commonwealth of nations (con) · commonwealth secretary-general and secretariat. a recent...

1

LONDON INTERNATIONAL MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2016 .

Commonwealth of Nations (CoN) London International Model United Nations 17th Session | 2016

1

2


Table of Content

Introduction to Commonwealth of Nations 3

Topic A: The question of the leadership of the commonwealth 5

History of the Problem 5

Statement of the Problem 8

Sources 10

Topic B: A Multilateral Free Trae Agreement for the Commonwealth 11

Statement of the Problem 11

Questions a Resolution Must Answer 15

Sources 17

Conference Information 18

Position Papers 19

Contact Details 20

2


3


Introduction to Commonwealth of Nations

The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary international organisation that operates

by intergovernmental consensus of the member states. The member states, which

were once territories of the British Empire now run in communion through the

Commonwealth Secretariat and NGO’s organised through the Commonwealth

foundation.

The Commonwealth provides a platform for otherwise less able nations to speak at an

international platform and have their voice heard at par with the bigger players of

the world community. Apart from instilling a sense of importance and equivalence,

the commonwealth aims at helping developing nations raise their standard of

democracy, rights and governance.

Members:

The Commonwealth is the only international organisation that boasts to have

participation from all inhabited 6 continents and people from every religion and

cultural background. The 54 member states have shared heritage in language,

culture, law, education and democratic traditions, among other things, enables

Commonwealth countries to work together in an atmosphere of greater trust and

understanding than generally prevails among nations.

Charter and functional basis:

Even though CoN has no official charter; there are several declarations that highlight

the roles and ambitions of the commonwealth. The Balfour Declaration of 1926 was


4


the first to define the motives of the Commonwealth. The Declaration

emphasised on the autonomous relationships shared between the British Empire and

its former territories.

The Singapore Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting of 1971 resulted in a

14-clause article obligated the Commonwealth to the over ambitious goals of world

peace, promotion of a representative democracy and individual liberty, the pursuit

of equality and opposition of racism, the fight against poverty, ignorance and disease

and free trade. Following the Lusaka Declaration, 1979 and the Langkawi Declaration

of 1989, gender equality and environmental sustainability were added to these

objectives. Most of these ideals were reinforced and underwent minor revision in the

Harare Declaration of 1991. The legal framework is defined as per the Westminster

Stature.

As of now, promotion of democracy and development take highest priority on the

Commonwealth agenda.

Decision Making:

The Heads of governments of the various members of the commonwealth meet every

two years. The summit, known as The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting

(CHOGM), is held in a different state each year with the PM or President of the host

state taking on the role of Chair in office. The CHOGM remains the highest decision

making body of the commonwealth, the general purpose of the CHOGMs is the

review the remits and roles of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG).

The CMAG is an eight-member group of nations whose responsibility is to uphold the

commonwealth values as illustrated in the Harare Declaration. However, recent

accusations state that the CMAG has tended to limit its work only to unconstitutional

changes of government, and that it is not tackling the full range of serious or persistent

violations of Commonwealth values, this could result in a revised mandate to

empower the action group more.

Distinctiveness:

The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary organisation, which implies that coercion

is not as instrument of imposing policy. This distinguishing characteristic has been of

historical importance. It is a forum where every country despite their GDP and status

reach agreement by consensus. This has been instrumental in the success of the

commonwealth.

5


Topic A: The Question of the Leadership of the

Commonwealth

Introduction

The Commonwealth of Nations (CoN) has now existed for 67 years, with only one

leadership change occurring within that time. This topic centers on preparations for

the next change in leadership, and discussion of the advantages and limitations of

the current governance structure. As it stands today, the monarchy of the United

Kingdom has always acted as Head of the Commonwealth, with a rotating roster of

leaders joining the Secretariat to maintain the CoN’s ability to provide debate and

consensus on global issues. But when the time for change comes, is this current

structure still suitable in the 21st century? And if it is to be changed, what should the

new structure entail? Who should take up that leadership? These are the issues that

delegates are invited to research and discuss.

History of the Problem

The London Declaration was created on 28 April 1949 at the annual Commonwealth

Prime Minister’s Conference, where the leaders of eight self-governing countries

gathered in London to decide the future of what was then known as the British

Commonwealth. In light of Ireland’s recent exit due to its transformation from

dominion of the United Kingdom into a republic, and India’s intention to do the same,

a meeting was required to adjust the Commonwealth to this new global reality.

King George VI, the reigning monarch in the United Kingdom at the time of the

declaration, endorsed the decision negotiated between the eight prime ministers. The

5


6


British Commonwealth then transformed into the Commonwealth of Nations,

marked by three main provisions:

i) It allowed the Commonwealth to admit and retain members that had not

previously been dominions, which allowed it to include both republics and

indigenous monarchies;

ii) These members then became a voluntary body linked in a “free and equal

association”i in which the monarch of the UK was accepted as the symbolic

Head of the Commonwealth;

iii) The name then changed from the British Commonwealth to

Commonwealth of Nations in order to reflect the first change, leaning away

from a British dominance of the organisation.

Upon the death of King George IV, Queen Elizabeth II was invited to take his place.

Like her father, the Queen has been committed to the success of the Commonwealth

in her role as its Head for the past 63 years. The association known as the

Commonwealth Secretariat is housed in Marlborough House, London, a palace made

available for this purpose by the Queen. The universal language of the

Commonwealth is English, observing parliamentary forms largely used in Westminster,

with laws, institutions and traditions based upon the common law of England.

Therefore, despite having dropped the term “British” from its name, the

Commonwealth of Nations still retains a large degree of British influence and support

in the modern day.

Current governance of the Commonwealth of Nations

The Commonwealth of Nations has a two-tier hierarchy, with the Queen as its symbolic

head at the top and the Commonwealth Secretariat and Commonwealth

Foundation just below it.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II acts as the Head of the Commonwealth. Her role

includes a variety of symbolic functions, and has no maximum fixed term. It is up to

the leaders of the member states of the Commonwealth to decide upon a successor,

should the need arise.

The Commonwealth Secretariat is headed by the Commonwealth Secretary-General.

The first Secretary-General post was created in 1965 and was filled by Arnold Smith of

Canada, serving until 1975. The Secretary-General is the public face of the

Commonwealth, and is also the Chief Executive Officer of the Commonwealth

Secretariat. They are selected by Commonwealth leaders in the same manner as the

Head of the Commonwealth, but are subject to a maximum of two four-year terms.

The current Secretary-General is Kamalesh Sharma from India, and is the fifth

Secretary-General to preside over the Commonwealth of Nations.

In support of the Secretary-General, there are the Deputies Secretary-General. Their

roles range from having oversight responsibilities for various Commonwealth

7


Secretariat divisions, advising and reporting to the Secretary-General on

economic and social development, and overseeing the political and legal work of

the Secretariat. There are currently three Deputies Secretary-General: Gary Dunn,

Deodat Maharaj and Dr Josephine Ojiambo. All Deputies are appointed by the

Secretary-General following a selection process.

The Commonwealth Chair-In Office is the leader of the Commonwealth country that

is acting as the host for the current Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting

(CHOGM), with the role coming into effect at the start of the CHOGM for two years.

Their purpose is to voice Commonwealth positions at high-level international forums,

and to reinforce the work on conflict prevention and resolution carried out in

Commonwealth countries by the Secretary-General.

The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) deals with all violations of

Commonwealth political values when considered to be of a serious or persistent

nature, and can recommend measures for collective action. CMAG may also

consider situations of concern in member countries in a proactive, engaged and

positive manner. It is noted that the CMAG’S power to suspend or recommend to

Commonwealth leaders that a member state can be expelled for violations “is

unparalleled by other international organisations”, which may be something to

consider when debating the issue of the Commonwealth’s structure.

However, the CMAG can only be convened by the Commonwealth Secretary-

General, and is made up of a representative from the Chair-In-Office and foreign

ministers from eight countries within the Commonwealth. These ministers serve a two-

year term on the group.

Finally, the Board of Governors approves the Secretariat’s work plans and budgets on

an annual basis, and the work of the Commonwealth Foundation. All member

governments are represented via an AGM. This concludes the structure of the

Commonwealth Secretariat, and those associated with it.

The Commonwealth Foundation is noted as a “development organisation with an

international remit and reach, uniquely situated at the interface between

government and civil society”. Their mission statement is “to develop the capacity of

civil society to act together and learn from each other to engage with the institutions

that shape people’s lives”ii. Their structure is smaller than the Commonwealth

Secretariat, and is comprised of three main committees.

The Executive Committee is made up of selected members from the Board of

Governors, who meet on a quarterly basis to review resources and programmatic and

financial affairs.

The Grants Committee is a sub-committee of the EC, assessing applications for grant

funding three times a year from various Commonwealth countries.

8


Finally, the Civil Society Advisory Committee is composed of representatives of

non-government Commonwealth organisations to provide guidance on the

programmes and long-term strategy of the Foundation.

Statement of the Problem

Criticisms of the leadership structure

A significant criticism of the structure of the Commonwealth’s leadership lies not with

the symbolic head in the form of the Queen, but with the powers of the

Commonwealth Secretary-General and Secretariat.

A recent controversy surrounding the decision to hold the 2013 CHOGM in Sri Lanka

created a debate about whether a Secretary-General should have more power to

lead the Heads of Government in a more determined direction.

Given the well-publicised human rights violations of Sri Lanka at the time, a multitude

of world leaders refused to attend the CHOGM in protest of its location. It even

created rifts between countries, with the Indian head of state boycotting a CHOGM

that had been organised by an Indian Secretary-General.

So should a Secretary-General and their Secretariat be more proactive in their power

as a small international organisation and exploit the space provided to them in order

to guide world leaders, rather than sit back and await the heads’ instruction?

It has arguably been done before, for example at the 1979 Lusaka CHOGM.

According to research undertaken at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, a great

deal of time and preparation was put into ensuring that the United Kingdom was

encouraged to press for a consensus with regards to the long-standing

Rhodesia/Zimbabwe crisis at the timeiii.

Various forums associated with the Commonwealth of Nations meet in anticipation of

the CHOGM in order to provide reports that also help the Secretariat in guiding

debate. For example, at the most recent 2015 Malta CHOGM, the reports published

by the four pre-CHOGM forums (Youth Forum, Women’s Forum, Business Forum and

People’s Forum) highlighted the need for debate on the issue of migration and ways

in which the Commonwealth can aid solutions to the problems faced by many

Commonwealth nations. This was then recognised in the official statement and

communiqué issued after the CHOGM had endediv.

Another issue that the leadership structure of the Commonwealth faces is the

anticipation of having to select a new Head of the Commonwealth, in the event that

Queen Elizabeth II should need to step away from her role. This is a decision that will

be made by all members of the Commonwealth under the guidance of the

Secretary-General and the Secretariat.

9


There are various options laid before the Commonwealth of Nations with regards

to this issue:

i) Should the successor to the British monarchy be selected as the next Head

of the Commonwealth, in keeping with the previous decision taken back in

1952? In 1958, the Queen declared through the Letters Patent that Prince

Charles and his heirs and successors would be future Heads of

Commonwealth. Is this document now outdated?

ii) If not a member of the British monarchy, how will a new leader be selected,

and on what criteria?

If the second option were to be taken into account, delegates should also be mindful

of the influence that the United Kingdom and the British monarchy retain within the

Commonwealth today. They are the provider of the Commonwealth headquarters in

London, and are responsible for the majority of the day-to-day maintenance of the

Commonwealth Secretariat and Foundation. How would the redistribution of these

responsibilities be carried out, if at all?

Many countries do not have a well-developed policy on the question of the

leadership of the Commonwealth, as this debate has yet to come into fruition

between today’s leaders. However, there are nations that would have a natural

tendency to fall to one side of the debate, such as Commonwealth realms with strong

monarchical ties. Some leaders of member states such as New Zealand, Australia, the

United Kingdom and Canada have expressed their desire to see the Prince of Wales

succeed the Queen as head of the Commonwealth when the time comes for her to

step away from her duties, however the feeling is not unanimous amongst the CoN.

There are others who joined the Commonwealth as ‘newly’ formed republics, such as

India who has voiced a preference for a change in the leadership structure. A number

of African leaders have referred to the British domination of the Commonwealth as

neo-imperialistic and have thus called for a reform of the current leadership structure.

The Commonwealth has been criticized as one of the last reminders of “days gone

by,” as an illusion of the splendors of the empire upon “which the sun never set”.

Similarly, the Commonwealth members located on the Indian Sub-Continent continue

to yearn for a greater role in its leadership, as a reflection of the mainly economic

influence they now poses upon the modern world. The Commonwealth’s smallest

member states (located in the Pacific and Caribbean) seem to be content with the

current leadership (and proposed Anglo continuation) and have voiced little to no

critique.

It is up to the delegates of this committee to guide debate to reflect the views that

they believe their leaders would evoke in this situation, keeping in mind the issues set

out in this guide.

10


Sources

Kirby, Michael. ‘Proposals for reform of the Commonwealth of Nations’, Law Quarterly

Review (Jan 2012), vol. 128, p.37-40

http://www.commonwealthfoundation.com/about-us Accessed 03/12/2015

http://www.commonwealthoralhistories.org/2013/the-commonwealth-crisis-

controversy-and-chogms/ Accessed 03/12/2015

http://thecommonwealth.org/media/news/commonwealth-heads-government-

statement Accessed 03/12/2015

http://www.commonwealthfoundation.com/about-us

http://www.commonwealthoralhistories.org/2013/the-commonwealth-crisis-controversy-and-chogms/

http://www.commonwealthoralhistories.org/2013/the-commonwealth-crisis-controversy-and-chogms/

http://thecommonwealth.org/media/news/commonwealth-heads-government-statement%20Accessed%2003/12/2015

http://thecommonwealth.org/media/news/commonwealth-heads-government-statement%20Accessed%2003/12/2015

11


Topic B: A Multilateral Free Trade Agreement

for the Commonwealth

Introduction

As the Commonwealth is formed of a rather diverse group of nations, ranging from

highly economically developed to moderately or barely developed countries, a free

trade agreement would have to be designed to meet the diverse needs of each

Member State. Furthermore, the Commonwealth inhibits an unavoidable geographic

disadvantage, with its members strewn across the globe it is only physically connected

through poor and patchy infrastructure.

History of the Problem

Economic giants in the developing world for instance India or Nigeria would have to

coordinate their interests with developed nations such as Canada or Malta who in

turn are tasked with reaching an agreement with their smaller colleagues such as

Belize or Nauru. This cycle, of interest alignment is further complicated by already

existing international institutions with a strong economic character, such as the

European Union. Malta, Cyprus and the United Kingdom are not able to negotiate

free trade agreements with their Commonwealth colleagues unless they cease their

membership status within the European Union. This restriction, together with the rise of

Euroscepticism and the “in-out” referendum in the United Kingdom, has prompted a

rise in discussions concerning a Commonwealth Free Trade alternative to the

European Union, especially in the United Kingdom. With India, reporting a 7% GDP per

annum growth in 2015 and African economic powerhouses such as Nigeria and

Rwanda growing at a 9.5% GDP per annum for 2015 and 7% respectively, the

Commonwealth is beginning to look like an attractive alternative to the crisis riddled

European Union. British economists, such as Ruth Lea have argued that “the

Commonwealth in its richness and diversity mirrors today's global economy in a way


12


that the EU simply cannot start to aspire to. In its global reach it speaks of the

future, and should not be regarded as a curious relic of Empire, whereas the EU will

continue its inexorable, relative decline.”

In general, the Commonwealth has agreed to work towards reducing trade barriers

whilst ensuring that those least developed and smallest in geographical size are not

presented with ‘the short end of the stick.’ Indeed, many Commonwealth nations fear

that if a Free Trade Agreement would be implemented their economies would be

exposed to a larger number of aggressive competitors from abroad, as more

developed nations would ‘swoop in’ and flood their domestic markets with their

foreign products, making it difficult for domestic producers to keep up with their often,

cheaper competition. Some, particularly powerful sectors of the domestic markets

might be able to exercise enough political influence to erect a protective mechanism

against threatening imports. Hence, even with numerous Free Trade Agreements in

operation around the world, in practice trade barriers continue to prevail.

Free Trade amongst nation states is viewed, by the vast majority of economists, as

capable of improving the overall economic welfare of a collectivity. Free Trade is

defined as trading without tariffs, quotas or other governmental barriers. This allows

each country to specialize in an area capable of export and generate competitive

products, which possess the qualities needed to penetrate foreign markets.

Currently, the Commonwealth provides its members with some preferential trade

conditions but there is no trade agreement between all member States. Historically,

most Commonwealth countries had some kind of special trade arrangement with the

United Kingdom, with Britain formally joining the then, European Economic

Community in 1973, these nations were forced to look elsewhere for favourable trade

conditions. Australia and Canada, two of the Commonwealth’s biggest economic

players have, for instance concentrated on trade relations outside the organization

(with the United States, for example), only a small percentage of their trade sector

hinges on the Commonwealth. Similarly, India has chosen to expand eastward for

economic and political influence whilst the African nations have looked inwards for

greater trade opportunities. Malaysia and Singapore have in turn, shifted their focus

towards South East Asia. However, Commonwealth nations are subject to a few

regional groups and agreements operating between one another, including but not

limited to:

-agreements falling under the umbrella of the African Union (AU) (for example

the Economic Community of West African States) between some of the

following AU members Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burundi, Cabo Verde,

Cameroon, Chad, Comoros, Congo Brazzaville, Cote d’Ivoire, DR Congo,

Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana,

Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi,

Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda,

Sahrawi, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, the Seychelles, Sierra Leone,

13


Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia,

Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe.

-the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) between Brunei,

Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore,

Thailand and Vietnam

-the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) between Australia, Brunei

Darussalam, Canada, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand,

the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, the United States, the People’s Republic

of China, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Chile, Peru, the Russian Federation, and

Vietnam

-the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) between Antigua and

Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile,

Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador,

Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua,

Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and

the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, the United States, Uruguay

and Venezuela

Some argue that a Free Trade Agreement for the Commonwealth is in fact,

unnecessary or unprofitable. A vast majority of member states have already joined

some type of alternative economic collectivity, such as ASEAN or the FTAA. It is

unclear how, or indeed if a significant number of Commonwealth nations would

benefit from such an undertaking. Canada and Australia for instance, two of the

Commonwealth’s export giants have expressed their skepticism over such an

agreement as their interests lie at odds with traditional import heavy nations, such as

Samoa and the Seychelles.

Advantages and Limitations

In the last few decades, the notion of a free trade agreement for the Commonwealth

has seen a revival amongst a number of Commonwealth-related organizations. The

Commonwealth Secretariat, for instance has expressed its interest in expanding the

trade relationships amongst the members of the Commonwealth, whilst many

members in turn have publicized their desire to cultivate such relationships but have

also asserted the practical difficulties associated with such proposals. In 2005 at the

Commonwealth Business Summit in Malta, member states were urged to consider “the

possibility of establishing a Commonwealth preferential, or free trade area.” Intra-

Commonwealth trade is responsible for about one-sixth of total trade within the

Commonwealth, with the average fluctuating around the one-third mark of each

member’s total trade capacity (for some States intra-commonwealth trade accounts

for as much as half of their total trade). Intra-Commonwealth trade has grown slowly

yet steadily over the last decades from 12% in the 1990s to 16% in 2008. In some

member states, Commonwealth trade makes up the majority of total trade such as in

Botswana and Namibia, who rely heavily on Commonwealth imports as well as St

14


Vincent and Samoa, who export primarily to the Commonwealth (90% of foreign

trade). This trend does not only hold true for the smaller, least developed

Commonwealth countries but also speaks for economic giants such as India. The

Commonwealth accounts for around 21% of India’s exports and approximately 17%

of its imports. For Australia and South Africa, the Commonwealth market is responsible

for around 23% of their total exports. Furthermore, studies have shown that despite the

lack of a common trade agreement within the Commonwealth, trade is nevertheless

still easier due to common languages, legal systems, principles of democracy, good

governance and corporate customs. The Canadian author, Cameron wrote: “if the

Commonwealth today were an economic bloc, it would be equal in size to the United

States; it would have 13 of the world’s fastest growing economies; it would possess

most of the world’s leading knowledge economies outside of the US; it would have

one third of the world’s population; and would represent 40 per cent of the

membership of the World Trade Organisation.”

On the other hand, economists have forecasted a further decline of trade in goods

amongst the Commonwealth nations, with only six of the Commonwealth’s 53

member states accounting for 84% of the organizations exports and the overall trade

in goods having decreased since the 1960s (admittedly at a moderate rate). The 36

smallest States (who compromise the majority of the Commonwealth countries) are

only able to enjoy a tiny share of the ‘Commonwealth Export Pie’, many of these

States had previously relied upon preferential trading terms with the United Kingdom

and have since been forced to settle for sometimes, less than favourable

arrangements. These smaller States have thus begun to look elsewhere for import

needy markets, the Caribbean Commonwealth members for example, sought to

export their fish to the United States due to its proximity. Others have negotiated with

the European Union for Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) which are aimed at

“promoting sustainable development and growth” but also the “gradual integration

of ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) countries into the world economy”. The

European Union provides its partners with the following structure:

-political dialogue

-development support

-economic and trade cooperation

Therefore, some have concluded that the Commonwealth is gradually becoming

obsolete with 80% of all its exports destined for markets located outside the

organization.

Free Trade Agreements encourage nations to specialize in a sector capable of export;

indeed some Commonwealth country’s industry is already concentrated in such a

manner. Many of the Commonwealth’s smallest economies rely on the export of

services, such as tourism and yet these circumstances are unlikely to develop further

with the introduction of a free trade arrangement (i.e. flights are unlikely to become

cheaper and a boom in hotel real-estate cannot be derived from a Free Trade

Agreement).

15


In recent years, free trade agreements have come under public scrutiny for failing to

take into account environmental and labour concerns. Activists fear that unrestricted

trade within a collectivity will generate a “race to the bottom” scenario and

contribute to a stagnating fall in labour and environmental standards. Labour rights

and environmental protection mechanisms would be tossed aside in favour of

cheaper products and greater profits. Countries, whose industry is sharply regulated

through legislative measures (such as Canada), might thus want to consider the

broader implications a free trade agreement inhibits.

On the other hand, free trade has historically encouraged cross-border technology

sharing which has allowed for a rise in real wages and the investment in more

environmentally friendly production techniques. The Commonwealth, as an institution

has already raised awareness for such concerns, amongst other causes, it has focused

on “inclusive economic growth and sustainable development” and championed the

“creat[ion] [of] climate financing frameworks” which is why some have argued, that

the Commonwealth as an organization would be the ideal breeding ground for an

inclusive, fair Free Trade Agreement.

Indeed, the United Kingdom has often drawn parallels between “increased free and

fair trade” and “an increased commitment to democratic values.” Recently, the idea

of a trade agreement for the Commonwealth has been shifted back into the spotlight

“we want the Commonwealth to become a leading voice in the global economy,

working to liberalise trade, break down barriers for international business, resist

protectionism and contribute to the Doha Development Agenda.” The

Commonwealth has the unique ability to give smaller, more vulnerable countries who

often wield only a limited degree of soft/hard power, the chance to voice their

opinions as equals and receive assistance from other Commonwealth

States. Furthermore, as it currently stands, the Commonwealth includes some of the

fastest growing markets in the global South such as India, South Africa, Malaysia,

Bangladesh and Singapore; a common trade agreement might very well act as an

incentive for further economic growth.

Questions a Resolution Must Answer

As the delegates embark upon further research in anticipation of the conference,

they will undoubtedly uncover a variety of sources either applauding a free trade

agreement or rejecting it on a number of grounds. Delegates are asked to remember

that they are not required to support the idea of a free trade agreement but, in line

with their nation’s foreign and economic policy, may suggest other means of

increasing trade within the Commonwealth and strengthening its economic

character.

16


Whether delegates choose to back the creation of a Free Trade Agreement for

the Commonwealth or a more general expansion of intra-commonwealth trade, they

may want to consider a formal meeting with the Ministers of Trade or Industry of all

Commonwealth countries, the implications of the Doha Development Round and the

World Trade Organization (WTO) Rules (which virtually all Commonwealth countries

are part of).

Recommended further reading

1. ‘The role of the Monarchy in the Commonwealth’

http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchandcommonwealth/queenandcommonw

ealth/queenandcommonwealth.aspx

2. Hall, H. Duncan. Commonwealth: a history of the British Commonwealth of

Nations, London: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1971

3. Kirby, Michael. ‘The Commonwealth of Nations today: historical anachronism

or focus for universal values?’, Commonwealth Law Bulletin (2011), vol. 31(1),

p.39-59

4. Mayall, James. ‘Democratizing the Commonwealth’, International Affairs (April

1998), vol. 74(2), p. 379

5. Tong, Raymond. ‘Perspective on Commonwealth evolution’, Contemporary

Review (March 1992), vol. 260, p.121

6. Cameron, Brent. The Case for Commonwealth Free Trade: Options for a New

Globalization. Trafford Publishing, 2006. Print.

7. "Economic Development." Commonwealth Network. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Dec.

2015. <http://www.commonwealthofnations.org/commonwealth-in-

action/economic-development-2/>.

8. Khor, Martin. "BILATERAL/REGIONAL FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS: AN OUTLINE OF

ELEMENTS, NATURE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS." Third World Network.

N.p., Sept. 2005. Web. 5 Dec. 2015. <www.twn.my/title2/par/mk005.doc>.

9. Ahmed, Kamal. "Forget Europe, Its Time for the Commonwealth." The

Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 11 Feb. 2012. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.

<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/kamal-

ahmed/9076348/Forget-Europe-its-time-for-the-Commonwealth.html>.

http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchandcommonwealth/queenandcommonwealth/queenandcommonwealth.aspx

http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchandcommonwealth/queenandcommonwealth/queenandcommonwealth.aspx

17


Sources

"Biennale Report of the Commonwealth Secretary-General 2013-2015." The

Commonwealth. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.

<http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/BR220013-2015.pdf>.

Chowdhury, Jayanta Roy. "The Commonwealth: A Free Trade Area?" Times of Malta.

N.p., 09 Feb. 2012. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120209/business-comment/The-

Commonwealth-A-free-trade-area-.405965

"European Commission Directorate-General for Trade." Africa, Caribbean, Pacific

(ACP). N.p., 06 May 2010. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.

<http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/regions/africa-caribbean-

pacific/>.

Holmes, Frank. "The Commonwealth and a Free-Trade Area in Europe." International

Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 34, No. 1 Jan. 1958. Web. 5

Dec. 2015.

Irwin, Douglas, A. "International Trade Agreements.": The Concise Encyclopaedia of

Economics. Library of Economics and Liberty, n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/InternationalTradeAgreements.html

Lord Howell of Guildford. “The Commonwealth: A Global Network for the 21st Century”

The Round Table. 100:414, 251-255. 09 June 2011. 05 Dec.

2015. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00358533.2011.574897

Sir Sanders, Ronald. "A Commonwealth Free Trade Area Is Neither Likely Not Desirable."

Commonwealth Advisory Bureau (2012): n. pag. Opinion Piece. Web.

http://www.sirronaldsanders.com/Docs/A%20Commonweralth%20Free%20Trade%20

Area%20is%20neither%20likely%20nor%20desirable.pdf

"The Ultimate Eurosceptic Fantasy: Putting Faith in the Commonwealth." The

Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 30 Oct. 2011. Web. 05 Dec. 2015.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120209/business-comment/The-Commonwealth-A-free-trade-area-.405965





http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00358533.2011.574897

http://www.sirronaldsanders.com/Docs/A%20Commonweralth%20Free%20Trade%20Area%20is%20neither%20likely%20nor%20desirable.pdf



18


Conference Information

When looking for information regarding LIMUN 2016 (and subsequent editions) your

first step should be to visit our website: www.limun.org.uk

LIMUN in social media

Please follow updates from us through our social media channels:

London International Model United Nations (LIMUN)

@LondonMUN

When tweeting about this year’s conference (your preparations, journey to/from

London or when live-tweeting the events during the conference itself) –

- please use hashtag #LIMUN2016

Agenda & Rules of Procedure

The agenda for the 2016 conference is available online at

www.limun.org.uk/agenda

Since its 16th session last year, LIMUN has introduced changes to its Rules of Procedure.

The revised Rules can be accessed here: http://limun.org.uk/rules

19


Position Papers

What is a position paper?

A position paper is a statement of policy, which is intended to communicate an

overall position of a country on a particular topic debated in the committee. Position

papers should be brief and outline the general policies rather than specific measures.

Each delegate should submit one position paper per topic to be debated by the

committee (note: most of the committees have two proposed topics). Each paper

should be approximately one page per topic.

LIMUN offers a short guide on how to write a position paper. It is available on our

website: http://limun.org.uk/FCKfiles/File/PP_Guide.pdf

Deadlines

The deadline for the submission of delegates’ position papers is 20 February

2016. Failure to submit by this deadline will render delegates ineligible for

Diplomacy Awards.

Positions Papers will have to be submitted in a publicly-accessible Dropbox, to

be provided by committee directors. At their discretion, directors may provide

feedback in individuals cases if so requested.

The most worthy work submitted in a committee will earn the delegate a Best

Position Paper Award. The length of any one paper should not exceed 500

words.

20


Contact Details

For any enquiries relating to your committee proceedings or if you want to get in touch

with your committee’s Directors, or for submission of position papers:

- please e-mail: [email protected]

Other enquiries regarding the Conference:

- please e-mail: [email protected]

Before contacting LIMUN please make sure you have read FAQ section on our

website: http://limun.org.uk/faq


commonwealth of nations (con) · commonwealth secretary-general and secretariat. a recent...

Documents