writing resolutions, delegates will be receiving live updates as to how the conflict is progressing and how past resolutions that have passed are being implemented and received. This will make for a more realistic committee, as the events the UNSC 1 http://www.un.org/en/sc/members/2 http://www.unfoundation.org/what-we-do/issues/united-nations/the-un-security-council.html.3 Jacobson, Thomas. “U.N. Peacekeeping: Few Successes, Many Failures, Inherent Flaws,” March 15, 2012.4 http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unamsil/index.html.

9tackles are always shifting and changing, making it even more challenging to come up with solutions. Because of the ever changing situation, delegates will be able to go back to reform and repass resolutions they have written if they find a better solution or wish to correct issues. Even with this change, however, the only communication the UNSC will have with the conflict is through the writing and passing of official resolutions.

10

IntroductionThe early 1990s saw the start of the Yugoslav breakup and the holding of elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These elections yielded seats for the three largest national populations within the nation. These groups were the Bosniaks (the Bosnian Muslim population), Bosnian Serbs, and Bosnian Croats. From these three groups, a coalition government was created with the president, Alija Izetbegovic, descending from the Bosniaks. However, as time went by, tensions between the groups continued to rise.

By 1991, several regions were heavily Serb in population. The increased tension and disillusion with the government led these regions to declare themselves the “Serb Autonomous Regions.” Additionally, it was revealed that the Yugoslav People’s Army had been secretly sending weapons to Bosnian Serbs from Belgrade, the capital of Serbia. Bosnian Serbs, previously a part of the Bosnian government, broke away and instead created the Serb National Assembly.

While all of this was occurring in Bosnia and Herzegovina, what is now called the Yugoslav Wars were also occurring (the Bosnian conflict itself being grouped into this larger region of conflict). Croatia had descended into a war and Yugoslavia was continuing towards the path of a breakup. Taking note from the Bosnian Serbs, two regions in Bosnia and Herzegovina that were primarily Croat also proclaimed themselves to be “Croat Autonomous Regions.”5

In early 1992, a referendum was held regarding Bosnian and Herzegovinian independence. This came after Bosnia’s neighbors, Serbia and Croatia, had already been recognized as independent. The referendum was met with problems. Few Bosnian Serbs voted, partly due to the obstruction by the Serb Democratic Party. Bosnian Serbs did not wish to be independent, but wanted to be a part of a greater Serbian state, which was the reason for both the boycott and their opposition to the referendum.6 Nevertheless, the referendum passed. Bosnian Serbs were infuriated by the declaration of independence that was made without their approval. This was caused by the fact that the constitution mandated that all major decisions made by the nation must reach a consensus with all three groups. The Bosnian War broke out not long after the declaration of independence by Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Start of WarFollowing the claim of independence that went unsupported by the Bosnian Serb community, the Serbs took up arms.7 They claimed that they were concerned that the current president, Alija Izetbegovic, a member of 5 https://www.britannica.com/event/Bosnian-conflict.6 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-17212376.7 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-warcrimes-karadzic-bosnia-idUSL2164446420080721.

Topic I: The Humanitarian Disaster

11the Bosniak community, wanted to turn the nation into an Islamic state. The Serbs were being supported by the nation of Serbia and the Yugoslav army, and were, therefore, better equipped than the other groups even though the nation was comprised of nearly 15% more Bosniaks than Serbs.

The Serbs quickly launched a series of attacks onto the capital, Sarajevo, as well as several primarily Bosniak towns including Zvornik, Foca, and Visegrad.8 These attacks have been deemed an ethnic cleansing as they are an attempt to expel the Bosniak community from the nation. Some of the Bosniaks that were removed from their homes have been placed in concentration camps. While Bosniaks are the primary targets, the Bosnian Croats are also targets for the Bosnian Serbs, as the Serbs are attempting to take over by ridding the nation of all other ethnic groups.9

Alliances in Bosnia HerzegovinaThe conflict has produced many alliances that are both fragile and shifting. The firmest alliance has been that between the Serbian government, the Bosnian Serbs, and the Yugoslav army that is made up primarily of Serbs. This tie is so strong because they all share the same Serbian identity. The actors that make up this alliance are not likely to shift allegiance to any other actor in the conflict.

In June 1992, the Bosnian president, Alija Izetbegovic, announced a formal alliance with Croatia. This alliance, militaristic in nature, boosted the resources and power of Bosnia. The alliance angered the Serbs, because it meant they now had a larger enemy to face. While the alliance was initially unexpected, Croatia and Serbia have never had a record of peace between them, most recently fighting over territory in 1991, and that Bosnian Croats have been among the victims of the Serbs’ assault did not help prevent Croatia from aligning with Bosnia.

Part of the reason that other nations are becoming involved in this fight is that the Bosnian government feels abandoned and is trying to gain whatever assistance they can get. They have expressed that they do not see the West coming to their aid. This feeling has caused the Bosnian government to seek assistance elsewhere, such as Croatia.10 However, the Bosnian government has also fought the Bosnian Croats, adding a layer of complexity; no current alliance is strong enough to certainly last through the war. It has even been reported that regional military leaders form and break their own alliances. This means that some areas of the conflict may not be following the same alliances that have been detailed above, which makes intervening and working with groups even harder.

Refugees and AidThis conflict, especially due to the targeting of large swaths of civilian populations, has produced a considerable number of refugees. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has estimated the refugee count at over 1.3 million in September, including internally displaced persons. This number does not include the estimated hundreds of thousands of people who wish to leave, but are trapped in their homes, nor does it include the estimated hundreds of thousands of refugees displaced from neighboring nations such as Croatia due to other conflicts in the Yugoslav Wars.11

8 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1997/bosnia/history/.9 http://www.history.com/topics/bosnian-genocide.10 https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1992/06/17/bosnian-leader-declares-alli-ance-with-croatia/1a1dfef7-7269-44a8-8745-bc8298c4a73f/?utm_term=.cf419b220eb3.11 http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1992-05-24/news/9202160560_1_bosnia-herzegovina-drina-riv-er-serb.

12This has been said to be one of the worst refugee crises in several decades. In many areas, the amount of refugees is too great for the aid available, and where there is aid, there is not enough coordination between organizations and the UNHCR to provide aid to the people in need. There are also several logistical concerns with how to move aid not only to refugees, but to those stuck in place. Both of these issues need to be resolved if the UN is going to try and limit further civilian casualties.

Security ConcernsOne of the largest problems facing the refugee crisis is imminent threats to lives; there have been multiple reports of attacks on those trying to either leave Bosnia or enter it to provide aid. As they attempt to move beyond Bosnian borders, refugees are often met with only more conflict. A similar problem plagues humanitarian aid workers as well; the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) has provided escorts and assistance, but these envoys are seen as targets, and are repeatedly attacked.12 Several aid trucks have been seized by Bosnian Serbs as well. If further security for aid workers and refugees is not secured, the aid and the lives of many will remain in danger.

There is also a problem of people who are not actually providing aid, but using the symbol of the UN to get through to certain areas. Some of these people are moving commodities through the nation, in violation of previous sanctions. Others are using the symbol to get into enemy territory. This hinders the trust of intended aid recipients and makes all sides of the conflict suspicious of actual UN aid workers.

ResettlementWith so many refugees already displaced and more to be displaced as the conflict continues, the regions that have taken in so many already struggle to accept many more. Most refugees have sought placement within other former Yugoslav states. These states are not stable enough to help the amount of refugees that they are letting in, and many have refugees of their own who need relocation. As a result, Bosnian refugees are suffering. Nations in Europe that have taken refugees, such as Germany, Hungary, and Austria, are becoming frustrated with the large amount of refugees.13 There is an urgent need to find other places for Bosnian refugees to settle.

UNSC Action So FarThe UN Security Council has taken notice of the events transpiring in the region and have already passed several resolutions attempting to deal with the conflict. Some of the resolutions and other actions taken are as follows:

• UNSC Resolution 713 called for an arms embargo on all of Yugoslavia. • UNSC Resolution 743 established UNPROFOR (UN Protection Force) for 12 months in Croatia, Bosnia

and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. In some areas, the force was meant to oversee the ceasefire, but in Bosnia and Herzegovina, UNPROFOR was tasked with keeping citizens alive until the end of the conflict.14

• UNSC Resolution 757 called for the Croatian army to cease action in the conflict. The resolution also called for member states to cut many ties with the region, such as prohibiting the import and export of commodities, reducing diplomatic outreach, and denying air transport (other than for humanitarian

12 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_EVcaXZRxYYJ:refuge.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/refuge/article/viewFile/21183/19854+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us.13 http://www.nytimes.com/1992/07/24/world/yugoslav-refugee-crisis-europe-s-worst-since-40-s.html.14 http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unprof_b.htm.

13actions) to or from the region.

• UNSC Resolution 798 condemned and demanded that all detention camps, especially those for women, be closed. It also requested that the UN help a delegation from the European Community (an economic cooperation similar and related to the European Union) get safe access to areas where Bosnians were being held.

• UNSC Resolution 787 called for the end of both ethnic cleansing and the taking of territory, and request-ed that all displaced persons be allowed to go home. It also called upon the Secretary-General of the UN to work with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to look at the possibility of imple-menting safe zones for displaced persons.

• The UNSC placed sanctions on Serbia for assisting and supporting the Bosnian Serbs in what many called their “reign of terror.”

• The UNHCR has been working to secure protection and aid to refugees in asylum nations as it tradition-ally does.15

Research Questions1. What are other possible locations for resettlement of refugees and what would it take to get the refugees safely to these places?

2. What could help humanitarian aid to move safely through areas so that it can get to those in need?

3. How could the UNSC expand on the resolutions already passed relating to this conflict?

4. How could the shifting of alliances impact the movement of refugees and humanitarian aid?

5. How could the nature of targeting civilians change both the threat to refugees and humanitarian workers in comparison to other types of conflicts?

6. How can the UNSC use and support the NGOs that are already set up within the countries that are attempting to support civilians.

Helpful Websiteshttp://www.un.org/en/sc/about/http://www.unhcr.org/en-ushttp://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Bosnian_Warhttps://tinyurl.com/primary-sources-bosnian-war

15 Young, Kirsten. “UNHCR and ICRC in the Former Yugoslavia: Bosnia-Herzegovina.” IRRC 83 (Sep-tember 2001): 781–90.

14

IntroductionWhile the safety of all Bosnian citizens is a top priority for the United Nations, it is also imperative to look into strategies the United Nations can employ for conflict resolution. The conflict is one of the most complicated in recent times, a civil war with many sides and ever-shifting alliances. To complicate matters even further, the intervention of surrounding nations into the region, complicating matters with their own international conflicts, has proven to make an already-volatile situation worse. It is clear that there will be no simple solution for Bosnia.

Currently, there is no dialogue between actors and it appears as if there is no willingness to compromise on any front. Because the conflict in both Bosnia and the surrounding region has been active for a few years, the UN has already attempted actions for peace. Negotiations and ceasefires were created and dismantled, but so far, most of the action taken has had little to no effect in Bosnia and the war has continued to escalate.

The failures of the UN as a whole means that the UNSC will need to evaluate all past actions and how it has impacted the conflict. The current situation is bleak and looking worse; tactics and methods may need to be improved. It is clear that if the UN wants to work towards peace in Bosnia, innovative ideas and resolutions will have to be brought to the table.

A Fragile ReigionIt is important to look at the broader context when attempting to find a solution to the Bosnian War. One of the reasons for this is partly because the entire region of former Yugoslavia is fragile. Most of the states in the region are not yet stable, due to their very recent declarations of independence from Yugoslavia, and their transitions toward independence have not been easy. Additionally, the states are also ethnically diverse and their populations have diverse interests, which can cause great tension between ethnic groups and solidify natural alliances between the ethnically defined groups in Bosnia.

Croatia and Serbia, neighbors of Bosnia, both have dealt, or are dealing with, their own internal conflicts. Actions taken towards Bosnian peace, therefore, will have to be taken with the effects on the rest of region kept in mind. Peace can only be secure if war is not easily susceptible to breaking out again in an easily destabilized region.

The fragility of the region, and its impact on the current conflicts, have led some individual nations to not only take action against Bosnia, but against the region as a whole. The UN has also targeted the entire region

Topic II: UN Actions Towards Peace

15with trade restrictions, placing an arms embargo on all former Yugoslav nations in order to try to quell the fighting in the region, and attempt to prevent further weaponry from entering the region and escalating tensions.16 In 1992, by passing Resolution 757, the UN placed expansive sanctions on the region.1 This type of reaction considers the larger context of the volatile region and recognizes that peace in only one area is fragile when surrounded by conflict.

CeasefireCeasefires are often one of the first options sought after by the UN. These agreements allow parties to attempt a dialogue and, at least for a brief time, stop the violence between the opposing groups and allow for humanitarian efforts to continue. However, the region has not been particularly susceptible to ceasefire agreements. The UN-negotiated ceasefires between Serbia and Croatia were quickly broken.

However, the Secretary-General, in 1992, attempted again to negotiate a ceasefire between forces in Bosnia. The UNSC “in a series of resolutions and statements appealed to all parties to bring about a ceasefire and a negotiated political solution, and demanded, inter alia, that all forms of interference from outside Bosnia and Herzegovina, including by JNA, as well as by the Croatian Army, cease immediately and that all local irregular forces be disbanded and disarmed” (United Nations). However, despite this attempt, conflict escalated even further and pleas from the UN fell on deaf ears.17

The failure of UN-brokered ceasefires in the region. along with the ignoring of pleas and demands from the UN by the warring Bosnian parties, make it clear that those in the midst of the conflict do not seem interested with working towards peace. Further ceasefires may be requested and negotiated as the conflict continues and changes. As of the current situation, the entire region, especially Bosnia, does not seem interested or swayed towards agreements of this kind.

Possibility of Armed InterventionUN Peacekeeping RestrictionsThe United Nations is an intergovernmental organization and, as such, does not operate under the normal rules of war, as a sovereign nation would. There are many principles that must be followed in order for the UN to remain a welcomed participant in helping to resolve the conflict and for its members to put their trust in the organization.

UN peacekeeping forces can only enter a country with the consent of the main parties that are involved in the conflict. If the forces enter without consent, they can quickly become an enemy or an ally in the conflict, which is not a goal of the UN. However, even with consent from all of the players in the conflict, issues can arise.18 Consent from the top does not necessarily mean that the UN forces will not become targets of attack, especially if the conflict is constantly changing or if the different levels of leadership within the groups are not in agreement. This is a particular concern for Bosnia, where alliances between the several groups are fragile and can change at any time, altering the war as a whole. Also, this conflict is fought in regions with often-varying leadership. Both of these factors make it harder for the UN to send in a peacekeeping force that can create and work towards attainable goals of returning to peace.

16 https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/49/IMG/NR059649.pd-f?OpenElement17 http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unprof_b.htm18 http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/principles.shtml

16The UN must also remain impartial to any side, which is especially difficult considering the numerous sides. It is not only essential to remain impartial officially, but also to appear to do so. If it even appears that one side is getting assistance unfairly from the UN, the opposing side could target peacekeepers, viewing them as part of the enemy, removing their consent, and making the possibility of the UN helping to find peace much harder, if not impossible.

The final restriction is hinted to in the name of the force. The peacekeeping force must never use force unless they are doing so out of self-defense or in “defense of the mandate” (United Nations). The possibility of peacekeepers playing a major role in ending the war through force is questionable due to the restrictions that they have.

Peacekeeping vs. Peace EnforcementHowever, peace enforcement is another type of action that has looser rules. Peace enforcement “does not require the consent of the main parties and may involve the use of military force at the strategic or international level, which is normally prohibited for Member States under Article 2(4) of the Charter, unless authorized by the Security Council” (United Nations). Since peace enforcement does not require consent of the parties at war, it is a more viable way to intervene in a complicated conflict. However, this is not something that the UN will purposefully set out to do, but something that occurs when peacekeeping missions fail, and become part of the conflict. At this point in the conflict, it is doubtful that all sides will agree to the amount of personnel needed in order to make an impact in the war. Peace enforcement, by nature, goes against at least one side of the conflict. If the intervention crosses the line into peace enforcement, it would most likely be seen fighting for and against groups. In this fight, it would most likely be against the Bosnian Serbs, as they were the group to initially go against the ruling government, and are seen by many member states as the primary and illegitimate aggressors. They have also been the least willing actors within Bosnia to work with the UN. The Bosnian Serbs currently have an alliance with Serbia and the Yugoslav army so by forcefully intervening, it could anger not just one side of a conflict, but outside actors who have aligned themselves with the Bosnian Serbs.

Peacekeeping is a role the UN frequently takes on and peace enforcement is not. Peace enforcement is not an outright action that the UN normally takes. The UN sometimes crosses the line between keeping the peace and enforcing peace during particularly hostile conflicts where they end up using more force than originally planned.19 In these instances, the UN has unintentionally escalated armed conflict when they were trying to do the opposite. This is important to bear in mind. With the complexity and fragility of the Bosnian War, it is possible that any peacekeeping forces sent in, if not properly employed and watched, could move beyond their duties of impartial peace keepers and become yet another side of the conflict.

19 http://pesd.princeton.edu/?q=node/259

17Looking Past the ConflictIt is also important for the UNSC to look toward the future as the conflict will not be eternal. The UNSC has the ability, and some would say duty, to come up with goals and plans post conflict. This entails helping the government that ultimately ends up with control to maintain peace. This is traditionally done with peacekeepers, but logistics and other forms of peace maintenance tools must be considered.

The UN will also have the opportunity to play a role in the resettlement of people who were forced to flee their homes during the conflict and wish to return home. Many of them will be unable to return to their homes, as their homes will have been destroyed. Others will not wish to move back, but cannot live in refugee camps permanently. The UN must look into the humanitarian aspect of post-conflict Bosnia, as there will be people in need of support long after the final shots are heard.

If the nation returns to democratic governance following the war, the UN will be in a position to help transition the government back from wartime to peacetime. The UN must figure out how to guard democracy in the nation while it is still fragile. No concrete plan for peace can be made while the nation is in the middle of a civil war with different parties taking control of different areas. However, if peace is found and there is no plan or assistance for maintaining that peace, Bosnia could easily fall back into war. Therefore, while focusing on assisting the people and helping to carve a pathway to peace, it is important to think of possible actions after the conflict is over.

The United Nations has a myriad of options at its disposal to deal with the war. It can minimally intervene and focus on the humanitarian aspects of the conflict, send in peacekeeping personnel, or continue to try and broker ceasefire agreements and open up a dialogue. Additionally, the UN could compel member states to continue the embargoes and sanctions or could terminate them. The UN could try a mix of tactics or new ones altogether. If the UN does not intervene in some way, the conflict will have devastating effects for the innocent citizens caught up in the war.

Research Questions1. What past actions taken by the UNSC in this conflict have occurred and what were their result?

2. How would any actions taken by the UNSC in Bosnia affect the volatile region of the former states of Yugoslavia?

3. What steps need to be taken in order to delineate a clear line between peacekeeping and peace enforcement?

4. What methods could the UNSC use in an attempt to get the parties involved in the conflict to open up a dialogue? 5. Other than inserting personnel into the conflict, how can the UNSC put pressure on all actors to consider paths towards resolution of the conflict?

6. How could symbolic actions and resolutions passed by the UNSC play a role in the conflict?

7. How have actions taken by the UNSC when dealing with other similar conflicts resulted?

8. How can the UNSC start preparing to assist with a transition back to a democracy while the conflict is still escalating?

18Helpful Websiteshttps://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/jcs/article/view/4355/5009https://udayton.edu/m/daytonpeaceaccordsat20/history_of_bosnian_war.phphttp://bit.ly/2sFSBfjhttp://bit.ly/2sFXHImhttp://nyti.ms/2ruLItV